Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: All these wants with no solutions

Posted 6 years ago on May 24, 2012, 9:24 p.m. EST by ikki6 (11)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Funny how everyone is screaming for stuff, ending corporate greed, lower tuition, less loan costs/interest, cheaper this, cheaper that. Well, here is the problem, you all don't give any solution how this is to be done or what to do to actually get there. You all just screen for what you want but don't actually see how it is possible. Another thing I find funny is people wanting cheaper taxes, well to do all this, taxes will need to be raised, if they aren't, then who the hell is going to pay for all of it? No one, No one can, you all ask for so much and yet don't see how much something is actually going to cost to implement. As for solution, there is really only one thing I can see that would solve all this but it would cause you to complain even more. That solution would be to sell off a lot of your stuff, live in a more crammed space, make less money and perform like the majority of the world. Living as an American Today is not practical for the rest of the world, it costs way too much, takes up way too much space, and uses up way too much energy. Like honestly, think what it would be like for China or India to live the way Americans do? You can't think of it, why? Because you won't have even close to enough space on the globe.

So really, maybe you guys should actually re-think what you want. If you want equality for everyone (probably most of you only equality within your own boarders just because it would give your greedy ass more) then you are going to have to step down, stop having that hot shower everyday, stop spending your hours upon hours on the computer, sell your car (or at least drive is a lot less) Cut down your oil consumption/ energy consumption in general by a lot. Are you really prepared for that? I highly doubt it



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

Actually I think the answer is fairly simple, straight forward and specific. Let's just look at the time in history when we went through an economic collapse of comparable magnitude to today's, and do what we did back then to get out of it.

The economic collapse would be the great depression, and what we did to get out of it was a Glass Steagall bankruptcy reorganization of the financial system, and the New Deal as an economic development program.

Many people here want Glass Steagall and an economic development program. We would also need a national bank to finance the economic development projects. This would be the alternative financing system, once most of Wall Street is declared bankrupt.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

C'mon bot runners.

Let's see you put up or shut up.

You've mercilessly attacked Progressives on this forum, yet I have NEVER seen you come close to talking to posters like this one.

Not a word from the bot cowards and conspiracy theory haters for posters like this one.

Go ahead boys, you say you are the REAL OWS. Have go at this guy.

We're getting tired of doing it for you.


[-] 1 points by TruthRightsFreedom (259) 6 years ago

An Article V convention IS solution, but the infiltrators of the forum work to bury any real solution in sensationalistic distraction.

ikki6 wrote:Well, here is the problem, you all don't give any solution how this is to be done or what to do to actually get there.

These people were blocked with semi-secret techno censorship here when trying to unify around solution.


But without the cognitive infiltration leading the sheep, the sheep feel lonely and afraid. They are more comfortable with sensation or details of things they could do to solve any problems. So few people are registering and posting. Also, there appears to have been some techno sabotage as there is a bogus malware warning page that google imposes somehow.

[-] 1 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 6 years ago

"Another thing I find funny is people wanting cheaper taxes"

Only the 1% and people with a certain political mindset want to keep lowering taxes. The data is easily found that shows a strong correlation between the higher tax rates and greater economic growth between the end of the Great Depression and the early 1980s...

[-] 0 points by farmer88 (40) 6 years ago

What moron in their right mind actually wants to pay more of their income out to someone else?

[-] 1 points by tr289 (916) from Chicago, IL 6 years ago

Exactly, which is why any one who votes republican is voting to raise there own taxes... Unless of course you are extremely wealthy.

When you cut income tax you are shifting the burden to the middle class. Once that burden is shifted there is only 2 options. Massive cuts to things like SS and Medicare and or raising other taxes and fees that mostly effect the middle class, kind of like whats happening now with republican trash controlling congress.

The great republican lie is that lowering taxes on the rich creates jobs and puts more money in every ones pockets. It couldn't be further from the truth.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago

Someone who has a ton of money and still has a social conscience?

The majority of the middle class definitely pay plenty in taxes as compared to their income.

That's why so many are in favor of extending tax breaks to the needy while letting them expire for those who are more than financially blessed.

But I have the feeling that you were already aware of that fact.

[-] -1 points by farmer88 (40) 6 years ago

Have you ever heard of something called a charity? I'd much rather give my money to charities than the government.

[-] 2 points by Odin (583) 6 years ago

Fewer people would need your "charity" if there was a more equitable distribution of wealth/compensation. When 28% of the wealth in this country is held by the super wealthy, which is about equal to what it was in 1928, something might be wrong. Don't you think? In the early 1980s that figure was just under 10%. That was before neoliberalism kicked into gear, of course.

