i never worked for a poor person.

That's a very very VERY foolish position to take in the long run. Something akin to King Louis and Marie Antoinette right before they got their heads lopped off. And before this is all said and done if business men don't start acting constructively the Occupy protests will continually gain in strength and in a best case scenario the money will be taken back in tax hikes for the rich and businesses will be saddled with many new regulations. And the 99%ers will simply take the opinion that it dosn't matter if it hurts the economy because the economy effing sucks anyway.

Another dumb comment. I've never worked for a "rich person" either because I'm not a butler, limo driver or landscaper. I've worked for corporations and am usually hired by an HR person who is not in the top 1%.

what they care if a bunch of fat gluttons come waddling at them yelling "off with their heads!". they can dance around them calling them a bunch of names, or pay somebody to do it for them.

how much did the CEO make for the corporations that you worked for?

and:
Tax Revenue; 2,292,752,677,079
Government Spending: 3,505,123,817,777
Medicare: 823,136,109,129
SS: 721,927,852,822
Cost of Retirement: 1.545.063.961.951
% of Spending on Retired people: 44.08%

turned my computer on, btw.

The CEO is not my employer Dibs, he is a fellow employee. Thanks to wonderful corporate legislation the corporation is in and of itself the person who is our mutual employer.

sounds like you're bypassing the question. i'm guessing that it's irrelevant that he gets paid more than you.

The CEO SHOULD get paid more then me. That is not at all my point. The point is that executives should not be paid more at the expense of the rest of the employees.

yes, but we're running into the problem where the employees are being replaced by machines, or by people who can operate those machines. so, if the CEO finds a way to reward his stockholders, why should he be punished?

Because unlike what free market libertarians will have you believe it is NOT all about the stockholders. If it was then monopolies and trusts would not only be legal, but would be something to strive towards.

the CEO is an employee as ORKINMan said.
in a corporation, the CEO is appointed by the board of directors. The board of directors is elected via the shareholders via 1 share, 1 vote. The shareholders are the owners of the corporation and ultimately you work for them. The question is who are "the share holders" It could be mostly the CEO or members of the board of directors, or other large corporations/investment funds, or wealth individuals. 80% of the time it's mostly those people. However it can just be a random group of people too:P

The interesting thing about corporations is that it allows for the workers to become owners, or at least part owners as well as less wealthy individuals. It's kind of something out of Marx.

you feel that people shouldn't be rewarded for investing their money into a publicly traded company? what kind of limit should be placed on how much money i can earn by investing in a struggling new technology firm?

right now we are seeing the accumulation of wealth in the hands of few to an extent not seen since the great depression. at the same time, the top marginal tax rate is also at a near low, and reminiscent of great depression levels. here's a graph

click please: http://i.imgur.com/RryDv.jpg

when the economy was healthy, up through 1973, incomes grew relatively evenly across multiple classes. since then, we've had runaway growth for the wealthiest americans and stagnant growth for the poor. and in the crash, who do you think suffered most? this ties in with the appoint of the above graphic: this is very dangerous

http://i.imgur.com/VG9tw.jpg


the economic ramifications is less spending power for the lower classes, which is poor for the economy. in order for them to spend, they must borrow, and credit debt has also exceeded great depression levels.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/...DUX5geEwes/s320/Image.gif

this basically creates an enormous bubble. in fact, this type of bubble is what led to the huge economic collapse just a couple years ago. this also was a factor leading into the great depression. how are the richest making their money? (first chart below) hm, financial sorcery. and what are they spending it on? (second chart below) will it trickle down? not really, sorry.

http://i.imgur.com/hVdsA.gif
http://i.imgur.com/SGQ09.gif

after wallowing for several years through the depression, fdr enacted the new deal, providing social safety nets and work programs. this time, after just a hint of increased regulation - and a dirty bailout - we've seen a huge backlash from the populace. with no real reform we're destined to repeat the crisis again. and it further appears like we're going to end up taking the death spiral route: austerity programs. this further kneecaps the poor and damages the economy and is basically the last bleeding of the stone for the benefit of the ownership classes before leaving behind the corpses. here's a graph showing the financial benefits of different types of government actions. these basically show the "fiscal multipliers," economically speaking. observe what's most helpful vs. what is least efficient, and then compare that to what we're actually going to do.

http://i.imgur.com/0qKre.jpg

does anyone in the system have any sort of interest in fixing this? not really, no. there was this thing called the people's budget, proposed by the congressional progressive caucus. this proposal offered to:

