Occupy Wall Street

[mg_]

Also, the quote system is **** up. Like, **** to the max.

[squatta_leader]

Also, the quote system is **** up. Like, **** to the max.

It's not, it just limits how many quotes within quotes you can do to three levels deep. It can slow down the site a whole bunch if not.

Also, you forgot to close your first quote tag ([/quote]).

[Jb_]

KILL THE JEWS DAMMIT!

[CharlieGiteau]

Speaking of SS and all the IOUs...the govt has still failed to pay back what its borrowed from my retirement plan, the Railroad Retirement Board. They've asked to do it again; thankfully, they've refused and rumor has it the govt is trying to find a loophole (surprising huh?) to do it regardless of what the RRB says.

I'm glad I no longer pay into the cluster that is SS.

[sevEN]

Cliffs?

[kirk]

Cliffs?

-Some people support 99%.
-Pawns of 1% (unpro) come to defense of 1%.
-I curse a lot, bring up morality, and get one step closer to Communism.
-Sears shows up and we talk Buddhism. He has agreed to be my Lama.
-Mitch Graham brings up facts relevant to the debate and won (in my biased opinion).

[gwolf_]

You cut discretionary spending and defense budget and refill the pot. SS wasn't never unsustainable until the USFG decided to use it as a free checking account. Man, imagine what you could do with $200 billion a year from the DOD's budget. I'm like 99% sure that'd make SS sustainable.

No. The money was not used as a checking account, money was borrowed against it, there is a difference. I agree with you that its a bad idea but that is not the reason there is a liquidity problem with SS itself. That problem affects the government budget as a whole though. I agree with you that cutting the defense budget is a good idea.

Huntsman represents corporate interests. He might not be a batshit insane fundamentalist, but he's definitely a problem when it comes to the neo-liberalism slant. He's part of the problem. Social issues are a mask to the real thing - the economy. If you got people to stop going back and forth on such miniscule issues like gay marriage and abortion, then the middle class would get a **** clue as to the looting and pillaging the mega-wealthy have done to this country.

All I was saying is he's a smart guy, not that I agree with him or support his ideas. You're right about social issues.

No, actually it has been. Even Ron Paul has introduced legislation to stop this kind of shit. It's that bad. SS was never in a liquidity problem until the early 1990s when the Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats decided it was a checking account for them to use.

I still maintain the liquidity issue is due to the baby boomer's. You can easily find your own statistics about this. Now birthrates have gone down so there isn't the same ability to pay it through or as RIck Perry would call it A PONZI SCHEME !@)(&*!$@^& Also people are living longer and therefore taking more money out of social security.

If you want to make a case that 60% marginal tax rate was too high, then sure.

That is what I said

I'm not talking about laundering money. I'm talking about the cost being internalized into the final price. If Wal-Mart pays $X amount of tax on income, they never actually pay that cost. Wal-Mart puts that tax into the prices for the products it sells.

Funny story, Wal Mart is turning in its highest profits ever and yet it is cutting benefits and pay.



The system is broken. Executive pay needs to be reigned in. The fact shareholders and management are largely indistinguishable is a problem in and of itself in the United States. Until that delineation is underscored and clearly marked, we're not going to see an improvement in the system.

You're right about executive pay. Shareholders need more power in the relationship with management. These "interlocking directorates" where CEO of company A sits on the board of Company B and vice versa prevents reforms. You're missing my point about corporate taxation. The current system of corporate taxation exists so that money can't be laundered and to prevent scams, its purpose isn't so much to raise revenue as it is to prevent bad people from doing sneaky things. The alternative is to use the tax structure that is used by S-corporations, LLC's etc. But the problem with this system is that all shareholders need to be American citizens as the tax structure passes through to the individual. When you do this tax is paid on profits not withdrawn from the business and you couldn't collect money from foreign shareholders. If you removed the corporate tax code money would be funneled outside the country and then back in and it would be almost impossible to catch.

For the most part I think we're on the same page here though!

[squatta_leader]

What was the monastery like? Was that in the US or another country?

Namdroling Montana

Basically, I was on an epic road trip crossing the country back to Oregon from Boston after getting divorced, and saw a bunch of monks in town getting gas for a tractor and was like WTF?? so I asked them WTF?? and then went to visit their place and ended up staying for pretty much an entire summer just for kicks.

Totally crazy life changing experience.

Namdroling is traditional tibetan buddhism, so it's was a bit more elaborate than my zen-dominated practice now. A lot of parallels, just different goals and methods for attaining them. I think zen works better for westerners because it's much more minimilistic and is more culturally relevant to the western world. I would have a really hard time living any kind of western lifestyle if I was truly practicing tibetan buddhism, I don't know how people really pull that off.

[kirk]

What was the monastery like? Was that in the US or another country?

Namdroling Montana

Basically, I was on an epic road trip crossing the country back to Oregon from Boston after getting divorced, and saw a bunch of monks in town getting gas for a tractor and was like WTF?? so I asked them WTF?? and then went to visit their place and ended up staying for pretty much an entire summer just for kicks.

Totally crazy life changing experience.

Namdroling is traditional tibetan buddhism, so it's was a bit more elaborate than my zen-dominated practice now. A lot of parallels, just different goals and methods for attaining them. I think zen works better for westerners because it's much more minimilistic and is more culturally relevant to the western world. I would have a really hard time living any kind of western lifestyle if I was truly practicing tibetan buddhism, I don't know how people really pull that off.

So how did it work? I assume it's not the sort of deal where anyone can just show up and start living there. Do you have to pay to cover costs of rent/food/etc.? Do you work?

Details, bro!

[unpro]

just because i think a different economic model than the one you want would be better doesnt mean im a pawn of anything.

you guys want to put things in perspective to todays regulations, i want to limit or get rid of regulations when im taking about this issue.

ive explained it 20 **** times. i dont think the taxes need to be raised if we close all the BS loopholes and stop giving people deductions for spending money.

i think people who make under 15-20k a year should not be required to pay an income tax(i also think the income tax should be abolished)

i agree ss is ****, and needs to be reworked and stopped being used as a **** spend all account for the government. i also think it should be voluntary to put money into it.

i dont think its fair to raise taxes on the wealthy to the point where they effectively work for **** free once they make x amount of money.

i dont think wallstreet is solely responsible for the issues. if anything i think the federal government is MORE responsible for the current issues than anyone else, especially when it comes to things like the housing market, school loans, bail outs that enabled companies that should have failed to continue while making massive profits on terrible business decisions, etc.

corporate lobbying wouldnt be possible if it wasnt for the federal government enabling the behavior and practice. you cant blame one side fully and not blame the other side. especially when one can be considered to be the more accountable side.

i think we need to reduce the size of our government. i would start with the TSA and homeland security.

i dont think we should be spending billions of dollars "helping" other countries when we cant even fix the poverty issues in our own country.

i dont think we have any right to spread our moralities to other countries or cultures simply because we disagree with theres if they have no interest.