Occupy Wall Street


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Occupy Wall Street

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 15 · Next
Author Message
Profile Orgil
Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 05
Posts: 979
Credit: 103,388
RAC: 1
Mongolia
Message 1159629 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 2:03:19 UTC
Last modified: 7 Oct 2011, 2:37:57 UTC

The whole point is america is far more individualistic society plus culture versus japan and mostly asia is a lot more communial culture. Individual point and right is almost zero in japan and in china too. (and i am guessing mostly in asia same) (which this is another keys to the secret of why creating iphone is 10 times cheaper in china than in america.)

So this really translated in the inheritence tax world that the taxing difference is so huge. And seemingly EU is in the middle.

==============

There is this phrase among expats in japan that "in japan you live to work but in the west you work to live". Which really implies the cultural difference.
____________
Mandtugai!

Message 1159708 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 8:05:14 UTC

The 99%ers don't get it.

The 1%ers Love When The-as S^S says-'Wage Slaves' do a little Uprising.

'Cause when The Wage Slaves blow off a little steam and think they are going to Change Something, The 1%ers know it will net-net equal Zero.

Every second The 1%ers, no matter what, make money. Every Second.

And The 99%ers, every second, Spend Money. Every Second. No Matter What. And End Up with Less Than Zero. Always. Forever.

Yes, there are a Few 99%ers who Get It. And can Play The Game, and actually Come Out Ahead. Not Many. A Few. Good for 'em. They use The 'Ole Noggin' and don't get Swayed By Emotion. Smart, Real Smart. Might become 1%ers.

It's a Joy to watch Rabble Rousers spew Their Furry.

The Rabble Rouser Party. That's the ticket. I Like it.

Dull, so Frakking Dull

Profile Orgil
Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 05
Posts: 979
Credit: 103,388
RAC: 1
Mongolia
Message 1159731 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 11:55:06 UTC
Last modified: 7 Oct 2011, 12:09:09 UTC

This is very clear fact seemingly:

http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/
____________
Mandtugai!

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1159736 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 12:19:58 UTC - in response to Message 1159599.

Maybe out of G8 supreme empirials union only america has 0% heredity tax. What I heard is in japan heredity tax is 80%.


What incentive do I have to bust my ass for my entire life if I can't leave the fruits of my labors to my family? I sure as hell don't want the majority of the it going to the government!

Soooo you've accumulated more that $6.5 million? I don't see passing ones wealth to our children as benefitting them. I recall the founding fathers being against Hereditary titles and wealth. But I might be mistaken as well or maybe they were


No, I haven't, but what if I did? It should be at my choosing as to what to do with that generated wealth, not forcefully taken by the government. You may not see it as benefiting my children, but I see it as allowing them the freedom to live life without all the financial worries I had... and it would go to more than just my kids. I would give some of it away to charity, but at my choosing and the government isn't a charity.

...and back to: what incentive do I have to begin building a $6.5 million dollar fortune if at the end it's all going to be taken away (assuming a major 80% cut is given to the gov't like that which I quoted in my post).


I think Skil might be saying apply the death tax the same way to everyone, regardless of how little or how much one could accumulate in his or her lifetime. Perhaps this is at odds with views he has expressed elsewhere. Maybe the way to go is that the tax should be at a lower rate for those in lower income brackets? But I'm sure someone else would scream bloody murder about that. But what do you think, Ozz?

No my point was more toward each man earning his own way. Handing your kids the keys to the castle doesn't make them better people for not having to work for it. It does however create a layer of very wealthy entitled people that for lack of a better word could give a sheet about anything other than partying on their parents wealth
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13625
Credit: 31,065,252
RAC: 20,473
United States
Message 1159754 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 13:53:43 UTC - in response to Message 1159736.
Last modified: 7 Oct 2011, 14:14:19 UTC

No my point was more toward each man earning his own way. Handing your kids the keys to the castle doesn't make them better people for not having to work for it.


But shouldn't that be up to each parent to decide? It should not be up to the general populace to take by force through laws.

It does however create a layer of very wealthy entitled people that for lack of a better word could give a sheet about anything other than partying on their parents wealth


Isn't that a generalization? There's a lot of people who start off life financially secure, but are raised to be responsible, law-abiding citizens. It's easy to think that all the rich do is party when the press always show the worst of upper class while the rest of them are busy living out their lives trying to make a difference. I'm sure the ratio of responsible to irresponsible upper-middle and upper-class citizens is about the same or better than the same ratio for lower-middle and lower class citizens.

