Forum Post: I Finally Realize Why You All Are Protesting- You are Upset With President Obama
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 15, 2011, 12:28 a.m. EST by MikeInOhio
(13)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I see the basis of this protest, and it comes from the ineffectual leadership of our President; You expected a lot from him and he didn’t deliver.
Liberals are as upset with the lack of reform. Conservatives are upset with the lack of leadership. I think we can all agree that systematic change is needed.
The change needed:
10% corporate tax rate- bring business back to America Repeal of interest deduction on homes 3-tier federal income tax system Introduction of a VAT Tax Balanced-Budget Amendment
Please take a look at the Republican candidates, especially Herman Cane, and keep an open mind.
Herman Cain use to work for the private Federal Reserve. He deserves a jail cell pursuant to the Trading With the Enemy Act.
Oh, that's nice. Great Point!
We are protesting because politicians are not elected, they are purchased. I don't know how to make it any clearer.
Understood
Stockholm Syndrome
You got dat right.
paranoia
Corporations were dodging their federal taxes and collecting billions in federal "refunds" paid for by We the People long before Obama came on the scene.
Yes, they were. I cannot defend that. I'm just saying take a look.
Oh I have. Not impressed.
I wouldn't tax the corporations as much as I would the executives. They obviously need some encouragement to put corporate money back into jobs rather than their salaries. Or the lobby for that matter. How could even a 60% individual tax on people making over $10 mil a year hurt? They won't be able to buy a second home in Europe or a yacht? These aren't the people who are starting small businesses. They either already own their own (obviously successful) business or are leeching off of said business through market investment and I doubt they're going to suffer all that much.
I don't personally care if corporate taxes stay low. Or even disappear entirely. The less that's taken from corporations, the less they can say the government is screwing them - forcing them to create jobs.
I'm sorry, I will defend them.
People who make lots of money do so because the do something very, very well. I don't hold that against them, I admire them. You can argue that a few don't deserve their salary and that is true, of course. You could say the same for teachers.
Then we agree to disagree. There are plenty who make tons of money that deserve it. Some of them are doctors. Athletes? Actors? Those are people getting paid to do what they love. Were I a pro actor, I'd work anywhere any time for any pay as long as my family was comfy. Problem is, there are plenty who are well beyond "comfy". There are more than 1000x more who aren't anywhere near it.
Then there are people who snaked their way to the top and have the blood on their back stabbing knife to prove it. They deserve ludicrous pay about as much as Brad Pitt, who I incidentally think is a fine actor, but makes too much money for something he'd be doing happily at union scale as long as he had regular work.
I agree to disagree. I guess the difference is the fact that I don't think we need people to tell us what certain people should make. The market does a great job, although it isn't perfect.
What's wrong with some making $10 million per year? I have no problem with it.
I guess it's just a matter of personal life experience combined with basic principles. My understanding of Jesus might have a little to do with it (though I'm closer to a deist). The end result is that I couldn't in good conscience make money like that and not give gobs of it away where I perceived a need. I couldn't even make 6 figures and do it.
My uncle is probably also an inspiration for that. He's had money for a while and has always been pretty generous. Though (sigh), you can't teach a virtue like generosity.
My grandparents gave all their money away, and it was substantial.
Hope the good it ended up doing was substantial too. If not, just let me dream. I need a happy thought for bedtime.
I think it was.
I argue that they rigged the system partially through the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 in order to control more centralized money and hijack legislation to their own ends ("bought" our politicians- both parties), deregulation under Clinton, media control and media deregulation circa '93.
I agree, although deregulation is a red herring. I flew to Germany with my parents in 1976 at a cost of $970 each. I can fly to Frankfort now for the same price.
Well regulate what exactly? You can have private banks and they still have to obey laws regarding them. Panama has had private banks and no central bank for over 100 years and managed to be pretty stable: http://mises.org/daily/2533
Here's Dennis Kucinich on the topic talking to the House of Representatives offering reasons and a solution regarding the Fed, nice to see a view of it coming from a liberal Democrat as many mistakenly think it's only Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters against the Fed so this is simply adding more views to think over: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjL108wA9QU
I'm from Ohio, when you mention Kucinich you lose my attention.
Hahaha my bad. I don't hate the guy myself, but I'm not exactly for him. I'm for private non-centralized banks, but willing to discuss views from whatever party and non-party. My top priority is getting money out of politics and fixing root problems in the system if we can. And if we can identify such problems, offer solutions (offering more than one solution is great), and get our system representing the people again then I don't care where an idea comes from, even if it's from a children's colouring book a good idea is a good idea to discuss over- no matter the source.
