Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

99%? Who wants to be a part of the 100%?

page: 57
25
<< 54  55  56    58  59 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by NoHierarchy
 

It is in no way about blaming the poor! It is about reminding people it SHOULD be about blaming the CROOKS...not the people that know how to make money!

Everyone AGREES the corporations are the problem. The difference between my view and your viewpoint beyond that is I say keep going and get ALL the crooks. You are saying and get the RICH!

I refuse to go after law abiding citizens simply because they have something I lack. I want CROOKS punished not the law abiding successful INDIVIDUAL

Why is it you refuse to acknowledge poor people can be crooks too?? or if you will, they still get a pass from you BASED on INCOME rather than how they make their money...Legally or ILLEGALLY




posted on Oct, 23 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Cinaed
 


Because a typical conservative exaggerates welfare fraud and downplays white collar embezzlement.

That is why!



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Seems like a pretty lame argument to focus your attack on a CLASS of people aka a MINORITY.... Rather than the law breakers.

Interesting point you reveal though, your actual beef isn't with lawbreakers.....CRIMINALS aren't your focus.... Just the rich.

Thank you for making this point very CLEAR



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cinaed
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 

Interesting point you reveal though, your actual beef isn't with lawbreakers.....CRIMINALS aren't your focus.... Just the rich.


Let's be honest. If someone is caught committing welfare fraud they will be punished. No point in "going after them" since that is already taken care of. Meanwhile large corporations, not honest wealthy people, get laws changed so that their acts are not illegal when they should be.

Maybe the single digit millionaires need to join the protests and change it from the 99% to the 99.9%.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Much welfare, housing,WIC, unemployment fraud isn't caught, nor is all the waste in said agencies checked..... This is especially true in the home health medicaid scams through assorted private and non profit agencies(if you work any of these places you see it first hand). What I find so unfair is no one seems interested in the 100's of billions lost in these areas BUT as you suggest the non criminal rich better do something if they don't want to be treated like criminals

Sorry state of affairs when the non criminal is treated worse than those criminals considered pretty low priority..... Based purely on income

I say America should be about punishing law breakers and changing unfair or corrupt lawsn rather than discriminting against a minority based on income



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cinaed
reply to post by daskakik
 

What I find so unfair is no one seems interested in the 100's of billions lost in these areas BUT as you suggest the non criminal rich better do something if they don't want to be treated like criminals


There is no proof that they will be treated like criminals. They may get their tax breaks taken away.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


I have no issue with punishing criminals and changing unjust or unfair laws; never have. I would submit to you that the private, law abiding wealthy individual is already being treated like a criminal in the court of public opinon.... By the left. Also by the federal goverment with the 250,000 cap they are trying to push through. Do you have any idea how many small business owners that law would put out of business if it passes???

I believe being driven out of business for being successful is criminal in and of itself. I still maintain that before going after the rich law abider who contributes much to society, the right and just thing to do after dealing with rich crooks is to deal with the poor crooks.

That is not what is happening nor is it what OWS or any other left leaning group is calling for. What they are asking for ans supporting is discrimination of a group of law abiding citizens based on income



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Cinaed
 


I think your running a bit loose with the term criminal. Court of public opinion means next to nothing. Also if you have a business and you make a six digit figure a year why would you be driven out of business?



posted on Oct, 25 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


My point about the term *criminal* is my main beef with the OWS movement is while they keep insisting they aren't considering the $250,000 person a crook. However the laws that they are supporting lump such earners in with the 1%.

To the business owner that makes $250,000 a yr....much of this goes on the line to grow, improve and keep the business profitable. Such people are literally married to their businesses even when the majority of workers see a manager instead. They invest over and over again into the business. They take risks and not all of them pay off. Even when they get loans they are constantly moving money around and at pretty much any given time they do not have TONS of money just laying around. Sure they have the means to get their hands on a LOT in a short time, but they don't really live that much better than I do and I am certainly no where near that sort of yrly income.