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13625
Credit: 31,065,252
RAC: 20,473
United States
Message 1159755 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 13:57:25 UTC - in response to Message 1159599.

I think Skil might be saying apply the death tax the same way to everyone, regardless of how little or how much one could accumulate in his or her lifetime. Perhaps this is at odds with views he has expressed elsewhere. Maybe the way to go is that the tax should be at a lower rate for those in lower income brackets? But I'm sure someone else would scream bloody murder about that. But what do you think, Ozz?


I think we should get rid of most taxes. No death tax. No income tax. No sales tax. No inheritance tax. Simply a consumption tax. You should be taxed on the money you spend once, not multiple times.

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13625
Credit: 31,065,252
RAC: 20,473
United States
Message 1159758 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 14:06:10 UTC - in response to Message 1159629.

The whole point is america is far more individualistic society plus culture versus japan and mostly asia is a lot more communial culture. Individual point and right is almost zero in japan and in china too. (and i am guessing mostly in asia same)


I value individualism more than anything. I would rather stand strong on being an individual than to be forced to fit in with the community or I am ostracized because I dare to think different.

(which this is another keys to the secret of why creating iphone is 10 times cheaper in china than in america.)


No, the iPhone is 10 times cheaper because of forced labor, child labor and sweat shops. The people over there have no sense of self-worth and cannot speak up or they will be ostracized or worse.

So this really translated in the inheritence tax world that the taxing difference is so huge. And seemingly EU is in the middle.


The inheritance tax is so large because the government takes everything from the individual and mostly keeps it for themselves, and redistributes what it wants, how it wants, and if it feels it's worth it.

There is this phrase among expats in japan that "in japan you live to work but in the west you work to live". Which really implies the cultural difference.


With the high pressure to perform combined with the high suicide rates of employees at many high-tech companies, I'd hazard an educated guess that you work to live in Japan as well, though their press gives the illusion to westerners that it's the other way around, likely through nationalistic pride that their way of life is somehow better.

Profile Orgil
Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 05
Posts: 979
Credit: 103,388
RAC: 1
Mongolia
Message 1159764 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 14:23:13 UTC - in response to Message 1159731.
Last modified: 7 Oct 2011, 14:41:50 UTC

But ozzf4 your individualism always lead to this. Here is the fact:

This is very clear fact seemingly:

http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/


Because billionares and high paying professionals always felt individualistic so the society crumbles after few cycles.

I have read that both Michele and Barack Obama just managed to pay off their student loan debt just after Obamas successful first book sale. Was that before or just after presidential election.

============

Maybe in the west some degree of individualism really succeed and in the east some degree of communialism really succeed i am not sure something human natural law is working here.
____________
Mandtugai!

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 3,003,124
RAC: 1,218
United Kingdom
Message 1159770 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 14:40:23 UTC - in response to Message 1159755.

I think we should get rid of most taxes. No death tax. No income tax. No sales tax. No inheritance tax. Simply a consumption tax. You should be taxed on the money you spend once, not multiple times.


Ozz, You'd think this was the most practical solution to taxation and one I favour in many parts. But the problem arising here is that the lower earners will end up spending most of their income on basic survival expenditures due to the level of consumption tax's having to rise to cover that tax lost through having no direct wage taxation. The way to make big earners pay their fair amount of tax is by stopping all tax avoidance schemes across the whole industrialised nations of the world. There are so many things wrong with the taxation systems run by our industrialised nations and for every dollar earned in tax by governments just how much of it is used up to run the taxation system before what gets left can be used to service the country.

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13625
Credit: 31,065,252
RAC: 20,473
United States
Message 1159776 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 14:53:14 UTC - in response to Message 1159764.

But ozzf4 your individualism always lead to this. Here is the fact:

This is very clear fact seemingly:

http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/


Those 99%, like myself (as I am drowning in debt), are responsible for themselves and their debt. This is not the result of an individualistic society, and it would not necessarily be better in a communal society. This is the result of people being allowed to and borrowing more than they should have (again, myself included).

I came from a very poor family. I am still very poor, though some opportunities are finally opening up for me. It is all up to me and the decisions I make that will determine my "fate" (not that I believe in fate, but for a lack of a better word).

Because billionares and high paying professionals always felt individualistic so the society crumbles after few cycles.


Perhaps more people should think differently and be individuals, they could become the next billionaire.

