If the "rich" protestors want to "solve the problem" then just set up a trust fund or charity, toss their unwanted dollars into it, and dole it out

You think that's enough? You think that will fix the current problems?

DFR-3634868 I'm totally with you. If they want to give. Why go through the federal government? Even a liberal has to admit that the government doesn't use money as wisely as a genuinely concerned citizen.

DFR-3634868 You're right you don't understand. You don't understand that one person alone even if they are in the 1% cannot afford to build a nuclear power plant or tunnel under a river or build a water and sewage treatment plant, etc. The kinds of things your government is providing now because private investors are not interested in doing it because the returns are too low and too slow. Get serious.

I don't think you read the article. one of the "1%" explains why a few of the "1%" donating or giving away money won't solve the big problems.

DFR-3634868, it's not about money. It's about the upward mobility that is lost through today's tax codes and corporate greed. 99% of Americans are stuck in stagnant wages, job insecurity and the absence of jobs for those not employed, working at reduced hours or even part-time. When the Middle Class shrinks, America regresses.

I'm not sure what these people are waiting for.

Why there is this obsessive need to have the US Government do what these people can simply do for themselves RIGHT NOW, I just don't understand.

What we are waiting for, and always will, is for the needs of citizens to have equal access to the making of laws and policy as K St. lobbyists.

This is called "equity".

Obviously, having "ordinary" income and capital gains taxed at different rates is "unequal" and in the product of its own kind of "social engineering". Warren Buffet knows that better than anyone.

So is preferential treatment for oil and gas depletion,

So is the definition of income made in and out of the country,

So is preferential treatment of tax-free municipal bonds.

Each on looks like a "good idea" until there are 20,000 "good ideas" and then no one who is on the lower end of the scale is able to use any of them.

Although Cain's 9-9-9 idea is appealing in its simplicity, the practical application is ruinous to exacting the same people who cannot take advantage of all the existing "good ideas".

In California, Proposition 13 became ruinous as you can have people living side-by-side in the identical house, one paying 4 times more property taxes than the other. This is when you take a meat-axe approach to help solve a problem that should have been narrowly focused an needed a surgical scalpel - the plight of long-time owners who were no longer able to pay their property taxes in an inflationary market on what was formerly a respectable fixed income.

Let's see what kind of BS Eric Cantor is going to say about this one...I can't wait..

Maybe something like: "The children of the job creators are not aware of what they are doing. We must be tolerant due to their inexperience..."

He is good at giving lip service for all kinds of BS....

1) We need to get rid of NAFTA ( which I initially supported) or ratify it drastically

2) We need to tax goods coming from overseas more than American Goods or give AMerican Goods a significant sales tax break.

3) We need to lower the price of Gas for the next 24 months to around $2 per gallon then raise it very slowly.

4) We need to stop any and all aid , tax breaks and bail outs to companies that take their workforces and help desk ( AT&T for example) overseas.

5. We need to STOP the sale of AMerica ( no, you should not be able to own the Pennsylvania Turnpike if you are a middle east shiek. I am sorry but we have to look out for AMERICANS!) No, you should not be allowed to own our Health Insurance companies or our Hospitals. Citibank and all other "banks that are too big to fail" should be run by Americans only!

6. CEO's made more this fiscal year than EVER BEFORE IN HISTORY! Stop supporting those companies.

7. We need to stop supporting Democrat and Republicans for the next decade until they clean house for themselves. Demand corporations allow smaller unknown candidates to have TV time. They talk about whether or not someone is a certain religion---what are you doing about NAFTA? Ask the hard questions.

8. And YES, every American should have health coverage and good basic care....every single one of us. It should be afordable. Sorry this will unfortunately mean you will have to either join an insurance group through work or sign a waiver saying if you fall ill and you refuse then you are entirely financially responsible for the entire bill. THere is just no way I see around that.

Yes, because those out there that worked so hard for their money and then freely gave some of their profits to charities or nonprofit organizations certainly would agree with your comment. You are a credit to this conversation.

If these people really wanted to make a difference with their wealth they would not spend their time protesting or sending out donations that make an impact once. Instead they should do what this country really needs and create commerce. Start companies, with all of that money, that will employ people. Give them the opportunity for jobs, dignity and financial independence.

If they had to work for the money they would feel a little different I bet.