I have a sister that owns a business that she has grown for over a decade, now in this economy she has had to sell her house at a loss and go back to living over the business as they did while building the house.....simply in hopes of not losing the business too. This $250,000 cap will hurt her worse...and THEN...don't forget all the new federal regulations coming down the pike.

Well maybe one or the other she could handle, the tax hit OR the new regs....but she is very afraid she can't survive BOTH...and definitely not both at the SAME TIME. Hers is a very common story....Most of her peers, other business owners in her state are feeling the same squeeze. So sure you can say, the tax thing wont drive them out of business and roll your eyes but see there is a lot more to business and the current administration that just this ONE bill.....

The point being, on paper she either is, or is close to a millionaire.... She has hundreds of thousands of dollars just in inventory.

She lives above her business and lost her butt on her home, striving to save a business she had hoped would cover her in her old age.... She doesn't sound very rich though....does she? The last thing her business needs right now in this current economy is a tax hike

Oh well.... the evil rich bitch! She deserves it. What does she need that kind of money for anyway? Besides she is old enough to be deemed a useless eater anyways......

Well.....if she closes her doors so she wont have to eat cat food when she is 70 (she is 62) and takes the money and runs.... she will be *okay* (she certainly wont be rich) but what about all the people that work for her? And, if she decides that now since she doesn't have that security of a profitable business at her age and moves to someplace with a lower cost of living so her remaining money can last her the rest of her life.....that affects her community... if there are others like her do the same thing, it HURTS her community.

I keep saying OWS is a great movement in theory..... it leaves LOTS to be desired in practice and principle



posted on Oct, 25 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cinaed
reply to post by daskakik
 


I have no issue with punishing criminals and changing unjust or unfair laws; never have. I would submit to you that the private, law abiding wealthy individual is already being treated like a criminal in the court of public opinon.... By the left. Also by the federal goverment with the 250,000 cap they are trying to push through. Do you have any idea how many small business owners that law would put out of business if it passes???

I believe being driven out of business for being successful is criminal in and of itself. I still maintain that before going after the rich law abider who contributes much to society, the right and just thing to do after dealing with rich crooks is to deal with the poor crooks.

That is not what is happening nor is it what OWS or any other left leaning group is calling for. What they are asking for ans supporting is discrimination of a group of law abiding citizens based on income


WOW. I even made a post saying that $1 million should be the highest bracket in a related thread and you still got mad. It seems you can't make up your mind what *rich* is . Then you bring the "class warfare" bs to the table, unlimited rights, the constitution, why should I be taxed, threats of violence, etc.

According to you should there be a limit? Should they pay taxes? No answers of yet, just lots of insults or diversion.



posted on Oct, 25 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


LOL what makes you think I am *mad*???? I find it most amusing you say I keep changing my stance on what rich is....

I have never changed my stance! I do not believe any person or group of people have a right to determine how much is *too much* and I qualify my statement with *honestly earned* I will not punish people for playing by the rules just because the rules are unfair. I say...well change the damn rules stupid! Just don't limit the power of the INDIVIDUAL in the process, no governing body should have that right or that kind of power!

What we have an OBLIGATION to do as citizens is to make sure the rules of how people earn and invest are fair and just... Something we have failed miserably at.

My issue is about anyone telling another human being how well they can succeed or what is *fair* earning power. I refuse to support punishing law abiding citizens and lumping them in with *criminals* I oppose crony capitalism and support free market, and I am very anti socialist/communist/globalist

I also stand on my views that rules should be fair...equal opportunity....versus controlling, enslaving and discriminating....equal out come

I am very opposed to discrimination, not JUST the popular, or politically correct aspects

Sure I realize the banks have screwed us over, but I also see it was the federal gov and the FED that forced banks to give loans to people that VERY LIKELY could not afford them....so I refuse to blame JUST the banks. I refuse to accept responsibility for your lack of desire to view the entire picture so you can attack a minority.

This is a typical far left tactic and I refuse to play...