I have read that both Michele and Barack Obama just managed to pay off their student loan debt just after Obamas successful first book sale. Was that before or just after presidential election.


...and that's a great example of capitalism at work. Do something productive that people want and they will pay for it. You will benefit from it and your life will be enriched by it. This is the American Dream and we need more people involved with it.

Maybe in the west some degree of individualism really succeed and in the east some degree of communialism really succeed i am not sure something human natural law is working here.


Success is all but guaranteed for those who use their heads.

Steve Jobs was raised in a financially unstable family as an adopted orphan, built computers in his garage and worked his way up to leading one of the most financially stable companies in America, who's coffers now hold more than the US Treasury's. That's the American Dream in action. It does happen, people have to work for it and dare to Think Different.

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13625
Credit: 31,065,252
RAC: 20,473
United States
Message 1159778 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 15:03:19 UTC - in response to Message 1159770.

I think we should get rid of most taxes. No death tax. No income tax. No sales tax. No inheritance tax. Simply a consumption tax. You should be taxed on the money you spend once, not multiple times.


Ozz, You'd think this was the most practical solution to taxation and one I favour in many parts. But the problem arising here is that the lower earners will end up spending most of their income on basic survival expenditures due to the level of consumption tax's having to rise to cover that tax lost through having no direct wage taxation. The way to make big earners pay their fair amount of tax is by stopping all tax avoidance schemes across the whole industrialised nations of the world. There are so many things wrong with the taxation systems run by our industrialised nations and for every dollar earned in tax by governments just how much of it is used up to run the taxation system before what gets left can be used to service the country.


Which is why, in my idealized version of the world, our country's base expenditures would be very low. No more career politicians. A politician's job should be a civic duty like jury service, like our nation's founders used to. No more getting fat off our money while pretending to represent us and our voices. Have a flat consumption tax for all classes of people so there's no loopholes. The tax system should be so simple that the entire IRS is unneeded and unnecessary.

Profile Orgil
Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 05
Posts: 979
Credit: 103,388
RAC: 1
Mongolia
Message 1159785 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 15:22:56 UTC
Last modified: 7 Oct 2011, 15:37:34 UTC

Ozzf4 you are really ignoring the fact that american society is realistically nurture only few Steve Jobs's and only few Obamas and rest of more than 90% is really end up with capitalism victims.

And realistically there cannot be thousand billionares managed to be included in a single society because of limited resources and other limiting factors.

============

I am also critical of communial asian type of system because of tons of its negative features. But I need to criticize western version of capitalist system because it is hurting its own most of members plus its nonstop recessions in every 10-20 years.

===========

Versus Steve Jobs success there is another example who is McAfee, who has nearly same background but now he is almost fallen back to middle class. So there are tons of contrasting figures in your modern history dynamics.
____________
Mandtugai!

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13625
Credit: 31,065,252
RAC: 20,473
United States
Message 1159787 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 15:33:22 UTC - in response to Message 1159785.
Last modified: 7 Oct 2011, 15:45:10 UTC

Ozzf4 you are really ignoring the fact that american society is realistically nurture only few Steve Jobs's and only few Obamas and rest of more than 90% is really end up with capitalism victims.


The only victims of capitalism are the ones that are uninterested in their own education and uninterested in developing a useful skill to earn a living off of.

Not everyone needs to be rich like Steve Jobs to live comfortably. They simply need to be wiser, live wiser, and make smart choices. There will always be a percentage of people that are down on their luck in capitalism (or any economic system for that matter), and those people deserve help. They deserve a helping hand to get back up on their feet, but then they need to learn to walk on their own again.

And realistically there cannot be thousand billionares managed to be included in a single society because of limited resources and other limiting factors.


I'm not arguing that everyone needs to be a billionaire. But that should be everyone's goal. If you take all incentive away toward that goal, then you've ruined the entire system.

I am also critical of communial asian type of system because of tons of its negative features. But I need to criticize western version of capitalist system because it is hurting its own most of members plus its nonstop recessions in every 10-20 years.


There's plenty to criticize within capitalism, but if you take an objective look, most of the failures are of the people because it is an individualized system. In communal systems a single failure point can cause the whole thing to go down, taking everyone down with it, so the sum is no greater than it's parts. In capitalism a single failure will not ruin the entire system. The only time capitalism fails is when power is given to a single entity (government) that will naturally bring along bureaucracy.