How many of the super-rich today, would you say, were already born into priviledge?

I'd venture to say an overwhelming majority.

This is the difference between compassion and apathy.

Those of you who say "just give the money away" are stupid.

That does not solve the problems. It just delays them. The 99% are about ALL Americans and telling the rich it is not right to take our money and leave us without just because they can.

Get a heart will ya. This is your country too and you are NOT immune.

How do we expect the indifferent here on this thread, or elsewhere, to understand the movement when they cannot even read/comprehend this story?

Just give it to the government. That is what Obama wants. More tax money. That way the government can decide how much it will suck off the top to support the government bureaucracy, then redistribute the rest. Anyone who wants can send in more money with their taxes. They do not need the government to say it will take it, they can do it themselves. Just step up to the plate and do it. Why wait? Do it and do it now. Most of the 1% already know that. If they don't then they have inherited their money and hvae know idea what it took for a relative to actually earn that money.

So they should just throw their money at charities and not be forced to pay a fair amount of taxes? These tax breaks the Republicans keep pushing for have not helped the economy in the slightest. Trickle down economics is what has gotten American into this mess, and are not what is going to get America out of it. Why should the people who are the richest in this country, who will supply the most amount of money to the economy pay a substantially smaller percent than a person making the GDP?

Kalle, one of then senator Obama's promises when he camapigned in Ohio was the redo NAFTA to make it more fair to the American worker. 3 months into office, then President Obama backed out of that pledge during a speech given in Mexico, and the left in the US said NOTHING!!

No, but it would be nice to have money funneled into creating jobs so that people spending tens of thousands of dollars and countless hours earning their degrees to be able to work after they graduate. All the nay-sayers care about is the possibility that someone might get a 'hand-out'. Hey, we work hard too, so keep your hand-out. 99% of us want just want equality.

This is just a symptom of a common cycle I'd say....

Let's start at zero - things being relatively equitable.

Wealth naturally begets more wealth. That's how things go, generation after generation, spend money to make money. The growth is driven by those in the middle, the innovators, the scientists, the up-and-comers. Those at the top exploit that, naturally, it's what they do. They invest, they utilize the middle to make more money, they don't actually do the work themselves. Which is fine, it's the natural order of things. Meanwhile, the bottom poorest become increasingly dependent on the top because that is where the money is funnelled, this burdens the top and the middle, in sets resentment by both parties.

As the top becomes wealthier, the bottom becomes more dependent - while the middle begins to stagnate. The gap to the top is getting too large. The innovative middle finds it increasingly difficult to make it to the top. No longer is their work worth as much. The places the middle used to be able to go to make it to the top are now being occupied by the children, and the children's children of those already at the top.

The gap stretches more and more... like silly putty. Upward mobility, once a highway, is now a trickle. The middle cannot sustain its own weight - and people begin dropping down into the bottom.

This iis where we are going. Eventually though, it snaps - always does.... and it will start over again.

Rod..."Those of you who say "just give the money away" are stupid."

As opposed to those who are comfortable with one of the most financially inefficient mechanisms known to man, government, taking it from us and then giving it to some 3rd generation welfare bum, walking around with $5,000.00 worth of tattoos, a gold grill and getting free VD treatment at the government clinic and spouting off some crap about 'fair share'.

What many are calling for is just what the Russians got after WWI. Any idea where that lead?

1) We need to get rid of NAFTA ( which I initially supported) or ratify it drastically

Agreed, we should be able to make whatever we want to regardless of what the neighbors are doing. This creates competition, which creates business, business employ people, people spend money, the economy starts growing again.

2) We need to tax goods coming from overseas more than American Goods or give AMerican Goods a significant sales tax break.

American manufacturers need to bring quality at an affordable price back to the table. Giving tax breaks on our goods would be a good place to start. We're at the point of our economy that people will basically look at price alone, not where it came from.

3) We need to lower the price of Gas for the next 24 months to around $2 per gallon then raise it very slowly.

Only way this is going to happen is if we reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We need new or modified technologies that can replace internal combustion. That is one tech that is clearly out dated.

4) We need to stop any and all aid , tax breaks and bail outs to companies that take their workforces and help desk ( AT&T for example) overseas.