I do not consider that Life Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness gives everyone the right to own a home and several nice cars, flat screen tv, smartphones and luxury toys, designer clothes, free college, free healthcare, etc etc etc etc that so many are screaming are or should be *rights*. I believe anyone willing to work hard and make sacrifices should have equal opportunity. I am completely against even dead beats having the right to all these things with zero investment of time, work or money....just a simple expectation of entitlement to a good life! I believe life should be what you make it, not what others make it for you.

Any government big enough to give you everything you want is powerful enough to take everything you have-- Thomas Jefferson

I believe in the power of the individual and the Constitution. A timeless document intending to be amended and or amendments repealed as needed for the times....

I realize you can not wrap your brain around such fairness and I accept it....I would suggest you do the same and move along...



posted on Oct, 25 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Cinaed
 


I blame both the government and wall street because they have evolved to become the same thing. One enormous all-encompassing corporation registered in the state of delaware. I have no idea why some people keep complaining "don't protest wall street, rather head on to pennsylvania avenue". This makes no sense to me.

Tea party is reform from a conservative perspective and OWS is reform from a liberal perspective. Such is life and you should deal with it! I don't hate the tea party folks, I simply disagree with them just like you disagree with me.

Lastely I think paying taxes is unavoidable and I gave you the 16th amendment to the constitution which proves its legallity. Yes we are overtaxed and worst of all we the people are barely represented, but it does not mean I want a radical "tear down" approach. The best way is to fix it gradually from within!



posted on Oct, 25 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


I don't think the average conservative is against taxation. What we are screaming is THE TAX CODE AND METHOD NEEDS REFORMED but not to punish law abiding citizens! Personally I support the Fair Tax which basically does away with income tax and the IRS and uses an amendment to the constitution so the gov cant raise it without consent of the people.

Certain things are not taxed and luxury items are taxed the most. This would truly bring about the rich paying their *fair share*, they are after all the ones that can afford such items!

Poor people would pay very little tax and still have assistance programs....programs where the horrible waste and fraud is cleaned up!

Point in example: In my state, every person on public assistance for families with children get 3, count them THREE letters via the us mail for every written correspondence sent. So if they send out a mass mailing about a single issue, EACH recipient gets THREE letters...... and there are ZILLIONS of things like this.

The medicaid racket is just sickening! I know a man whose son was born with no eyes. Through all the programs out there they are actually fairing pretty well, they have access to most things he needs. So, why is a *vision test* required every yr for this recipient? the young man HAS NO EYES!!! Yet the gov is mandating the gov to pay for this....to ensure he still qualifies
the bottom line is you and I are paying for this kind of thing, all through the system there is stupidity like this and GOSH what a lot of paperwork and people get paid for making sure this young man does not grow eyes!

And dumbest of all...even though he has no eyes whatsoever...he still has to re certify every so often (every 2 yrs I think) and go through a whole battery of stuff...to make sure he is REALLY disabled, paying many people for services in no way needed....Since the family qualifies for all the benefits out there, it is the tax payer paying the gov to provide many services not needed by anyone, paying gov workers very well to do so....and charging ridiculous prices....

I mean even if you deem a vision test be needed every 5-10 yrs..how much should a agency bill for a visit where they take one look and the test is over? then you have all the benefit programs workers that must be paid to collect this paper and shuffle it around all the different agencies the family gets the benefits from...to other workers getting paid to shuffle papers....

And you think the fraud is found out and punished?? not by a long shot

How many things like that prevent those truly in need from having the funds available to them?

Clean up the hundreds of billions going to this kind of BS and there would be more monies for all the programs!

It is not just the poor milking the system, it is also the gov itself! In order to grow bigger government...

The point being our current tax dollars are not being spent wisely at all.....



posted on Oct, 25 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cinaed
reply to post by daskakik
 

To the business owner that makes $250,000 a yr....much of this goes on the line to grow, improve and keep the business profitable.


If your sister's business is making a million dollars in sales but she's only taking home $50,000 then she is in no way part of the 1%. When a business owner makes out an income statement all the overhead gets deduced. She would be way below the $250,000 that the OWS crowd is talking about.

