• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Labor Unions Join Wall Street Occupiers for "Mass Rally'

1Perry

Banned
Joined
Jun 26, 2011
Messages
7,624
Reaction score
1,859
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Not for the people who want to kill you. They think war is good.

I didn't think the question was asking what they thought.
 

EarlzP

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2011
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
541
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
:lamo Congratulations, guys. You could not have picked a more inchoate, idiot group of hippies to tie your public image too. Half these people want to destroy your jobs... but you can't help yourself, and rush to join in with anyone yelling about the rich.


:) alternate headline for this story: Unions Jump Shark.

If the some of the rich would quit stealing from the middle class and poor of our country there would be no protestors no OWS demonstrations

Chris Hedges

Chris Hedges made this statement in New York City’s Zuccotti Park on Thursday morning during the People’s Hearing on Goldman Sachs, which he chaired with Dr. Cornel West. The activist and Truthdig columnist then joined a march of several hundred protesters to the nearby corporate headquarters of Goldman Sachs, where he was arrested with 16 others.

Goldman Sachs, which received more subsidies and bailout-related funds than any other investment bank because the Federal Reserve permitted it to become a bank holding company under its “emergency situation,” has used billions in taxpayer money to enrich itself and reward its top executives. It handed its senior employees a staggering $18 billion in 2009, $16 billion in 2010 and $10 billion in 2011 in mega-bonuses. This massive transfer of wealth upwards by the Bush and Obama administrations, now estimated at $13 trillion to $14 trillion, went into the pockets of those who carried out fraud and criminal activity rather than the victims who lost their jobs, their savings and often their homes.
Goldman Sachs’ commodities index is the most heavily traded in the world. Goldman Sachs hoards rice, wheat, corn, sugar and livestock and jacks up commodity prices around the globe so that poor families can no longer afford basic staples and literally starve. Goldman Sachs is able to carry out its malfeasance at home and in global markets because it has former officials filtered throughout the government and lavishly funds compliant politicians—including Barack Obama, who received $1 million from employees at Goldman Sachs in 2008 when he ran for president. These politicians, in return, permit Goldman Sachs to ignore security laws that under a functioning judiciary system would see the firm indicted for felony fraud. Or, as in the case of Bill Clinton, these politicians pass laws such as the 2000 Commodity Futures Modernization Act that effectively removed all oversight and outside control over the speculation in commodities, one of the major reasons food prices have soared. In 2008 and again in 2010 prices for crops such as rice, wheat and corn doubled and even tripled, making life precarious for hundreds of millions of people. And it was all done so a few corporate oligarchs, the 1 percent, could make personal fortunes in the tens and hundreds of millions of dollars. Despite a damning 650-page Senate subcommittee investigation report, no individual at Goldman Sachs has been indicted, although the report accuses Goldman of defrauding its clients.
Most news sources are funded by corporations and investors. Their goal is to drive people to advertisers while pushing the corporate agenda. NationofChange is a 501(c)3 organization funded almost 100% from its readers–you! Our only accountability is to the public.

When the government in the fall 2008 provided the firm with billions of dollars in the form of cheap loans, FDIC debt guarantees, TARP, AIG make-wholes, and a late-night label-shift from investment bank to bank holding company, giving the firm access to excessive Federal Reserve aid, access [the corporation] still has, it enabled and abetted Goldman’s criminal behavior. Goldman Sachs unloaded billions in worthless securities to its clients, decimating 401(k)s, pension and mutual funds. The firm misled investors about the true nature of these worthless securities, insisted the securities they were pushing on their clients were sound, and hid the material fact that, simultaneously, they were betting against these same securities—$2 billion against just one of their deals. The firm then had the gall to extort from its victims—us—to make good on its bets when the global economy it helped trash lost $40 trillion in worldwide wealth and huge insurance firms were unable to cover their bad debts.
The Securities Act of 1933, established in the wake of the massive fraud that pervaded the securities market before the 1929 Crash, was written to ensure that “any securities transactions are not based on fraudulent information or practices.” The act “prohibits deceit, misrepresentation, and other fraud in the sale of securities.” The subcommittee report indicates that Goldman Sachs clearly broke security laws.