-Reduces unemployment—and thus the deficit—through extensive investment in infrastructure, clean energy, transportation and education;
-Ends almost all the Bush tax cuts, creates new tax brackets for millionaires and new fees on Wall Street;
-Full American military withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, along with other reductions in military spending;
-Ends subsidies for non-renewable energy;
-Lowers health care costs through a public option and negotiating Rx payments with pharmaceutical companies;
-Raises the taxable maximum on Social Security.
http://www.dailykos.com/...ucing-the-Peoples-Budget,

has anyone even heard of it? no, because obama and the rest of the center-right mainstream democrats ignored it. instead of starting with that and then working toward compromise, obama's bargaining strategy started with offering some austerity and tax code 'revisions' (not tax increases). this is partly because obama is a conservative and partly because of the media: corporate mass media beats the false idea into everyone's heads that TAX CUTS create jobs by letting the rich horde money (allegedly works much better than taking that money and sponsoring government funded jobs...) and that government needs to GET OUT OF THE WAY!

so this is why capitalism is in its death throes.

now to go off topic a little bit, lets look at the truth about how the public would like to solve the debt issue (dont let this get in the way of the media narratives though! dont raise taxes, cut entitlements!).

http://images1.dailykos.com/...685/njpollcuts7-26-11.gif
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...gArt/budgetcutsupport.jpg
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...ngArt/budgetcutoppose.jpg

if you dont wanna read any of that you can still click the pics

i have an interest in fixing it. i want to be out of debt before i die so i don't have to put up with debt collectors in hell.

No Dibs I am not saying that. I'm perfectly fine with someone like Bill Gates making 60 billion dollars from owning Microsoft despite barely coding any of the products that generated his wealth. It was his vision and capital and his reward. Nobody has a problem with that. The problem comes in when increased wealth is not created by increased ingenuity/market share/customer service but simply by screwing the lower rung employees by yanking benefits, slashing pay or cutting jobs. Or in the case of many compnies right now all of the above simultaneously. This form of wealth "generation" benefits no one on the planet except for the select few stockholders and has massive negative externalities for many other people.

um, let's see, the rich are hoarding money, which basically means that they ain't making any money off of it, and it's felt that the taxes that they ain't paying because they ain't making any money need to be increased?

Um they're making a lot of money

where's it coming from? if they ain't loaning it out to earn interest on it?

If you have a hoard of money in a bank account you pay taxes on the interest:P

read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/...onsible_government#Canada

LOL, if you're collecting interest on it, then the money is being loaned out, it isn't being hoarded.

It's not being loaned out to the general population. It's being used by banks to fund risky gambling that will, once again, likely require bail outs with tax payer money.

See MF Global.

@dibs possibly. Although it could just be loaned to the bank itself and they use it for themselves to do a variety of things such as trading investments, not necessarily make personal/commercial loans. If commercial lending is tightened, banks don't stop taking deposits or necessarily change that rate in your personal bank account.

i dunno, they've never been too fond of giving me loans just for the heck of it, always required some form of collateral so that they could feel safe because they didn't trust my word.

what does the OWS movement teach us?

don't attract the homeless because they'll steal stuff out of your tent.
don't throw rocks at public servants or they'll use non-lethal methods to make you cry like a pregnant whore who can't win a paternity suit.
next the man will be exacting rental payments because the dictators are seizing space reserved for th e public.

y'all got the backing of the 99%, you should be able to get a permit and pay the applicable fee to use public property to demonstrate your wishes.

just in case y'all didn't notice, i qualify modern day protestors under the numerous people who need chronic attention to keep from fluffting a brick. i have a stock of Thailand Tuna, btw, blocking the port is not going to effect my diet for at least 60 days. better luck next time brain dead zombies.

thanks for nothing fluffheads, you just increased the cost of living in America.

have to re-enact the draft to teach people what it is to lose freedom when you're defending theirs. they take so much crap as granted.

oops, i done went a ranting.

Blocking a port is definitely retarded. Can't argue with that.

haha Dibs having a meltdown. Blocking a port owns btw.

meltdown? nah, just a convenient and harmless way to blow off some steam.

suppose i look at those lottery pots,
where every Joe has gave what he's got?
are they wishing for poverty?
or are they wishing for money to be?
a bloated sod, full of cod, hoping and praying to beat all odds.

http://i.imgur.com/QILBU.jpg

Quack, Quack! Waddle, Waddle!

wonder who owns Zucotti park and why they are so amaicable with people violating rules that they created.

also wonder about the female only tent. why are y'all sexually assaulting each other?
have no respect for other people's rights?

