Derby Trail Forums
Page 3 of 10 < 12 3 45 > Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Occupy Wall Street (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43957)

dellinger63 10-12-2011 10:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 810715)
Buffett never announced his charitable deductions, but it is calculated to be about 23 billion - yes billion - dollars to Gates Foundation. Buffett has always said that when he and his wife die, the vast majority of their money will go to Gates Foundation (rather than leave a huge estate to the kids)..

Then why bring up his tax rate, not knowing what his deductions were? His tax rate is the max!

Seems to me the culprit you should be blaming is the write off allowed for charitable deductions. Make a sign and get to Wall Street. See how 'NO MORE CHARITABLE DEDUCTIONS' plays.

slotdirt 10-12-2011 10:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 810699)
Small point ... that's not what they are saying, and we have a progressive, not regressive, tax system.

And: Warren Buffett released some of his income tax information today



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...875519978.html
I don't know how many times it has to be stated that Buffett pays 17.4 percent of his earned income to Uncle Sam and not 35 percent because he makes virtually all of his money off investments that aren't subject to the federal income tax. I realize Mr. Buffett is suggesting that people of his ilk should pay higher taxes, but I can't imagine he's suggesting that dividends and capital gains should be taxed at a higher rate. I can assure you that idea would hit many, many more people than just the top echelon of income earners.

In any event, Warren Buffett himself could just stroke a check for $30 billion or so and it would save the government just as much money as letting the Bush tax cuts expire for the current 35 percent tax bracket.

slotdirt 10-12-2011 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 810717)
There has been a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency put in place by the Obama administration, over the screaming objections of the Republicans, who blocked the appointment of Elizabeth Warren as it's head months ago, and are currently actively blocking the appointment of the second choice. Rendering the agency virtually non-existent for almost a year.

So some in Washington are desperately trying to "address" exactly what you don't like and are complaining about - but the special interest lobbies in Washington are blocking it completely through the Republican party.

Hence, Occupy Wall Street exists: to take back Washington and our government from the large corporations and special interests owning our government process and manipulating it to their, not our, end. Haven't you had enough of that?

Call Mitch McConnell and tell him to stop blocking the implementation of the CFPA and the appointment of it's head. That is what Occupy Wall Street wants to happen. Get corporate ownership out of our government.

Occupy Wall Street has nothing to do with how much CEO's make. It has everything to do with investment banks crashing our economy, getting bailed out by us, never being investigated for their malfesence, then we stay in the recession while they go on to record profits and bonuses, because Washington is owned by those corporations, and they won't let Washington make any laws that will benefit us, and threaten their profit margin.
Just curious, but if this whole "movement" has nothing to do with CEO income, why did a bunch of protesters meander over to the personal residences of several CEO's the other day? For exercise I guess?

slotdirt 10-12-2011 10:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 810628)
So you think that special intrests don't run Washington? Tell me why?

Banking industry Lobbyists and Pharmaceutical Industry Lobbyists? Repeal of Glass Stegal Act was that good for the country? No lobbyists involved there, LOL. Allowing Hedge Funds to invest in the Futures markets... Yeah that helped things and I am sure no lobbyists involved there... And your retort will be to ask for the Bill number and sponser may I say please stop in advance. You could be betting horses today instead of wasting your time.
You're a little late to the game, man. Glass-Steagal was repealed in the 90's. Does Occupy Wall Street have a Way Back Machine?

Nothing else to add aside from I'm relatively certain the two industries you cited have been as unsuccessful as any at influence over the last three or four years. If banking industry lobbyists ran the world, I'd guarantee you Dodd-Frank wouldn't be on the books. Likewise, the pharmaceutical industry and health reform.

Cannon Shell 10-12-2011 10:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 810715)

Buffett is fully supportive of the OWS movement. Buffett released this information in an attempt to garner congressional support for increasing the tax revenue from the rich by decreasing the loopholes, etc. that allow the more wealthy to pay a far lesser rate than the less wealthy.

Uh doesnt this snippet from one of your posts show this to be at least partially untrue?

That made for an effective tax rate of 17.4%(Buffett).

According to the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group, the average tax rate for taxpayers in the middle quintile—those earning between $34,000 and $60,000 a year—is 12%, including payroll and income taxes. Those earning from $103,000 to $163,000--the top 80% to 90% of earners—pay 18.2%. Those earning from $163,000 to $211,000 pay 19.8%, and those earning from $211,000 to $533,000 pay 20.4%.