As part of the political theater that has come to replace the legislative and judicial process, the Securities and Exchange Commission agreed to a $550 million settlement whereby Goldman Sachs admitted it showed “incomplete” information in marketing materials and that it was a “mistake” to not disclose the nature of its portfolio selection committee. This fine was a payoff to the SEC by Goldman Sachs of about four days’ worth of revenue, and in return they avoided going to court. CEO Lloyd Blankfein apparently not only lied to clients, but to the subcommittee itself on April 27, 2010, when he told lawmakers: “We didn’t have a massive short against the housing market, and we certainly did not bet against our clients.” Yet, they did.
And yet nothing has been done. No Goldman Sachs officials have gone to trial. This is because there is no way within the corporate state to vote against the interests of Goldman Sachs. There is no way through the formal mechanisms of power to restore the rule of law. There is no way to protect the ordinary citizen and the poor around the globe from the predatory activity of financial institutions such as Goldman Sachs. Since our courts refuse to put on trial the senior executives at Goldman Sachs, including Blankfein, who carried out these crimes and lied to cover them up, we will. Speculators like those in Goldman Sachs—who in the 17th century when speculation was a crime would have been hanged—must be prevented by law from again destroying our economy, preying on ordinary citizens, hoarding food so the poor starve and running our political process. We are paying for these crimes—not those who orchestrated perhaps the most massive fraud in human history. Our teachers, police, firefighters and public employees are losing their jobs so speculators like Blankfein can make an estimated $250,000 a day. Working men and women are losing their homes and going into personal bankruptcy because they cannot pay their medical bills. Our unemployed, far closer to 20 percent than the official 9 percent, are in deep distress all so a criminal class, a few blocks from where I speak, can wallow in luxury with mansions and yachts and swollen bank accounts.

What we are asking for today is simple—it is a return to the rule of law. And since the formal mechanisms of power refuse to restore the rule of law, then we, the 99 percent, will have to see that justice is done.

This article was originally posted on Truthdig.
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
40,296
Reaction score
11,692
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
If the some of the rich would quit stealing from the middle class and poor of our country there would be no protestors no OWS demonstrations

How do the "rich" which we now know to liberals in this means anyone that earns a living that OWS thinks they are entitled to, but How do the "rich" STEAL from the "poor"?





j-mac
 

EarlzP

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2011
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
541
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
How do the "rich" which we now know to liberals in this means anyone that earns a living that OWS thinks they are entitled to, but How do the "rich" STEAL from the "poor"?


j-mac

Scroll up to #627 and read the article by Chris Hedges, the thievery did not take rocket scientist to pull off and does not take a rocket scientist to under stand, it never takes more then following the money trail
 

teamosil

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
2,226
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
How do the "rich" which we now know to liberals in this means anyone that earns a living that OWS thinks they are entitled to, but How do the "rich" STEAL from the "poor"?

The median productivity for an American worker is an outstanding $97k/year. The median total compensation is only $44k. If you honestly don't see why that is a problem I really don't know what to tell you. Now, you might have some other name for it than "stealing". That's fine, you can call it whatever you want. But the important thing is that it is clearly a serious problem whatever you call it. That's costing you far, far, more than all your taxes combined at this point. Probably 3-5 times as much depending on your situation.
 

Conservative

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
127,048
Reaction score
13,133
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The median productivity for an American worker is an outstanding $97k/year. The median total compensation is only $44k. If you honestly don't see why that is a problem I really don't know what to tell you. Now, you might have some other name for it than "stealing". That's fine, you can call it whatever you want. But the important thing is that it is clearly a serious problem whatever you call it. That's costing you far, far, more than all your taxes combined at this point. Probably 3-5 times as much depending on your situation.

who do you think should determine the wages for an employee? What purpose do the OWS crowd serve and don't they have better use of their time? What I see as a problem is the entitlement mentality held by far too many and that is being promoted by iiberalism. I am waiting for someone to define what fair share is for the rich to pay as well as what is the fair share for lower income workers to pay. While your at it how about defining what a McDonald's worker should pay or any other lower educated worker with nothing but their time invested in the business?
 

teamosil

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
2,226
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
who do you think should determine the wages for an employee?

We should be asking why the market isn't doing it properly. In theory, in a free market, companies are supposed to be competing over employees. Each employer should be offering a bit more than the others to get the better resources, and back and forth, until they are all paying the employees almost as much as the value they create. That's the core idea of capitalism- the invisible hand. But that seems to have broken down in the modern US. They're paying less than half of what employees are worth and they're actually cutting compensation when in theory they should be raising it.