Do you believe that it is screwed up when Warren Buffet's office workers pay a higher tax rate than he does? I do.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 6 years ago

1080s? I'm going to assume that date is wrong. But the whole point of charity is that wealth isn't equally distributed. Technically, I always find this hilarious because there are so many hypocrites, one of the duties of a good Catholic is to take care of those less well off through charity, which is something I do. As I make more money later in life, I plan to use it to take care of others, however I do not want the government taking it, I'd rather give it out myself.

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 6 years ago

Yes i have corrected the date, as i have no idea what was going on in 1080. :-) Your generosity is to be commended, but there would not be as much of a need for it if the dynamics of neoliberalism, or trickle down had not been instituted in the first place. Trickle-down economics was 'sold' to the American people along with deregulation as the key for a better future for all of us. This has clearly not been the case as we see the the wealthiest among us grow in wealth in the triple digits over the last, however many years, and our (the 99%) standard of living stagnating or going down. This is all happening while corporations are reaping record profits. Things are clearly out of wack.

[-] 0 points by farmer88 (40) 6 years ago

I don't think there is anything wrong with the wealthy making money. Rather, the problem is that no one else is making money as well. Everyone should be making money, not no one.

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 6 years ago

no i have no problem with the wealthy making money either. one of the early lessons in life imparted to me by my dad was that those people who have more (stuff) than you probably worked hard for what they have. So please don't imply that i am jealous or wish to take away from others. The '"problem" is that the elite have set up, or rigged the playing field in their favor by instituting neoliberal policies.

[-] -1 points by farmer88 (40) 6 years ago

I'm not arguing anything about Warren Buffett's tax rate versus his secretaries. I think it's screwed up as well, but that has nothing to do with this conversation.

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 6 years ago

OK forget the tax rates. I was looking at your comment as well as the previous one. So what about the rest of my comment. Do you agree, or not? I have no time now to google up links for you to prove my point, but you can do that if you like.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 6 years ago

I would agree that things did appear to be better when regulated, such as the airline industry. They at least appeared to be better. I think a big problem is also the lack of ethics training and business ethics laws. I'm not an economist or anything, so I don't have much to back my opinions on however.

[-] 2 points by Odin (583) 6 years ago

No, i am no economist either, but i think it would be a good idea to look at the trends over the last thirty years, and the term neoliberalism, as most of us here have. There are also many good documentaries out there, and i would be happy to share my knowledge with you, as so many here have graciously shared theirs with me. The past 8 months have been a real learning experience for me, as i have been able to put the pieces of this sordid puzzle together. And what i have learned is quite alarming.

Just so you know, i am the father of three girls, and the grandpa of another one, and my ex and I have paid for two college educations,. My point being, i have done my thing in life, and I am here to see that my grandchild grows up in a better world. It's that simple.

[-] 1 points by tr289 (916) from Chicago, IL 6 years ago

Have you ever heard that on average less then 10% of the money donated to charity makes it to the people who it was intended to go to ? Every one has to take their cut before the people it's supposed to help get any of it.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago

Yeah because charity's work so well - I mean what .90 of every dollar donated goes to expenses ( overhead ) and advertizing?

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 6 years ago

Then find a better charity. There ARE charities that don't do that and actually spend almost all the money they take in.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago


Show proof?

Hell many charity's have fat cat CEO's of their own taking a huge chunk of money donated as their pay package - and charity's are supposed to be non-profit.

There have been plenty of investigative reports done that show this is the norm and not an exception.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 6 years ago


Take a look at that. Of course there are charities that CEOs use to help lower their taxes, but it still requires them to put a lot of money into the charities.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago

So very helpful. And you think that charity should replace Social Security and Medicare? Have multiple hundreds of charities to fill in for one government institution? That would be a clean neat and equitable way to take care of societies needy?

Somehow I just don't see that as a good idea.

[-] -1 points by farmer88 (40) 6 years ago

I'd trust a charity that has a sole mission of giving money to the needy (whatever the need may be) over a government that has many other objectives, missions, and things to do.

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

So farmer, *corruption only occurs if it's the government*, no one else in the private sector or the charities are ever corrupt?

I thought that some charities were found to be corrupt. Am I right?

I thought corruption was pretty much in every facet of life. That's what my experience has taught me.


[-] 1 points by jives13 (5) 6 years ago

Some of the solutions were simple or were already in place.

Example: BP/GE paying no taxes on million dollar revenues, they were double dipping in lost revenues for tax evasion.

Solutions: Actually tax them.

For the most part Regulation is fine, it's when it's NOT reinforced. Example: Madoff, toxic real estate sold off and gambled through Goldman Sachs. There were many red flags of a collapse. Derivative is NOT substitute for regulation nor should government bailout should be handle so lightly to participate in this toxic practice.

Solutions: Re-enstate the laws that prevent derivative. It worked before, it can work again.

ikki6. Think positive, we can do it : )


[-] 0 points by rayl (1007) 6 years ago