Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Inequality: The Results.

Posted 1 year ago on Sept. 8, 2012, 9:31 a.m. EST by shooz (26675)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I kept waiting for the "good" news about how the rich give their fellows a leg up, but it never happened.

Inequality, has NO up side for society.

http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html

A link to some folks trying to alleviate it.

http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/

24 Comments

24 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by TommyNYC (730) 1 year ago

Wow shooz, great post. I think the ending frame has some great goal for OWS to take away from the lecture as well:

  1. Stop tax avoidance
  2. End tax havens
  3. Make taxation progressive again

I particularly like those three because they can also increase revenue for job creation.

[-] 3 points by shooz (26675) 1 year ago

There are those here who are dead set against raising this revenue.

They would rather cut aid to anyone and everyone.

[-] 2 points by TommyNYC (730) 1 year ago

I propose that any and everyone who pokes around this forum that is unreasonable and inflexible in their opposition to job creation through progressive taxation is antithetical to the spirit of OWS, and should therefore be banned as a saboteur.

[-] 3 points by shooz (26675) 1 year ago

Many would seemingly prefer to wait for an even bigger crash.

Wishing, in their own way even more pain upon the 99%.

I reject them and argue with them, but they never waver in their desire to inflict that pain.

They are often banned, but believe in their egoist ways, that they have to come back and continue repeating themselves.

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

And that would leave you with what, six core posters here? Without us, you cease to exist; without us, OWS is but an old wooden shoe.

[-] 3 points by TommyNYC (730) 1 year ago

We would be able to attract more like-minded individuals to the forum because it would actually foster productive discourse.

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

The productive discourse once issues have been presented and debated, gets very boring. How many times can you say Glass-Steagall?

You will rise or fall on the strength of wisdom; if your ideas cannot stand on their own, drowning out the nay-sayers is not going to work any where outside the forum of cerebral. It's like saying we are children of the universe, or of a global identity, rather than American - a cerebral pseudo identity cannot stand to reality, nor will virtual pseudo resolutions to issues.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 1 year ago

I will call a spade a spade. Obama's "centrism" is a weakness, but he is a politician. There is no excuse for tolerating lies and divisiveness on a forum like this. I you want to be an ignorant ideologue, go do it somewhere else.

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

There's no one more flighty, superficial, uneducated, or more ignorant, than those that inhabit the Left, and they are far more ideologically determined than I am.

What the Obama presidency has brought to light is the presence of these people in America, all of which, for the most part, were thought to have been buried over 40 years ago.

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 1 year ago

You don't like stimulus. You don't like regulation. You don't like the left.

WHY ARE YOU HERE? Just leave.

[-] 1 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

I don't like people like you who attempt to put words in other people's mouths. When did I say I don't like regulation?

And you're not chasing me off this site or any other site; this world belongs to me.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

You can progressively tax all you want. There are 75k pages of loopholes that have to be destroyed, and the system started over, before it would make a difference.

[-] 2 points by TommyNYC (730) 1 year ago

Your apathy sounds strategic to me. What a coincidence, your not against progressive taxation, it's just that it's hopeless. Your libertarian agenda is so transparent.

Well yeah, we need to close loopholes and havens at the same time.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Not saying its hopeless, just saying that your ranting about progressive taxation is what we have right now. Its all the loopholes that fuck it all up. And the reason for those loopholes- lobbying efforts from massive amounts of money.

And why are those politicians so easily lobbied? Because we refuse to send them a stern message.

[-] 3 points by TommyNYC (730) 1 year ago

The loopholes are impeding true progressive taxation. So are low capital gains and inheritance taxes. so are tax havens only available to the rich. But the goal is still progressive taxation.

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Excellent post. Everyone should watch!

[-] 2 points by shooz (26675) 1 year ago

I thought this is why we are all here.

I may be mistaken.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

!st priority : Take our govt back from the 1% plutocrats., All money out of politics.

[-] 0 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

You and I actually agree on what should be the central issue and on our position on that issue. But your knee-jerk partisan squabbling led you to fail to recognize that.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I've told you we agree on this since our 1st exchange upon your return to the site.

I got no knee jerk partisanship. You are mistaken. I disagree with you regarding tea party success & OWS failure.

I've tried repeatedly to find more common ground and you have hidden behind false accusations that I am partisan.

recap done.

Peace

[-] 2 points by shooz (26675) 1 year ago
[-] 2 points by shooz (26675) 1 year ago

Screw partisanship?

Around here? Not likely.

This thread has been ignored by every single one of those that constantly stir up that partisanship they like to bitch about.

Talk about hypocrites.

This IS why we are here.

[-] -1 points by Orwellwuzright (-84) from Lockeford, CA 1 year ago

So what in your opinion should be the tax rate for the rich? 90%?

[-] 2 points by shooz (26675) 1 year ago

I never said it was necessarily only about the taxes.

Better balances could be reached.