So, something is broken. I can't honestly tell you that I know what it is. A suspect would be the incredible concentration of many of the main markets stifling competition. De-regulation of anti-competitive practices certainly doesn't help. Employment policies that create significant transaction costs for people considering changing jobs (like starting over at the bottom rung, losing stock options, etc) are probably part of it.
 

Conservative

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
127,048
Reaction score
13,133
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
teamosil;1059942235]We should be asking why the market isn't doing it properly. In theory, in a free market, companies are supposed to be competing over employees. Each employer should be offering a bit more than the others to get the better resources, and back and forth, until they are all paying the employees almost as much as the value they create. That's the core idea of capitalism- the invisible hand. But that seems to have broken down in the modern US. They're paying less than half of what employees are worth and they're actually cutting compensation when in theory they should be raising it.

A true free market without massive Federal and liberal intervention would but you dodge the point and ignore the costs forced upon business by the govt. Obviously many liberals here have never run a business and never invested their own income into a business which means they are the last one paid. You claim they are paying less than half of what the employee is worth so explain how you came up with how much an employee is worth? What makes you an expert on employee value?

So, something is broken. I can't honestly tell you that I know what it is. A suspect would be the incredible concentration of many of the main markets stifling competition. De-regulation of anti-competitive practices certainly doesn't help. Employment policies that create significant transaction costs for people considering changing jobs (like starting over at the bottom rung, losing stock options, etc) are probably part of it.

One thing great about this country is the ability for anyone to start their own business. What I have found however is that many liberals who are experts on the private sector have never started or run their own business. It would seem to me that any liberal who really wants to help people would start a business and pay them what they know they are worth and see how that works out for them
 

teamosil

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
2,226
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
It's weird to me that you seem to be holding a position passionately that you aren't able to come up with any arguments to defend. Maybe that means you got something wrong, no?

A true free market without massive Federal and liberal intervention would but you dodge the point and ignore the costs forced upon business by the govt.

What are you talking about? The corporate income taxes that only 1 in 3 businesses pay at all? That make up like 5% of our federal revenues? We could hardly be giving businesses a freer ride than we are...

You claim they are paying less than half of what the employee is worth so explain how you came up with how much an employee is worth? What makes you an expert on employee value?

Come on man. Worker productivity isn't something I cam up with or that I calculated... Obviously you know that, right? It's a standard economic measure. The BLS publishes the numbers every quarter...
 

Conservative

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
127,048
Reaction score
13,133
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It's weird to me that you seem to be holding a position passionately that you aren't able to come up with any arguments to defend. Maybe that means you got something wrong, no?



What are you talking about? The corporate income taxes that only 1 in 3 businesses pay at all? That make up like 5% of our federal revenues? We could hardly be giving businesses a freer ride than we are...



Come on man. Worker productivity isn't something I cam up with or that I calculated... Obviously you know that, right? It's a standard economic measure. The BLS publishes the numbers every quarter...

What does any of that have to do with the question as to the value of an employee and you starting your own business so that you can pay them what you think they are worth. Think they will be happy with the amount you decide?

Worker productivity varies by industry and value of the product they produce. Would you value someone who works for a dry cleaner the same as someone working in a techical field?

Would love to talk to you about taxes but that is irrelevant to this discussion. There are many more costs to business than taxes just like there a millions more of small businesses than those evil corporations you want to demonize
 

teamosil

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
2,226
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
What does any of that have to do with the question as to the value of an employee and you starting your own business so that you can pay them what you think they are worth. Think they will be happy with the amount you decide?

That's the point- we aren't supposed to have to rely on businesses being charitable. The market is supposed to ensure that they're paying fairly through competition. When the market is working properly, that is exactly what it does do.

Worker productivity varies by industry and value of the product they produce. Would you value someone who works for a dry cleaner the same as someone working in a techical field?

Not sure how you think that relates to what we're talking about. The median compensation is less than half the median productivity. Maybe you can explain your argument more?