Agreed - And stop giving corporations that do this tax break incentives. Did you know GE made 15 BILLION in profit and actually got 1 million+ in return? Essentially, they paid less in income taxes than an American making less than 40,000 a year... When you've got this happening, there are severe problems with our code. Our own tax system doesn't promote working Americans. Companies make more money (and are paid to do so) shipping it all overseas!

6. CEO's made more this fiscal year than EVER BEFORE IN HISTORY! Stop supporting those companies.

A company pays their head cheese 50+ million because they feel the need to keep talent. Richard Fuld made a killing and his company (Lehman) went splat. Tell me, this guy was the brightest in his company? These clowns aren't worth a fraction of what they are paid. The business should instead invest in more research/development in order to come up with new products and ideas that create more divisions (jobs) which in turn help the economy. What do you think 1 person is going to do with that kind of money? My guess is he'll turn around and sit on it.

8. And YES, every American should have health coverage and good basic care....every single one of us. It should be afordable. Sorry this will unfortunately mean you will have to either join an insurance group through work or sign a waiver saying if you fall ill and you refuse then you are entirely financially responsible for the entire bill. THere is just no way I see around that.

A lack of personal accountability, common sense, and generally malicious people, are all responsible for our insane healthcare costs. I have such a bad taste in my mouth from those individuals suing entities over things that were their own dam fault. Idiot burns himself with coffee: how should he be able to even see a judge? At what age do you learn coffee is 99% of the time served HOT.
Overnight fastfood manager sues company because he got fat over eating their food. Really? What were you expecting?

/rant

What a dumb article. A couple of spoiled trust-fund babies who sit on their a_ss all day complaining about big business.

I own a software company that I started in 2000 while unemployed. Last year, I made $1.1 million. I pay the highest tax rate in the country. Just as my fellow small business owners do. And we employ 80% of American workers. So these rich liberals inherited their money from mommy and daddy and do not pay fed income taxes yet go on to say they pay less percentage than regular workers. Yes, but they are the exception not the rule.

Bottom line: Business owners like myself who employ 80% of Americans pay the highest tax rates in the country!! We need our taxes lowered not raise. Lower my taxes and I hire a few more highly-paid software developers. Raise my taxes and I lay off a few. Seems pretty simple to me. Just wish this idiot obama would catch on.

I, for one, am SO proud of you 1%ers! For those of you who lost loved ones and gained wealth I'm deeply sorry for your loss. They must have been wonderful people to raise children like you!

I don't want to take all your money I just want a fairer system that allows everyone to have a decent life...but YOU know that.

Thank you so much for standing up and being counted. For those of you in here that didn't go to the link posting the placards...do it. They are very touching.

I agree!!! If you have SOOO much money and you want to pay more in taxes...Get out your damn checkbook and write a check!!! The IRS takes donations!!!

Notice most of the people have their money sheltered inside charities and trust funds to escape taxation!

Sick of the HYPOCRITES!!!

Most are not looking for a handout or a gimme. They are looking for simple things that they are NOT getting even though they are willing to work hard and are desirable members of society...things like a JOB that pays a living wage...affordable health care...to work until they retire not until they expire...

Hey Gary,

Sorry that I want a fair system. Why should the average American struggle to pay taxes, while the rich don't have to give their fair and equal share? Is it too hard for the Conservatives to want an equal system and for more social mobility. Believe me, I want to be rich. But under the current system, nobody who is not rich now, will be.

Most of the 99% are not looking for a hand out they are looking for real Jobs with real benefits for the long term! Employment that you can actually live on and raise a family, not all these min wage part time jobs that do not give anyone a decent quality of life!

So nice of them to volunteer other people's money. The rich earned or inherited it, so it is their money. They already pay more than their fair share. It is the bottom 47%, who pay nothing, who need to pay more.

I cannot believe how many lazy people want to just take from someone because they have more, and I am not even close to being one of the top 1%, but I do pay a lot in taxes.

that 47 percent you are talking about are mostly living at or below the poverty level

Kevin, Kevin, Kevin, you know that's not true. Inherited money isn't earned money. Its passed down wealth. Now, if you're complaining about our tax code.........well, that's another matter. Minimum wage doesn't really allow excess to contribute does it. I mean by the very definition of the word minimum "its just enough to insure survival or get by". That leaves those who make more than minimum wage but via write offs don't have enough left over to qualify. That's not the "lazy no good loafers" you describe. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, you're talking about corporate welfare whereby tax exemption is granted so that more of that non taxed money will go towards betterment of society via job creation. Are you a beneficiary of trickle down? Do you know anyone who is? Me neither. So, I see your point.......we have to insure that those that qualify to pay taxes, pay taxes. I think its very easy to "find the culprits" to blame. First you have to identify the culprits.