Unless "far lesser" has a different meaning to some

Cannon Shell 10-12-2011 10:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 810717)
There has been a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency put in place by the Obama administration, over the screaming objections of the Republicans, who blocked the appointment of Elizabeth Warren as it's head months ago, and are currently actively blocking the appointment of the second choice. Rendering the agency virtually non-existent for almost a year.

So some in Washington are desperately trying to "address" exactly what you don't like and are complaining about - but the special interest lobbies in Washington are blocking it completely through the Republican party.

Hence, Occupy Wall Street exists: to take back Washington and our government from the large corporations and special interests owning our government process and manipulating it to their, not our, end. Haven't you had enough of that?

Call Mitch McConnell and tell him to stop blocking the implementation of the CFPA and the appointment of it's head. That is what Occupy Wall Street wants to happen. Get corporate ownership out of our government.

Occupy Wall Street has nothing to do with how much CEO's make. It has everything to do with investment banks crashing our economy, getting bailed out by us, never being investigated for their malfesence, then we stay in the recession while they go on to record profits and bonuses, because Washington is owned by those corporations, and they won't let Washington make any laws that will benefit us, and threaten their profit margin.
Warren isnt fit to be the head of anything in the real world (no Harvard isnt real world) which makes her a fine candidate for Congress. But if Congress hadn't passed the supposed consumer protection credit card reform bill we wouldnt be facing many of these new fees which were created in response to that new law.

Despite how much hand wringing or protesting goes on the reality is money buys power and there is nothing that can be done to change that. And if I recall correctly you were against term limits for Congress which would seem to be a good place to start the reform that you speak of.

Riot 10-13-2011 12:34 AM
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 810721)
Then why bring up his tax rate, not knowing what his deductions were? His tax rate is the max!
Why don't you read the article, so you have a clue before you comment? Rather than just babbling on about things asked and answered.

Riot 10-13-2011 12:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810724)
I realize Mr. Buffett is suggesting that people of his ilk should pay higher taxes, but I can't imagine he's suggesting that dividends and capital gains should be taxed at a higher rate.
Why don't you read what Warren Buffett himself has said about that very thing, you know, in the article, about it? Then you won't have to imagine and speculate.

Riot 10-13-2011 12:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 810728)
Uh doesnt this snippet from one of your posts show this to be at least partially untrue?

That made for an effective tax rate of 17.4%(Buffett).

According to the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group, the average tax rate for taxpayers in the middle quintile—those earning between $34,000 and $60,000 a year—is 12%, including payroll and income taxes. Those earning from $103,000 to $163,000--the top 80% to 90% of earners—pay 18.2%. Those earning from $163,000 to $211,000 pay 19.8%, and those earning from $211,000 to $533,000 pay 20.4%.

Unless "far lesser" has a different meaning to some
The tax rate for Buffett's income level is 35%. Buffett payed 17.4%. Looks like "far less" to me. Looks like "far less" to Buffett, too. That's his deal. Not mine. I just posted that he did a rare thing, in pursuit of the change he wants. You might read what he has to say, and why he is lobbying for a tax rate change, if you want to comment on it.

You guys (you, Slot, Dell) are hilarious: you all have negative comments about something you've heard a little about, you base your arguments on partial information you read here, and you absolutely refuse to be fully informed about what you're bitchin' about, because it's so much easier to argue your imaginary "what ifs" than what someone like Buffett or the OWS crowd has really said on the record.

Riot 10-13-2011 12:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 810729)
Warren isnt fit to be the head of anything in the real world (no Harvard isnt real world) which makes her a fine candidate for Congress. But if Congress hadn't passed the supposed consumer protection credit card reform bill we wouldnt be facing many of these new fees which were created in response to that new law.
Warren is such a threat to "the real world" that the Republican party fell all over themselves attempt to block everything associated with the agencies creation, then her appointment to run it.

Naw, if it were not for Congress, you'd still be facing sudden unannounced 20%+ interest rate hikes with bills arriving 4 days before you due date, and interest accumulating from date of purchase, compounding of interest onto current purchases, etc.

I am repeatedly amazed at your factual ignorance regarding things you discuss here. I can only assume it's deliberate.

You might take a while to think and reflect upon the credit card reform passed, and then what those sudden "new fees" would be if the Republicans would allow the Consumer Financial Protection Agency to ... you know, do something about that gouging attempting to get outside the law, as the agency is intended to.