Well said, Fex. Kucinich has some great ideas; I just don't think he presents them in a positive light.
Please keep posting! It's people like you that make this whole discussion interesting.
How do you justify CEO's that say don't do very very well, and then are given severance packages with 8 or 9 zero's in the total?
Because I think they earned it. They have extraordinary skills that you don't understand.
Burger King, is basically on it's last leg thanks to their now fired CEO, they allowed him and all his failures to walk away with a $49.9 million severance, and you think he earned it? HP is in the dumper, they let their CEO go with $13 million, i suppose he earned that too? Mark Hurd resigned from HP after violating the companies sexual harassment policy, he walked with $50 million, but I guess playing grab ass with the secretary helped him earn that?
So what do you think. Did the shareholders see this coming and invite it? You use a few examples. is it systematic?
If we lower the corporate tax rate to 10%, how much will that increase the deficit and provide a link to reputable economists who can mathematically support your conclusion please.
Once you've explained how much it will increase the deficit, provide an economic analysis of how that will affect the economy; in particular, please provide an analysis of how much it will increase inflation including the economic mathematical calculations that support your conclusion.
After you've calculated the impact of the 10% corporate tax, please provide an econimic analysis of how the Balanced Budget Amendment will affect the Military, the poor, disabled, elderly and all other governmental programs and departments such as the FAA, FDA, etc.
In particular, I would be interested in how it would affect the rebuilding of the New Orleans levees and what the impact of another category 3 or higher hurricane which has prevailing winds from the west instead of the east as Katrina had.
After you've completed those exercises, please explain the "filibuster" and how it has impacted President Obama's administration.
That's just for starters. I'll have lots more questions after that.
I'm a reputable economist, I believe, and I believe it will increase tax revenues by the second year. By decreasing the tax rate, you invite companies to come home (like GE) and they will pay payroll taxes here. Not only that, you need to factor sales tax, local tax, and property tax into the equation.
We allowed all of our top companies to abandon us for low-tax havens like Ireland and Spain. I want them back, and the logical way of bringing them back is to lower tax rates.
I'd b happy to argue the rest if you are still around. You raised some excellent points.
Regards, Mike
What are your credentials as an economist and why should I believe you over, say, Paul Krugman, Elizabeth Warren, Ravi Batra, Thom Hartmann, Thomas Sowell, David Stockman and Robert Reich?
You are aware that even Alan Greenspan finally admitted that "tax cuts do not pay for themselves" don't you? And that David Stockman (former Directory of the Ofifce of Budget and Management under Ronald Reagan) believes that the Republican Party has moved far to the right of even Reagan's administration, don't you?
Why would companies "come home" when they can set up shop in countries where they can bribe officials, do nothing about polution and other environmental damage, pay people slave wages and abuse their employees. And do we really want to have to compete with countries like that?
Ireland and Spain? Can you provide any evidence that we've lost a significant number of jobs to those countries? I thought we were losing them to China, Vietnam, Cambodia, India, etc. I know that the jobs in my field (computer programming) are going mostly to India. And what about the fact that there are so many loopholes in American tax law that many, many large corporations not only pay no taxes to the United States but actually get subsidies? And if we CAN compete with environments like that, would we want to?
I used Spain and Ireland as examples, simply because they advertised their tax rates. The other countries you mentioned also did well. Bu Ireland and Spain were the most successful.
Hey, I'm not asking you to vote for me. I'm simply laying out what I know, and I expressing myself as a citizen. I would love to debate Paul Krugman, but I don't think that will happen.
Lower tax rates will bring companies home, I can promise you that, although I can't promise that is the answer to our problems.
Sorry, when so many large coporations are paying no taxes because of loopholes, I don't believe you. I do, however, believe that it's hurting small businesses. I would be in favor of lowering corporate tax rates if we close the loopholes for large corporations and, perhaps even provide some incentives for small companies.
Also, consider that it's not JUST tax rates that lure businesses. In polls, it's actually the quality of the schools that has consistently been shown to be the strongest lure for potential employees which is what companies want. My company moved most of our company's departments to a city that had a lower cost of living but they decided not to move the IT department (which I work for) because they couldn't find the kind of talent that they could where I live. Trust me, the quality of life in an area is also an important draw for corporations, especially when you're talking about quality jobs and the government is an important part of providing a high quality of life.