For those of you wondering what a Strawman argument is, here is an excellent example:

The left's view of government dependency is becoming glaringly obvious. "The people are too stupid to run their own lives, only the wealthy elite who run the government can save us from ourselves."

It is the bottom 47%, who pay nothing, who need to pay more.

They pay a lot - in a wide variety of other taxes (income tax isn't the only tax) The percentage of their total income that they pay in taxes, WITHOUT income tax, is staggering. Which is why they get a break on income tax.

Some Sanity Please, Alice Walton - recently used as the poster child of the 1% by the 99% - gave over $300 million plus devoted hours upon hours to build a community airport. So, yes, they can build infrastructure like you mention. However, I agree, I wouldn't want to rely on them.

In Michigan, fair and equal share? Let's talk about the 53% who pay income tax. Until that number gets closer to 63%, you can talk about the Rich needing to pay more with credibility, but, you can't use the words "fair and equal share" and maintain that credibility. And, yes I know the arguments about how that 47% pays employment taxes, sales taxes, state taxes, and local taxes. However, none of those provide a significant revenue stream toward operating our Federal Government.

Like the Tea Party, the general idea behind this group is good. However, they've got the details about what they are fighting for so wrong it severly undermines the impact of their efforts. You aren't going to solve corporate greed by attacking rich people about the taxes they pay. You need to focus on the stockholders and corporate boards that give away these outrageous salaries and bonuses while cutting back work forces and requiring those who still have a job to work harder and longer. That, and you need to focus on restructuring Capital Gains tax. Back to Alice Walton, not a hero of the masses by any means, however, she actually is condoning higher taxes on income and Capital Gains and getting rid of the Inheritance tax. Now, I think her plan benefits her in the long run and is far from unselfish, however, I think the general idea is where this country needs to go.

"Why don't they just send a check to Uncle Sam" is just idiotic. That's not policy, and that's what these people want: Fair Policy--where each person's voice is equally weighted, and wealth doesn't beget more voice, and more wealth. That's the real Ponzi scheme. You can't keep redistributing wealth up without an eventual collapse. We love America and don't want that to happen. We believe in fair opportunity and voice for all. That's what America used to be for too.

I heard an argument a few days ago, I wish I could remember who said it so I could attribute it, but the argument was this: High taxes in the middle of the last century forced the wealthy and business owners to reinvest within their businesses to avoid taxation rather than take the money out--that was the only way to avoid tax and it was worth it to them. That reinvestment created the growth, job creation and general prosperity we are missing now. Now, owners can take the money out at relatively low tax rates and keep it for themselves. That doesn't benefit society, and arguably doesn't benefit the rich in the long run either.

DFR-3634868 that would mean he'll have his money gone and others around him would still have theirs. That would be considered UNFAIR. Most of those protesters really don't know much of the world of finance anyways... all they know is .. it's unfair and don't talk to them about solutions- they don't want to hear it (sorta like teenagers).

Burke Stansbury could let his son's doctor know that he's willing to pay for the medical coverage of a child with same disability but unable to afford care instead of looking for the government to install crappy healthcare in which the child would have to wait awhile for treatments. He can make a difference in a child that has no hope and suffering while waiting for treatment into one whose life is made better now because for Stanbury's selfless act of charity.

In Michigan, sorry, but the example of Warren Buffet is a bad one. It is easy to look up the numbers and see what percentage of Americans pay what percentage of taxes. Easy to find and self explanatory. If you actually look at it it is very fair to those that pay no federal tax.

It has to come from the government, it has to be a sort-of involuntary ... redistribution of wealth because the few altruistic wealthy people giving (away) their money isn't going to do it."

I still need someone to explain how transferring even more wealth from the private side to government helps poor people be wealthy, or at least comfortable.

All I see it doing is turning our nation into a socialist pile of crap.

Everything government touches ends up costing 2, 3, 5x what they estimate, their programs are filled with fraud, corruption, waste and inefficiency, and the federal government tends to get worse and worse at what they do over time.