Riot 10-13-2011 12:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810725)
Just curious, but if this whole "movement" has nothing to do with CEO income, why did a bunch of protesters meander over to the personal residences of several CEO's the other day? For exercise I guess?
I guess if you really wanted to know, you'd watch the news. No, that had nothing to do with CEO income, it had to do with an expiring NY tax rate. But it appears you think it more convenient to not know the facts, and just attribute whatever purpose you make up in your mind.

Ignorance is bliss. Damn effing dirty hippies, right? LOL.

jms62 10-13-2011 05:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810726)
You're a little late to the game, man. Glass-Steagal was repealed in the 90's. Does Occupy Wall Street have a Way Back Machine?

Nothing else to add aside from I'm relatively certain the two industries you cited have been as unsuccessful as any at influence over the last three or four years. If banking industry lobbyists ran the world, I'd guarantee you Dodd-Frank wouldn't be on the books. Likewise, the pharmaceutical industry and health reform.
Dude you asked I gave and now you are complaining that Glass Stegal is old? It came into being during the Great Depression. Repealed and 10 years later we have the biggest economic crises since the depression. And your blanket statement about the success of Banking and Pharma lobbying after accusing someone of making blanket statement is pretty funny. This whole argument is pointless with you. Simple queston. Do you really believe the pablum you spew or just love a good argument?

slotdirt 10-13-2011 06:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 810734)
The tax rate for Buffett's income level is 35%. Buffett payed 17.4%. Looks like "far less" to me. Looks like "far less" to Buffett, too. That's his deal. Not mine. I just posted that he did a rare thing, in pursuit of the change he wants. You might read what he has to say, and why he is lobbying for a tax rate change, if you want to comment on it.

You guys (you, Slot, Dell) are hilarious: you all have negative comments about something you've heard a little about, you base your arguments on partial information you read here, and you absolutely refuse to be fully informed about what you're bitchin' about, because it's so much easier to argue your imaginary "what ifs" than what someone like Buffett or the OWS crowd has really said on the record.
Honest question: do you understand the difference between income earned by salary or wages (subject to the federal income tax) and income earned off investments (subject to capital gains taxes)? Further, do you understand that capital gains taxes are significantly lower than income taxes in order to encourage capital investment? Lastly, the only ways to make Warren Buffett pay more than 17.4 percent in taxes is to give him a larger salary (his is $100k and has been for 30 years), eliminate deductions, or to tax capital gains at a significantly higher rate. Pick your poison.

slotdirt 10-13-2011 06:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 810738)
Dude you asked I gave and now you are complaining that Glass Stegal is old? It came into being during the Great Depression. Repealed and 10 years later we have the biggest economic crises since the depression. And your blanket statement about the success of Banking and Pharma lobbying after accusing someone of making blanket statement is pretty funny. This whole argument is pointless with you. Simple queston. Do you really believe the pablum you spew or just love a good argument?
I just want to know why you weren't marching on Congress when they were looking to repeal most of Glass-Steagal back in the late 90's. Surely, you were as interested in these issues then as you are now, right?

And I don't mean to be trite, but anybody who tries to get the last word with constant insults is someone whose argument is already lost.

jms62 10-13-2011 07:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810745)
I just want to know why you weren't marching on Congress when they were looking to repeal most of Glass-Steagal back in the late 90's. Surely, you were as interested in these issues then as you are now, right?

And I don't mean to be trite, but anybody who tries to get the last word with constant insults is someone whose argument is already lost.
Sharp comeback:rolleyes: and if you dont mean to be trite then dont be it is a very simple concept.

Coach Pants 10-13-2011 09:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810745)

And I don't mean to be trite, but anybody who tries to get the last word with constant insults is someone whose argument is already lost.
That's a pushover mentality and a fine example of how these corrupt scumbags have conditioned us to lay down and be little b.itches and accept this nonsense. Control your emotions. Be fake. Accept things as the way they are.

BS. People need to be told to f.uck off more often.