Would love to talk to you about taxes but that is irrelevant to this discussion. There are many more costs to business than taxes just like there a millions more of small businesses than those evil corporations you want to demonize

Feel free to list them off. We generally have not just much lower corporate taxes than most countries and much less onerous regulations. And in fact, in most those countries with higher taxes and more regulations employers actually do pay much closer to the productivity of their workers. So "too many taxes and too much regulation" doesn't seem to fly as an explanation. In fact, it's probably too little regulation. The market only works right when the conditions are right. If we let competition break down, the market breaks down and this is what happens.
 

Conservative

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
127,048
Reaction score
13,133
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
teamosil;1059942333]That's the point- we aren't supposed to have to rely on businesses being charitable. The market is supposed to ensure that they're paying fairly through competition. When the market is working properly, that is exactly what it does do.

Do you know what the profit margin is for most businesses especially those evil companies are? Competition always works when allowed to work. Right now the govt. is preventing competition from working by over regulations and high taxes which is putting business out of business. You believe we have a 9.1% unemployment rate in this country? Business owners that have gone out of business aren't counted and get no compensation.


Not sure how you think that relates to what we're talking about. The median compensation is less than half the median productivity. Maybe you can explain your argument more?

We were taking about the value of people that you tie to productivity. That is the book talking to you and not the real world thus my statement regarding you starting your own business so you can apply your theory and book smarts to the real world.

Feel free to list them off. We generally have not just much lower corporate taxes than most countries and much less onerous regulations. And in fact, in most those countries with higher taxes and more regulations employers actually do pay much closer to the productivity of their workers. So "too many taxes and too much regulation" doesn't seem to fly as an explanation. In fact, it's probably too little regulation. The market only works right when the conditions are right. If we let competition break down, the market breaks down and this is what happens.

Not sure where you get your information on corporate taxes but you made the claim so prove it. Most countries have higher user taxes than we have including gasoline taxes to fund their socialist agenda. I am waiting for some of the liberal elites to start and run their own business and put their theories into practice. Please explain your experience in working in the real world so as to give credibility to a statement that market ony works when the conditions are right. What conditions and does human behavior have any impact on business?
 

teamosil

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
2,226
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Competition always works when allowed to work.

No, that just isn't true. No economist would defend that statement. IMO that is one of the points where many conservatives' thinking about economics goes off the rails. It's very much the opposite. Government has a firm duty to regulate the market to ensure competition. That is something every economist acknowledges, from the inventor of capitalism Adam Smith on down to the most right wing modern day economists, but somehow this notion that the perfect market is one with no government interference still rages on amongst the non-economically inclined members of the right.

We were taking about the value of people that you tie to productivity. That is the book talking to you and not the real world thus my statement regarding you starting your own business so you can apply your theory and book smarts to the real world.

Maybe you aren't clear on what productivity is? Look it up and come back if you still think there is something I'm missing.

Not sure where you get your information on corporate taxes but you made the claim so prove it. Most countries have higher user taxes than we have including gasoline taxes to fund their socialist agenda. I am waiting for some of the liberal elites to start and run their own business and put their theories into practice.

Probably the most frequently cited reference measuring how business friendly countries are would be the world bank's index. They rank the US as the 4th most pro-business country in the world.

Doing Business in United States - World Bank Group

Please explain your experience in working in the real world so as to give credibility to a statement that market ony works when the conditions are right. What conditions and does human behavior have any impact on business?

Dude, I didn't invent capitalism. This isn't my theory. This is the theory of the economies of virtually all first world countries... It's foundational to virtually all economic theories... You think that like if I managed a Dairy Queen for 6 months once capitalism is a valid theory, but if I didn't, capitalism is not a valid theory?

Regardless, just for the fun of it, I've worked in tech mostly. I managed the professional services departments in a few different software companies. Then I got sick of it after about 12 years and now I'm in law school.
 

Thrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
20,295
Reaction score
9,801
Location
Texas, Vegas, Colombia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I'm not sure it is valid to state that employees are worth 97k of production, but only receive 44k in compensation.... but leave out all other expenses of the employer

the difference between the 97k and the 44k is eaten up by a ton of expenses.
 

Conservative

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
127,048
Reaction score
13,133
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
No, that just isn't true. No economist would defend that statement. IMO that is one of the points where many conservatives' thinking about economics goes off the rails. It's very much the opposite. Government has a firm duty to regulate the market to ensure competition. That is something every economist acknowledges, from the inventor of capitalism Adam Smith on down to the most right wing modern day economists, but somehow this notion that the perfect market is one with no government interference still rages on amongst the non-economically inclined members of the right.