The way to improve individuals lives is to provide an environment for the potential for success.

Building mountains of debt is not the answer. Government is doing this at breakneck speed.

Raising taxes on productivity does not do this. Yet some of these ding dongs think that is the answer.

I am pretty sick and tired of small groups of richie rich kids and irresponsible hippies wanting to escape their debt get any press at all. The reporting outside of mainstream media paint a very different picture of OWS. They tell us that these groups are small, made up predominately of tourists, media, and lookie loo's and the occasional idiot with their little sign, with no real answers

Our government is failing us at every level. Giving them more money is the dumbest, absolute dumbest thing that we can do. We have 10x more federal workers making $100k+ than we did 6 years ago. Talk about idiocy.

Empowering the individual private citizen is the only real solution.

Sorry that I want a fair system. Why should the average American struggle to pay taxes, while the rich don't have to give their fair and equal share?

Because it is a necessary burden that should be carried by all...not just the few who have succeeded in life. That is your fair system...when everyone in a Democratic society has an equal stake in the financial need of a Government. I agree that Companies, giant packs and special interest organizations should have no influence in the running of this Country...but to do that "individuals" must step up and do their part....that includes paying taxes, that includes working to pay your own way instead of relying on Government handouts. That includes using those resources that are offered to the masses with respect and reverence...ie. making the most of a free and fair K-12 education, using federally supported services wisely, reporting those who cheat the system and diminish resources for those truly in need of Federal assistance.

If we wish to hold the "American Business interest" to a higher stander then the private sector must rise to a higher standard as well.

Kim Heitz: You're so full of crap my computer monitor is starting to stink.

Current poverty level is $11k for one person.

Attach a link where you say 47% of the USA population is at that level or lower.

I'm at the 47% with my $45k a year job. I had a GED at 16 years old cause of family issues and within 13 years I'm at where I'm at cause I bust my ass working and sweating.

I'll tell you and all you other socialist or communist pigs who want this redistribution crap. There are a bunch of average Americans just like me who will meet you in the streets if you get past the police. And we won't be armed with shields and clubs.

I've had enough of this crap of people crying for money cause they are too lazy to get a job.

GUESS WHAT!!! Alabama has lots of jobs open now because they scared off some illegals.

BUT I know you won't move there and take the jobs because that isn't your intent here.

You people's intent here is to change our form of government from a Republic to a Communist or Socialist state. And that change will be meet with blood if it continues.

Long live America! Live free or die hard! Death to the Reds!

SmBusOwnerinNY, that and it further widens the gap between the haves and have nots since the poor are borrowing money to make it through the day; paying extra money in interest every month. Meanwhile, the rich put their extra money away in investments and make money on interest and dividends every month. However, some of that has to do with the credit card craze that hit this country over the last 10 years. Possibly, that second mortgage to fund a trip to Europe, a second car, and new furniture for the whole house wasn't such a good idea. Regardless, even without the credit card craze, the gap would still have widened.

All the RICH made some or all of their money living in the USA, They are taking advanage of the US MILITARY that protect them from getting robbed from, oh! let us say DICTATORS. A POLICE FORCE that keeps them safe in their home and neighborhood. They drive on roads that are paved by the federal government, their food is inspected by the FDA, the clean water and air by the EPA. the airports and airplanes are inspected and controled by the FAA, their tv programs are regulated by the Christian Right FCC so their children will grow up good kids, the roads they drive on are patroled by State Troopers to make sure their safe. Now, let us say CHINA came to America, because the US Military was under funded and slapped the piss out the RICH and told them it is their money. What if a robber(s) broke into their home or caught them on the street pistol whipped them took their money, took them to their home banged their wife, and cleaned out their home of all that is valuable, who do they call?? not the ghostbusters. What if an out break happens with the food or water and the RICH DIE, what good is their money NOW!!! If they LOVE AMERICA SO MUCH like they preach to the unamericans, WHY NOT PAY YOUR FAIR SHARE TO KEEP AMERICA SAFE, CLEAN, PRODUCTIVE. There is alot more reasons to keep AMERICA FREE FOR ALL. They LOVE their wife, and they would think twice to spend 40 million on a diamond ring for her, just out of LOVE. Their LOVE for The United State of America shouldn't be any less, because they were born here and NOT a third world country where their chances of being RICH and FREE isn't that great. I lived in Nairobi, Kenya where life is HARD. and Kenya isn't a really high poverity country like some of the other African Countries. If you haven't been to a country like Kenya to see they way they live, PLEASE GO, it's an education to how good you and the RICH have it. What if you dropped the RICH in the middle of IRAQ, what would ALL their money do for them. That could be AMERICA in the near future. YOU NEVER KNOW THE WAY THINGS ARE GOING.