TOM, the OWS protestors in DC are becoming more weird every day. Yesterday I saw a teddy bear inside of a real bear trap at the entrance to McPherson Square, a woman screaming at a bum that he was sitting in the wrong place and new signs talking about communism working. These folks went from a more mainstream populist protest to straight up looney.

we are neglecting to point out again and again that the wealthy are buying a huge voice in our political system there by muting the 99%. That is a major concern. I do not want my political leaders working more for the ceo's than for me. our votes should be on equal ground.

what are the job requirements for a CEO?
would you listen to a CEO or the person standing next to you?

I read that the x% of the occupiers had already started the reveulitioun and are already spreading the wealth of the other y% of the other occupiers. Cameras, expensive laptops, phones are stolen on regular basis and all of a sudden 'sharing the wealth' doesn't sound so apealing anymore when you're at the wrong end of the bargain...

Actually the US Government is Borrowing the money from them.

And yes there is a bit of a problem with the government borrowing money from the banks/finance houses to loan to the banks or finance houses.

Yes shareholder 1 vote per share, but most shares are held by institutions and vote those shares, the common share holder is not necessarily rich, they are the 401k, IRA and mutual fund holders. However, to think thatthe interest of them commonshare holders through institutions get represented as the Fidiciary laws require, I would say is somewhat ignorant. When the corruption of salaries arbitration at the top comes into play and how bonuses are payed out, regardless of performance.

Check out the local newspaper from the occupation in DC: http://occupydc.org/...OCCUPY-DC-11-4-Hi-Res.pdf

can't. my PSP doesn't do pdf. i have to contemplate how i'm going to respond to the Obama Wealthcare System anyway. neato, OWS. i'm not going to be to happy with being required to pay a tax penalty because the majority of people can't pay for their own healthcare.

the occupy movements really need to get their act together.

"help! i wasn't properly trained to use my propane heater in my tent while i was doing the drugs!"

might also want to keep the guns away from y'all's peaceful seizure of public property, they tend to just spontaneously shoot anybody who doesn't give the proper respect that they deserve.

maybe i should find me a lawyer and sues them for misrepresenting the 99% and defamation of character.

how many people can be identified as Occupiers? 100k? 1m? 100m? 307.89m?

will they pass a demographic comparison against the 99%? or will the people occupying represent a minority of the 99%?

Great, you guys have someone with a pdf editor. Can I write a letter to the editor?

"Dear Occupy,

Bear traps in public parks that people walk through on their way to work are probably not safe. Fighting with a german shepherd inside of the fenced in part by McPherson's statute is probably not safe. Allowing the bums to fight over oatmeal causes the police to think you guys are causing more problems than you're advocating for.

Those of us 99%ers who have jobs and don't participate in your mess would like to know when we're welcome back to the park to eat our lunch, meet friends, and not have to deal with the sheninigans you guys seem to profess on a daily basis.

Sincerely,

Concerned 99% Landlord

PS--Control your people. I watched two occupiers jump in front a poor girl in a suit about 'was she scared' 'did she understand their plight now." Grow up. "


Seriously, I read their newspaper and just laugh. I got chided for being in a suit the other week and yet welcomed when I was on my bike. I just laugh. Walking through is like feeling like I'm back in high school going to an HFStival (locals will understand) and running across someone trying to convince me to live at their commune.

All you need is a vanguard party.

think i'd rather play Descent, if i'm going to have a retro party. don't remember much about Vanguard. bah, i don't need no silly party anyway.

what is causing this "economic inequality"?
people are being forced to buy health or auto insurance?
people are being taxed too much on alcohol and tobacco products?
the youngins feel that it's ok to give their money to illegal drug lords who send the money out of the country just so they can gets high?

there was a tent city in Camden, NJ at least 2 years before some college dumbasses decided to park their butts in Zuccotti... where were ya then? getting spoiled at home?

Actually it's thew other way around. The political system is buying a huge voice by using and encouraging idiots who haven't ever produced anything but votes. I don't want my political leader working more for himself, with help of the help of ignorants, than for me. I don't want our votes stand or equal grounds.