GenuineRisk 10-13-2011 10:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810744)
Honest question: do you understand the difference between income earned by salary or wages (subject to the federal income tax) and income earned off investments (subject to capital gains taxes)? Further, do you understand that capital gains taxes are significantly lower than income taxes in order to encourage capital investment? Lastly, the only ways to make Warren Buffett pay more than 17.4 percent in taxes is to give him a larger salary (his is $100k and has been for 30 years), eliminate deductions, or to tax capital gains at a significantly higher rate. Pick your poison.
Which would make sense if that's how it worked in the real world, but it's not. Because most stocks aren't initial public offerings, where the money goes to the company, theoretically to be used to expand; in fact, they're traded on the secondary market between private individuals and organizations that have no interest in their sliver of ownership of the company besides whether they can make a financial profit on eventually selling the stock. It's the difference between financial investment and economic investment. Most trading is a financial investment, which doesn't do the economy any good, unless the Warren Buffets of the world are taking their profits to build things. Which they aren't; they're buying more secondary market stocks and pocketing the profits.

So taxing capital gains as income isn't poison at all. It's far more fair than the current system. If the gov't wants to make an exception for IPOs, and tax them at a lower rate to encourage the company to further expand , fine, but once the stock has changed hands, it's not encouraging anything other than more profit-making with no intent to put that money back into the economy.

slotdirt 10-13-2011 10:15 AM
All well and good, but just understand that raising capital gains taxes is going to effect pretty much anybody who invests in stocks or mutual funds and not just Warren Buffett. Agreed?

clyde 10-13-2011 10:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Pants (Post 810764)
That's a pushover mentality and a fine example of how these corrupt scumbags have conditioned us to lay down and be little b.itches and accept this nonsense. Control your emotions. Be fake. Accept things as the way they are.

BS. People need to be told to f.uck off more often.

Fucl< off more often.

Coach Pants 10-13-2011 10:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by clyde (Post 810776)
Fucl< off more often.
!!OOOOOOOOOO!!

clyde 10-13-2011 10:28 AM
Thank you so much.

clyde 10-13-2011 10:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810775)
All well and good, but just understand that raising capital gains taxes is going to effect pretty much anybody who invests in stocks or mutual funds and not just Warren Buffett. Agreed?
Put a rider on it saying only those with net worth of 1 million dollars or more/and or are Tiger fans shall be subject to the tax.

Riot 10-13-2011 11:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810744)
Honest question: do you understand the difference between income earned by salary or wages (subject to the federal income tax) and income earned off investments (subject to capital gains taxes)? Further, do you understand that capital gains taxes are significantly lower than income taxes in order to encourage capital investment? Lastly, the only ways to make Warren Buffett pay more than 17.4 percent in taxes is to give him a larger salary (his is $100k and has been for 30 years), eliminate deductions, or to tax capital gains at a significantly higher rate. Pick your poison.
Yes, I pay different tax rates on my regular income versus my capital gains. Duh. Are we in economic kindergarten here?

What I suggest you do is read what Buffett is lobbying for regarding the tax code, rather than guessing and assuming. It's a bit more complicated than the mean understanding so far expressed.

Riot 10-13-2011 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810745)
I just want to know why you weren't marching on Congress when they were looking to repeal most of Glass-Steagal back in the late 90's.
Well, Occupy Wall Street is marching on Wall Street and the government now. Exactly over things like the repeal of Glass-Steagal.

slotdirt 10-13-2011 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by clyde (Post 810784)
Put a rider on it saying only those with net worth of 1 million dollars or more/and or are Tiger fans shall be subject to the tax.
Those two groups may be mutually exclusive.

jms62 10-13-2011 12:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810815)
Those two groups may be mutually exclusive.
;) How do you know the Tigers don't have millionares as fans. Can you supply evidence including W2's of all Tigers fans to prove your point. After all, "Is it really too much to ask of someone who's arguing a certain point to provide evidence substantiating said point? "

Cannon Shell 10-13-2011 12:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 810808)
Well, Occupy Wall Street is marching on Wall Street and the government now. Exactly over things like the repeal of Glass-Steagal.
I would be willing to bet that less than 5% of the people marching have ever heard of Glass-Steagal.

slotdirt 10-13-2011 12:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 810820)
;) How do you know the Tigers don't have millionares as fans. Can you supply evidence including W2's of all Tigers fans to prove your point. After all, "Is it really too much to ask of someone who's arguing a certain point to provide evidence substantiating said point? "
Very funny. I am, after all, the Tiger fan to whom clyde was referring in the first place.

Riot 10-13-2011 01:17 PM
Victoria Jackson, of SNL fame, goes to Occupy Wall Street
 
Victoria Jackson, of SNL fame, goes to Occupy Wall Street and interviews protesters.