Kim - Of the 140 million working Americans, 99% of those have part-time short term jobs? The problem with America is their attention span. People move from position to position, employer to employer with no dedication to a certain profession. If you stick with an employment long enough you will make it. Assuming you are actually a worthwhile asset a company can depended upon. Then again that relies upon an individual to be dedicated to an employer. However, due to this lack of loyalty, in the overall workforce, as an employer, I pay a little as possible to you, because I know you won't be around for very long. Once someone shows their ability and dedication, the raises and promotions begin.

Having people of wealth who already pay taxes gives some oomph to the OWS movement, since most of them likely don't pay taxes.

True.

However, the soloution, of which they offer none, are not higher taxes. What is the government going to do with it? Pay out more welfare so people don't have to work?

No. You should actually change the tax code so the wealthy pay more, the middle class pay more, and the poor don't "pay more". You make it so everyone contributes to fix the escalating debt crises. Everyone should be in on this. A flat tax doesn't cut it. My $100 in taxes is different from a poor person's $100 and a rich persons $100.

We need to "buck up" and solve this problem together. Pure and simple.

"If these people really wanted to make a difference with their wealth they would not spend their time protesting or sending out donations that make an impact once. Instead they should do what this country really needs and create commerce. Start companies, with all of that money, that will employ people. Give them the opportunity for jobs, dignity and financial independence."

On the surface this sounds like a great idea. The problem is you can't just start a company and expect it to be successful if you have no customers. How about putting people back to work with work that needs to be done for all of us, and yes we all pay for it, and thereby create customers. Then you could start a new business and have a chance at success..

christopher one politician makes up this pile of bull and the left runs with it like it is the greatest line they have ever heard.

Well said Order and Freedom Forever, I don't come from a wealthy family, yet today, I live comfortably and make in excess of $100,000 a year. I paid $28,000 last year in income tax alone. I got here by giving up 11 years of Opportunity Cost to go through schooling - which I am still paying for - and working my tuckuss off for the next 12 years. Many of those years I struggled to pay rent and was lucky to eat one small meal a day until my income rose to a level that I could cover my student loans and still have money to buy 3 square meals. I think there is something behind this movement, however, the argument of 1% versus 99% has nothing to do with that something.

The real problem is that there is no more social mobility. It used to be that if you were inventive or productive you had a real chance to change your situation. Now the inventor may get a patent, but is stuck with nothing but the fees, the worker is appreciated as a worker and never moves from being a worker. I've seen it in my own family. My sister married a trust funder. He's not smarter or better than anyone else. He earns less than anyone in the family. But his large pool of cash buys health, vacations, accommodations, and access to more money. It is a system that strongly favors the trust funders and few else.

That is when the rebelion starts to grow. Social stratification invariably leads to oppression, economic failure and strife.

It's true, nobody says life is fair, but you have problems when you marginalize the fair minded. I'm glad these guys are speaking on behalf of the unfunded. It gives a sense that we are NOT evolving into White fuedal Russia.

Hi Red,

You are correct, small businesses should be taxed less, to hire more. I think the problem is not small businesses but large corporations. The fundamental difference is: Large corporations that have a reduction in taxes do not hire more, the manufacturing is not in the U.S. and the savings in taxes go to the profit of the Corporation. I feel for people like yourself who have worked hard to get where you are only to lose a large portion of your money to taxes. Small U.S. businesses are caught in the wake of the large corporations and banking industry. Small businesses and middle to low class workers do not have any say in government, I think this is a systemic governmental failure that the protestors are fighting. Elections are won and lost with the backing of Banks and Corporations, and in return, what do the backers want? Preferential treatment or the governmental equivalent "special interest". You and I are hard pressed to affect any changes in tax codes and special interest lobbying if government reformation does not occur, at the most fundamental level. Following the money is an old term, but it has never been more true than today. If you scratch your head wondering why a politician does something that seems outrageous, follow the money, and you will find out the truth.