That isn't to say there aren't other issues with a capitalistic system such as "The only thing powerful people want is more power" or "The only thing a powerful person is afraid of losing is more power", so you're going to have social power struggles within the top 1%... but for everyone else just looking to better themselves, help others, and live comfortably, that's not a problem.

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 3,003,124
RAC: 1,218
United Kingdom
Message 1159788 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 15:35:42 UTC

Which is why, in my idealized version of the world, our country's base expenditures would be very low. No more career politicians. A politician's job should be a civic duty like jury service, like our nation's founders used to. No more getting fat off our money while pretending to represent us and our voices. Have a flat consumption tax for all classes of people so there's no loopholes. The tax system should be so simple that the entire IRS is unneeded and unnecessary.


Are you trying to say that the country should be run more on a management styled system where people are employed to run various government departments purely because they posses the qualifications to do so. Sounds like common sense to me as this is how I feel the UK should be run and politicians then get reduced to a more useful roll of being the overseers only. Then hopefully politics gets demoted to just a sideline affair for useless time wasters to get involved in. Changing the system would be like trying to take a chicken bone off a dog and unless you give something else rewarding to him, in place of this chicken bone, he's going to protest and try and snap your hand off.

Profile Orgil
Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 05
Posts: 979
Credit: 103,388
RAC: 1
Mongolia
Message 1159800 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 15:56:16 UTC
Last modified: 7 Oct 2011, 16:00:24 UTC

Whatever beauties you can define every "supreme social systems" crumble within 1-2 centuries. Just look back all those super empires all over europe and asia.

I think this capitalist trend started with british empire basically then brought down the originator in pre WWII period which then took some wind to the other side of the atlantic and now it is showing some serious negative symptoms there too.
____________
Mandtugai!

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13625
Credit: 31,065,252
RAC: 20,473
United States
Message 1159802 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 15:58:53 UTC - in response to Message 1159788.

Are you trying to say that the country should be run more on a management styled system where people are employed to run various government departments purely because they posses the qualifications to do so.


Our government wouldn't employ any people at all beyond defense and perhaps all necessary White House staff. All Senators and Congressmen should have full time jobs doing useful things for society, while their political interests should be elective and voluntary.

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13625
Credit: 31,065,252
RAC: 20,473
United States
Message 1159805 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 16:04:01 UTC - in response to Message 1159800.

Whatever beauties you can define every "supreme social systems" crumble within 1-2 centuries. Just look back all those super empires all over europe and asia.

I think this capitalist trend started with british empire basically then brought down the originator in pre WWII period which then took some wind to the other side of the atlantic and now it is showing some serious negative symptoms there too.


Actually the earliest forms of capitalism can be seen in the Roman Empire. Their biggest failings were aggressive expansionism, and a Caesar who refused to give up his imperial powers after war was over.

Hopefully we can learn from those mistakes to make a better system, and to not trust all the power to a single person.

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 3,003,124
RAC: 1,218
United Kingdom
Message 1159809 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 16:12:36 UTC - in response to Message 1159800.

Whatever beauties you can define every "supreme social systems" crumble within 1-2 centuries. Just look back all those super empires all over europe and asia.

I think this capitalist trend started with british empire basically then brought down the originator in pre WWII period which then took some wind to the other side of the atlantic and now it is showing some serious negative symptoms there too.


Orgil, It would be great to know what brings about the inevitable collapse? I feel the state has a lot to answer to here i.e. failing to change, modernise, adapt it's methods or ways to suit the changes that the country undergoes over the years after it gains prominent's or superiority in the world. Yes, the USA is going through serious negative thinking just like the UK did when the empire started to fail here back in he 1900's. Where the Romans went the UK was to follow, where the UK went the USA will follow, where the USA went then the Chinese will be sure to follow too. The course of events is all written down in history for all to see.

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,899,810
RAC: 2,799
United States
Message 1159823 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 17:06:59 UTC

Heard David Leonhardt, Washington bureau chief for The New York Times, on local radio this morning. If this analysis of the various assertions being made is true, I'd say it's an interesting listen.
____________
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 3,003,124
RAC: 1,218
United Kingdom
Message 1159838 - Posted: 7 Oct 2011, 17:35:32 UTC - in response to Message 1159823.

Heard David Leonhardt, Washington bureau chief for The New York Times, on local radio this morning. If this analysis of the various assertions being made is true, I'd say it's an interesting listen.


I wounder how this inequality is applied such that it works against about 90% of the USA population?

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 15 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Occupy Wall Street

Copyright © 2014 University of California