From the statistics that I have seen primary residence is excluded from net worth calculations so you could be living in a million dollar home and still be considered an average earner if you income is $40-50K.

edit on 25-10-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


What OWS is looking at will not affect my sister's business in the least....but the LAWS the government is pushing for WILL

OWS is not doing a thing for her, they aren't shouting down the bill that will do her in...they could care less about all the BS federal scam and skim she has to dance to...they are just pissed at Wallstreet screaming *evil rich 1%* and the government has included her and others like her into this group of demons...OWS doesn't care

So while OWS is protesting banks the laws are going to topple the remaining small business owners, OWS is certainly not AGAINST this...they don't give a hoot about it.

If they acknowledge such peeps are part of the 99% why aren't they standing up for the very people that create jobs?



posted on Oct, 25 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cinaed
reply to post by daskakik
 


What OWS is looking at will not affect my sister's business in the least....but the LAWS the government is pushing for WILL


What laws are those? Honest question. Just saying the laws is rather broad.

Also is your sister taking home 50K a year or 500K+. You keep saying she will be affected by the above 250K cap but she doesn't even have a million so I doubt she is taking home over 250K. She might have it in equity but that isn't the same as personal income so while you keep saying "think of the small business owner" many of them will not be affected by legislation that affects those making more than 250K a year.


OWS is not doing a thing for her, they aren't shouting down the bill that will do her in...they could care less about all the BS federal scam and skim she has to dance to...they are just pissed at Wallstreet screaming *evil rich 1%* and the government has included her and others like her into this group of demons...OWS doesn't care


Maybe it is in the best interest of those in her position to inform the OWS crowd. Remind them to aim a little higher.


So while OWS is protesting banks the laws are going to topple the remaining small business owners, OWS is certainly not AGAINST this...they don't give a hoot about it.


And if they don't protest the banks will this keep small businesses from toppling?


edit on 25-10-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 

I tossed out vague general figures because I am using my sister as an example not parading her private financial data. How you come to the conclusion of how much money she brings home is beyond me... I said she either is, or is close to being worth 1ML. My entire reason in bringing up my sister was she will be affected by this cap. Those are all you need to know about her private info...

The rest is your assumptions based on your own implied calculations of numbers.

The laws speaking about are federal regs coming out all over the place. When I was doing property management I was reading about the proposed regs that would affect my job.

What I read was a whole buch of BS worded to SOUND like environmental/green items....In short in the guise of environmental safety the gov was forcing all the property owners to change how remodel jobs are accomplished. Any building older than 1978 would have massive new environmental safety requirements that could only be met by those who paid for the gov trained certification of this *safety* job description.

It means not even a hole could be repaired in a wall without paid gov certified safety worker there.... who of course became worthy of their high wage because they paid the gov for the privilege


If you can't see where things like that lead I don't know what to tell you



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Cinaed
 


General figures is all we are working on. You keep saying she is worth close to 1million but as I pointed out that doesn't put her in the $250,000 a year income bracket. She may be but not if she is reinvesting all of the companies revenue in the company. Then it isn't part of her income. Her income is what is left after she pays the companies debts.

The main point being that someone having a million or two in assets doesn't place them in the $250,000+ bracket so it is incorrect to say that the OWS crowd is gunning for them or that laws affecting that bracket will affect them.

Regulations affect everyone but I fail to see how building/renovation regulations has anything to do with OWS.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Yea wel this whole 99% thing is just such a crummy math calculation ot the real world anyway.

its more like 1%, 15%, 30%, 45%, 9%. This would be a realistic economic division..... of the american world anyway.

Besides why are the talking about the 1% but keep flaping about anyone that makes over 200 large? It looks to me like they are really after the top 50%+- all together.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


The regulations are about growing bigger government and killing the private sector

That's why

It's the other side of the same coin OWS is protesting





new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 54  55  56    58  59 >>

log in

join