This video ... speaks for itself. This is the distilled essence of today's political conversation. Please make yourself watch all of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA1py9erpVk

Riot 10-13-2011 01:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 810822)
I would be willing to bet that less than 5% of the people marching have ever heard of Glass-Steagal.
Umm ... from hearing them being interviewed, I'd guess at least 30-40% have heard of Glass-Steagal. Alot of them sound fully informed, and directly reference the removal of laws that protected us from Wall Street malfeasance over the years. That is what OWS is all about. Let's hope they know about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbZB9...ayer_embedded#!

clyde 10-13-2011 01:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 810815)
Those two groups may be mutually exclusive.
Oh.

Clip-Clop 10-13-2011 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 810700)
What industry?
Construction.
Jobs available were, tech support, shipping, wire pulling, packaging, warehouse, data entry, admin/office manager, marketing director.

Interviewed about 30 people over the last two days. First interview question, spend any time down at "Occupy Denver"?

Most common answer, "nope, been looking for work."

My kind of people.

Cannon Shell 10-13-2011 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 810839)
Umm ... from hearing them being interviewed, I'd guess at least 30-40% have heard of Glass-Steagal. Alot of them sound fully informed, and directly reference the removal of laws that protected us from Wall Street malfeasance over the years. That is what OWS is all about. Let's hope they know about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbZB9...ayer_embedded#!
Yeah ok this is just about fairly obscure financial laws that were repealed a decade and a half ago? 5% was on the high side.

bigrun 10-13-2011 05:09 PM
Love the sign on the left....:D

Cannon Shell 10-13-2011 05:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigrun (Post 810884)
Love the sign on the left....:D
Think they are part of Riot's 40%?

Riot 10-13-2011 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clip-Clop (Post 810869)
Construction.
Jobs available were, tech support, shipping, wire pulling, packaging, warehouse, data entry, admin/office manager, marketing director.
Very nice! I wish there were 100,000 of you. I like Denver area, sunshine virtually every day of the year :)

Riot 10-13-2011 05:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 810883)
Yeah ok this is just about fairly obscure financial laws that were repealed a decade and a half ago? 5% was on the high side.
:zz: If you look at with internet blogs and discussions from the OWS crowd, you'd know they talk about that all the time, as they want it re-instated. It's a major contributor to the current financial disaster OWS is all about.

You don't ever bother to click on a link, or read anything different? No curiosity about this at all?

They say this alot: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win" - Ghandi

I guess you guys are at ridicule stage. There is fear it will get ugly in NY tomorrow morning, however, and move into the fight state, as they are going to try and pull the demonstraters out of the park. Let's hope the police don't lose it and become as violent as the Boston PD did the other night.

Knows about Glass-Steagall:


Nurses know about Glass-Steagall:


Definitely knows about Glass-Steagall:

dellinger63 10-13-2011 07:12 PM
At least we'll find out how law-abiding/peaceful they are tomorrow at 7am. EST.

Besides isn't it time to go back to their jobs and families, you know being part of the 99%?

Riot 10-13-2011 09:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 (Post 810934)
At least we'll find out how law-abiding/peaceful they are tomorrow at 7am. EST.

Besides isn't it time to go back to their jobs and families, you know being part of the 99%?
They were law abiding and peaceful in Boston, where the police attacked and beat the Veterans for Peace, while destroying their flags - nobody raised a finger against the police as they were hauled to jail.

They've always been law-abiding and peaceful in NY for the month so far. Even in the face of police brutality. Why would you think they would not be?

The plan is complete peaceful resistance at this stage. Timing is good, it can be televised live on the morning shows. Bloomberg will suffer, OWS is too popular with the public.

Lec Walesa is going to join them, but nobody knows for sure what time he'll get to New York.

jms62 10-14-2011 04:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 810949)
They were law abiding and peaceful in Boston, where the police attacked and beat the Veterans for Peace, while destroying their flags - nobody raised a finger against the police as they were hauled to jail.

They've always been law-abiding and peaceful in NY for the month so far. Even in the face of police brutality. Why would you think they would not be?

The plan is complete peaceful resistance at this stage. Timing is good, it can be televised live on the morning shows. Bloomberg will suffer, OWS is too popular with the public.

Lec Walesa is going to join them, but nobody knows for sure what time he'll get to New York.
It is kind of sad because i think a very high pct of Police force support OWS cause.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:20 AM.
Page 3 of 10 < 12 3 45 > Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.