Maybe you aren't clear on what productivity is? Look it up and come back if you still think there is something I'm missing.



Probably the most frequently cited reference measuring how business friendly countries are would be the world bank's index. They rank the US as the 4th most pro-business country in the world.

Doing Business in United States - World Bank Group



Dude, I didn't invent capitalism. This isn't my theory. This is the theory of the economies of virtually all first world countries... It's foundational to virtually all economic theories... You think that like if I managed a Dairy Queen for 6 months once capitalism is a valid theory, but if I didn't, capitalism is not a valid theory?

Regardless, just for the fun of it, I've worked in tech mostly. I managed the professional services departments in a few different software companies. Then I got sick of it after about 12 years and now I'm in law school.

I have seen no evidence of real world experience from you. You don't know the costs of running a business, starting up a business and yet act like an expert on business. Here are the corporate tax rates around the world. The U.S. ranks second behind Japan

Corporation tax rates around the world. How much do companies pay? | News | guardian.co.uk

I am still waiting for you to define fair share in the form of taxes and fair share in the form of income for the various types of jobs in the labor force?
 

teamosil

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
2,226
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I have seen no evidence of real world experience from you. You don't know the costs of running a business, starting up a business and yet act like an expert on business.

Kiddo, I'm not trying to form an economic theory based on my own personal experiences... What kind of idiot would do that? That would be insanely stupid...

Here are the corporate tax rates around the world. The U.S. ranks second behind Japan

Corporation tax rates around the world. How much do companies pay? | News | guardian.co.uk

Yeah, if they actually paid that... But around 2/3 of companies actually pay no taxes at all. The system is so riddled with loopholes that they can pretty much evade taxes entirely or give some token sum. I'm betting you actually already knew that though...

I am still waiting for you to define fair share in the form of taxes and fair share in the form of income for the various types of jobs in the labor force?

Have you not been reading my posts at all? Pay attention! I don't think somebody should come in and say "hey, from now on fair salaries are everybody gets $60k/year" or something... I think the market should figure it out. But when the market fails to do that properly, we shouldn't just sit by and let the system grind down until the axle falls off, we should fix it.

As for taxes, there obviously isn't like a fair tax rate table written on a stone tablet somewhere in the clouds. Optimal tax rates depend on a billion things. If the rich/poor gap gets wider, you want more progressive taxes. If it gets narrower, you want flatter taxes. If you are running a big deficit, you need higher taxes. If you are running a surplus you want lower taxes. If you need investment worse than you need business revenues, you make taxes flatter. If you need business revenues more badly than you need investment capital, you make taxes more progressive. Etc. This is policy making, not religious doctrine.
 

teamosil

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
2,226
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I'm not sure it is valid to state that employees are worth 97k of production, but only receive 44k in compensation.... but leave out all other expenses of the employer

the difference between the 97k and the 44k is eaten up by a ton of expenses.

Productivity means the value they create. So, like if you rent an office space for $1k/month and you work in it alone and you make $5k/month, your productivity is $4k.
 

Conservative

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
127,048
Reaction score
13,133
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
teamosil;1059942456]Kiddo, I'm not trying to form an economic theory based on my own personal experiences... What kind of idiot would do that? That would be insanely stupid...

It might help if book smart street stupid individuals had a little more real life experience to form their theories.

Yeah, if they actually paid that... But around 2/3 of companies actually pay no taxes at all. The system is so riddled with loopholes that they can pretty much evade taxes entirely or give some token sum. I'm betting you actually already knew that though...

2/3 of what companies don't pay any taxes? Why is tax revenue such an issue to you? Do you realize that corporations pay more than Federa taxes and actually employ people that pay taxes? Interesting how far too may are always concerned about what those evil corporations pay but not the fact that loopholes exist in individual taxes as well where 47% of U.S. income earning households don't pay any Federal Income Taxes but that is never addressed. The problem today with far too many is they are worried more about how much someone else earns or pays in taxes vs how the tax dollars are being spent. spending is the problem at the Federal level and that is being ignored


Have you not been reading my posts at all? Pay attention! I don't think somebody should come in and say "hey, from now on fair salaries are everybody gets $60k/year" or something... I think the market should figure it out. But when the market fails to do that properly, we shouldn't just sit by and let the system grind down until the axle falls off, we should fix it.

