Forum Post: OWS Organization with Progressive Membership Dues based on Income
Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 10, 2012, 3:08 p.m. EST by 903w
(24)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
At my occupy protest in Seattle, I saw great income inequalities between members protesting.
We should set up a progressive membership fee system based on a members income. OWS could charge member fees that would take 75% of the wealthiest OWS supporters. Then redistribute based on needs.
Once others see OWS members collectively live better lives, they will join.
[Removed]
I'm sure this made sense in that shriveled testicle you call a brain. But it from where I am sitting it looks like a lone floater in Rush Limbaugh's golden EIB toilet.
OWS has no fucking membership.
On account of (1) OWS has no fucking membership fees.
If you've ever set foot in an Occupy camp, then I am the fucking King of France.
OWS has no membership? That's why I am proposing this.
Bump this would work because the Warren Buffeteers of the world have said they want higher taxes.
This would only work if the richest "members" of OWS are like the Warren Buffeteers of the world. Are they?
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jpmoore/21-examples-of-the-1-standing-with-the-99
How does one "see" income inequalities? Is it like seeing auras?
At Occupy Boston there were numerous protesters who got in and out of $50K+ cars. Others had been "occupying" the park for the past 4 years and finally got to make it official last fall. I would say that is one easy way to see income inequalities.
Those are inequalities in "stuff" with which you could make an assumption about income.
I think saying that someone driving an M3 has more income than someone who has spent the last 5 years sleeping on a park bench is a pretty safe assumption.
Uhhhh, how will income be verified? Self-reporting, or do you propose submission of tax documents? Let's just call this a bad idea shall we :)
[Removed]
Who writes your material?
Hahahahahahahahahaha. You are funny.