I understand what you believe would be good demands. However, why not start with something everyone, the 99%, can agree on. End corporate contributions in campaigns, and restrict lobbyists access to congress. That way you sever the chords that bind Wall Street and Capitol Hill. I'm pretty sure most conservatives and liberals could agree with that.
"You expected a lot from him and he didn’t deliver." I expected nothing good from Obama, just like I expect nothing good from anyone beholden to corporate power.
I thought everyone who voted for him was hypnotized by "hope and change"? Didn't you expect something from him?
Yeah, I did. I honestly wanted more fire from him. But he's let a lot of people down.
He's welched on campaign promises left and right.
I agree. I almost voted for him (thank god I didn't).
We all want the same thing, we just have a different way of achieving he goal
Neither sides know what they are talking about. I have a job, I agree with capitalism, I agree with rewarding production, I agree with innovation. But I DISAGREE with Wall Street, and I want to see them lose their jobs, get their bonuses cut, and stop dreaming about a bubble period thats never going to come back. Thats why I donated to Occupy Wall Street. GO OCCUPY WALL STREET!
You are a libertarian, not a protester.
Maybe, we need both small government, and small finance.
I don't know, you may be right.
Herman Cain? 999 Cain? "Fair" Tax Cain? "I love pushing extremely regressive tax scams on an unsuspecting middle class and poor Cain?"
-faint-
I agree, it is a bit regressive. I would argue that it puts everyone in the game.
Oh Lordy...
No offense but - I hope no one actually takes you seriously. Because history will tell you otherwise about regressive taxation... (see - Coolidge Era and why the Founding Fathers found taxation necessary)
It is not a bit regressive "my friend"...it will suck the last life blood out of our withering country.
It's funny that VAT taxes are used throughout socialist Europe. Please tell me your proposal.
One - Source please. I would also like to know their rates, burden and how it compares to their income.
Two - Go back to post-Hoover and pre-Reagan rates. Close all tax loopholes and offshore tax havens. Strengthen our corporate prosecutors. Let's try to be serious and crack down on cheaters. Do NOT remove capital gains and derivatives tax as this is where the majority of the 1%ers' income comes from.
But first to be ABLE to do ANY of this...we need to do ONE thing that all men, women, OWS, Tea Party, Ron Paulian, Ralph Naderian, Dennis Kucinichian, Jesse Venturian, etc. wants to do....
TAKE. BACK. OUR. GOVERNMENT.
So before we even GET to the whole taxes argument (or even the usual FED bickering) we need to focus on TAKING BACK OUR GOVERNMENT.
THEN we can talk about all this. K?
Yes, agreed. You need to give me time to gather my ammo
xD I just KNOW that was a Tea Party guns to town meeting reference...
But now is not the time for divisive politics. Right now the 1%ers have amped up their game through infiltrators within the forum and within the protest. Did you read the Daily Mail article that basically demonized OWS? We need to give all our support to OWS and not parties.
We must take back our government.
OK. Tea Party paranoia doesn't work well in the heartland.
I don't like Cain, I'd vote for Ron Paul but I doubt he'll be a candidate and I actually think Mitt Romney would not be all that different from Obama, unless he wound up being really uptight on the "values" issues. But my perception is that Romney is pretty much center right, just like BHO, but a more experienced executive.
I am pretty sure Romney will be the Repub candidate.
I wouldn't kill myself if Romney wins, I'd wait & see how he governs. He's not my ideal President but he can't be worse than BO.
I'm a registered Democrat, btw.
I feel about the same way you do. I prefer Cain, but Romney is probably going to win. He's not my ideal either.
The reason we are protesting is that he is black. When I thought I was voting for the first African American president, I thought it meant a good white man from Johannesburg.
Why would we want another conservative? They don't care about the poor or middle class. I'm voting Obama again, he knows the struggle and will help our cause
Dumb fuck. Our life will get worse with him in. No one in the park will ever vote for Obama.
How has that worked out for you?
The only reason he hasn't accomplished as much as we wanted to is because of the RETHUGLICANS and loser conservatives in the congress and senate
He had a majority for the 1st two years in office. No results. No action.
As far as the health care bill goes, there IS this:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=COZN0yOBKOE
I thought the public option was a great idea. It was a great move to keep the health insurance industry in check. "We couldn't compete" was the biggest argument from the HII. It could also translate to: "We, as executives, won't take one for the team and cut our 7-8 figure salary to step up to the plate. I may or may not vote Obama. Depends on the alternative.
I beg to differ. What do you want, more stimulus spending?
Herman Cain rocks! He is the only one with any math skills.
He does rock. I really like his style.