Who is we? Who is qualified to tell a private business that has invested their money into a business what they should pay their employees?

As for taxes, there obviously isn't like a fair tax rate table written on a stone tablet somewhere in the clouds. Optimal tax rates depend on a billion things. If the rich/poor gap gets wider, you want more progressive taxes. If it gets narrower, you want flatter taxes. If you are running a big deficit, you need higher taxes. If you are running a surplus you want lower taxes. If you need investment worse than you need business revenues, you make taxes flatter. If you need business revenues more badly than you need investment capital, you make taxes more progressive. Etc. This is policy making, not religious doctrine.

Again you fail to address the problem which is spending and the distorted role of the Federal Govt vs the roles and responsibilities of the state. We currently have a 3.7 trillion dollar Federal Govt. and a 14.9 trilion dollar debt all created because we spend too much and too many people expect too much from the govt. and aren't paying for it.
 

teamosil

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
2,226
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
It might help if book smart street stupid individuals had a little more real life experience to form their theories.

Dude, it isn't remotely relevant, but like I said, I spent 12 years running entire departments in software companies... I guarantee you I've had more real world responsibility in the business world than you have even come close to. I've negotiated 10 million dollar deals, hired and fired tons of people, managed profits and losses for an entire department, managed departments both in start ups and companies with thousands of employees. Whatever this nonsense is you have in your head about how I'm "street stupid" or whatever is off the mark. But, again, how the hell is that relevant to economic theory? You honestly think one person's individual experiences would weigh as a major factor in a theory about how entire economies work? Besides, are you seriously arguing that you think capitalism got it wrong? Aren't you supposedly a conservative? Hence your name?

2/3 of what companies don't pay any taxes? Why is tax revenue such an issue to you?

Kiddo, you're falling apart here... YOU are the one that brought up tax revenues. Remember? You were arguing that the reason business were not paying people what they're worth was because of taxes?

Interesting how far too may are always concerned about what those evil corporations pay but not the fact that loopholes exist in individual taxes as well where 47% of U.S. income earning households don't pay any Federal Income Taxes but that is never addressed

Are you kidding me? We address it over and over and over until we're blue in the face, but you guys just come back the next day pretending like you forgot what we said.

It is true that 47% of people don't pay federal income taxes. Many of them, of course, are retired people, people who can't find work, etc. But that is only federal income taxes. Those are the only major progressive tax. They need to offset all the other taxes, most of which are steeply regressive. For example, FICA, sales, property, vehicle, etc, are all regressive. Most states have either a flat income tax or a income tax that is only nominally progressive. For example, a state might have a 5% income tax on the first $10k, and then 8% after that or whatever. So, federal income taxes have to counteract that somewhat. They can't hit up the same people that are getting hit the hardest by the other taxes, and who have the least to spare at the same time.

Never addressed... I bet I could find 5,000 posts on this forum explaining that. And guess what else, I bet that tomorrow you'll be on another thread pretending not to understand that again and claiming nobody ever explained it to you.

Who is we? Who is qualified to tell a private business that has invested their money into a business what they should pay their employees?

The people of the United States of course. We decide the rules we want in our society. When something in our society breaks down, we're responsible for fixing it.

Again you fail to address the problem which is spending and the distorted role of the Federal Govt vs the roles and responsibilities of the state. We currently have a 3.7 trillion dollar Federal Govt. and a 14.9 trilion dollar debt all created because we spend too much and too many people expect too much from the govt. and aren't paying for it.

Ok, you're just going off in a whole new direction now... You're kind of scatterbrained today...

We have deficit because we spend more than we pay for. If we want to fix that realistically we need to change both. We need to spend less and pay more. But neither of those things are politically popular... Generally speaking the Democrats seem ready to act on both, but the Republicans are still refusing to address taxation. Regardless though, that has nothing to do with the problem of businesses not paying people what they're worth...
 
Last edited:

Conservative

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
127,048
Reaction score
13,133
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Dude, it isn't remotely relevant, but like I said, I spent 12 years running entire departments in software companies... I guarantee you I've had more real world responsibility in the business world than you have even come close to. I've negotiated 10 million dollar deals, hired and fired tons of people, managed profits and losses for an entire department, managed departments both in start ups and companies with thousands of employees. Whatever this nonsense is you have in your head about how I'm "street stupid" or whatever is off the mark. But, again, how the hell is that relevant to economic theory? You honestly think one person's individual experiences would weigh as a major factor in a theory about how entire economies work? Besides, are you seriously arguing that you think capitalism got it wrong? Aren't you supposedly a conservative? Hence your name?



Kiddo, you're falling apart here... YOU are the one that brought up tax revenues. Remember? You were arguing that the reason business were not paying people what they're worth was because of taxes?



Are you kidding me? We address it over and over and over until we're blue in the face, but you guys just come back the next day pretending like you forgot what we said.

It is true that 47% of people don't pay federal income taxes. Many of them, of course, are retired people, people who can't find work, etc. But that is only federal income taxes. Those are the only major progressive tax. They need to offset all the other taxes, most of which are steeply regressive. For example, FICA, sales, property, vehicle, etc, are all regressive. Most states have either a flat income tax or a income tax that is only nominally progressive. For example, a state might have a 5% income tax on the first $10k, and then 8% after that or whatever. So, federal income taxes have to counteract that somewhat. They can't hit up the same people that are getting hit the hardest by the other taxes, and who have the least to spare at the same time.

Never addressed... I bet I could find 5,000 posts on this forum explaining that. And guess what else, I bet that tomorrow you'll be on another thread pretending not to understand that again and claiming nobody ever explained it to you.



The people of the United States of course. We decide the rules we want in our society. When something in our society breaks down, we're responsible for fixing it.



Ok, you're just going off in a whole new direction now... You're kind of scatterbrained today...

We have deficit because we spend more than we pay for. If we want to fix that realistically we need to change both. We need to spend less and pay more. But neither of those things are politically popular... Generally speaking the Democrats seem ready to act on both, but the Republicans are still refusing to address taxation. Regardless though, that has nothing to do with the problem of businesses not paying people what they're worth...

"Dude" you don't have a clue, I spent 35 years in the business world and ran a 200 million dollar a year business. Get back to me when you can meet that qualification.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
60,595
Reaction score
41,457
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"Dude" you don't have a clue, I spent 35 years in the business world and ran a 200 million dollar a year business. Get back to me when you can meet that qualification.

get back to us when you wake up from that dream
 

teamosil

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
2,226
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
"Dude" you don't have a clue, I spent 35 years in the business world and ran a 200 million dollar a year business. Get back to me when you can meet that qualification.

LOL. Yeah, you're a CEO of a company with $200m/year in revenues, but you don't know basics about how economics work. Turtledude graduated from a top 5 law school, but can't explain the basics of constitutional law. Funny how that keeps happening on the internet.
 

Misterveritis

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,813
Reaction score
2,233
Location
Huntsville, AL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
We generally have not just much lower corporate taxes than most countries and much less onerous regulations.
What impact do the 80,000 regulations published at the Federal level have on businesses? And are there any other nations who regulate their businesses so heavily? Has the United States become fascist?
 

Misterveritis

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,813
Reaction score
2,233
Location
Huntsville, AL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Government has a firm duty to regulate the market to ensure competition. That is something every economist acknowledges, from the inventor of capitalism Adam Smith on down to the most right wing modern day economists, but somehow this notion that the perfect market is one with no government interference still rages on amongst the non-economically inclined members of the right.
"We had to destroy the village in order to save it"
"We have to destroy capitalism in order to save it"
The Mahablog » Destroying Capitalism to Save It

Obama: It Became Necessary to Destroy the Economy to Save it | Common Dreams

Governments regulate because it gives them power. No other reason.
Progressivism is the enemy.
 
Last edited:

teamosil

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
6,623
Reaction score
2,226
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
What impact do the 80,000 regulations published at the Federal level have on businesses? And are there any other nations who regulate their businesses so heavily?

The (rabidly anti-regulation) world bank publishes a report each year about the most "business friendly" countries. The US ranked 4th last year. The countries ahead of us are all very small. Of the significant economies, we're clearly the most pro-business.

Doing Business in United States - World Bank Group

So I guess your pretty far off base with that one.

Has the United States become fascist?

Fascist? Regulating business isn't fascist... Fascism doesn't really have a clear economic policy. The most notable fascist government- Nazi Germany- was on the free market end of things. What fascism means is a government that is socially repressive, typically combined with nationalism or racism.
 
Top Bottom