Why do Corporations send the jobs overseas, because they can, without any penalty. How can we compete against overseas labor, we can't. Free Trade is comprised of slave labor. Free trade is a race to the bottom in the U.S. It is so plain to see. We all see it, Corporation, Politicians, Banks, You, and me. Why isn't something done about it, Profits! It's plain and simple. If history is written by the victors, policy is written by the profiteers.

In this day and age of mass media, you are now seeing a mass protest against this very system. The only way to change the way things are going is when the majority trumps the wealthy.

Sad but true.

Hmmmm.....those "featured protesters" said they INHERITED their wealth. 'Nuff said!!!!!!

So they didn't "work their way up".

Young and involved with non-profits.

Very much to the point TPokeys. Well said.

zoroaster

Well said!

No. You should actually change the tax code so the wealthy pay more, the middle class pay more, and the poor don't "pay more".

Last year, the bottom 47% of US household income earners paid ZERO federal income taxes to the IRS after tax breaks and deductions like the EIC (those who earned less than about $30k/yr). The top 10% paid 71% (those >$380k), and the top 25% paid 88% (those >$80k). The "middle" 25%, those >$30k but <$80k, paid the remaining 12% of total IRS household income taxes last year.

Now exactly how much MORE do you want the upper 25% to pay? 95%? 98%? 100%?

Zoro: these people don't want to EARN anything anymore and WORK for something. They have lost all sense of purpose and self-satisfaction. They want everything to be given to them; they have developed a "ME! ME! ME! ME!" and "GIMMIE! GIMMIE! GIMMIE!" mentality of entitlement.

If your already rich you will never need the money you make on your investments..Those investments are based on commodities that everyone is a part of and those investments should be circulated back into America creating more jobs etc. Life is short and you can't take it with you !

TPokeys You are right about the change in tax code, although you gave the wrong impression of a flat tax ( which BTW I am 100% against...) a flat tax is one where everyone pays at the same rate not the same amount. So those with a higher income would pay more, just not as much more as they should.

Still a family who makes $10,000 a year cannot afford to pay tax at all. Cain's plan is a flat tax where that makes taxes lower for those who live in certain places BUT eliminating the miniumum wage which will turn the mearly poor into the starving.

It is normal to see kids from wealthy people develop a guiltiness sentiment for having the wealth too easy.I would like to see Nancy Pelosi ,John Kerry and other OWS millionaires supporters giving away some of their greed.

Don't think you pay enough taxes?

Donate your money to charity, or voluntarily contribute more to the government, there are already legal channels for you to do so.

You want to help people? Then go help people.

Otherwise you are not advocating "fairness", you are taking the lazy and brutish way out of trying to *force* your will upon others, simultaneously stripping them of their full ability to give to charity and reap the psychic rewards of doing a good deed since you advocate force against them, and wind up aggressing against them which due to human nature makes them want to lash out back at you in justified resistance. Better a charitable program is run voluntarily and without as much funding as it might have if you forced people into it but still exists than that it is fought against entirely and scrapped *because* of the attempt to *force* people into it.

These yahoos and the ones gobbling it up kill me. A couple of things. First when you already have great wealth is it put into trusts which protect it from higher taxation while the principal grows through investment. This isn't taxed as ordinary income. People like the deceased Ted Kennedy were all about taxing the so-called rich. They were wanting taxes raised on the income that the so-called rich made while "working". All the while old drunk Kennedy had his mouth parts, when not attached to a bottle of Chivas Regal, firmly attached to blood vessel of the trust set up by his father Joe. You could raise the income tax to 90% and good old Teddy wouldn't have felt a thing. The second thing is you have all these rich liberals/progressives wanting to outsource their personal societal obligations and responsibilities to the government through taxation of other people's money because they are too lazy to figure out where the money that they want to give to charity should go. Typical of the ego involved and that they know best on how your money should be used.

Here's a couple of thoughts...

1. All these people have to do if they want to pay more taxes is to take less deductions. They can tell their accountants to simply pay the highest possible tax. Instead of holding up signs and talking, maybe they should do something.

2. The 99% don't exist. Its a gimmick. Its designed to make people think that there's the 1% and that everyone else is broke. Kim at 1.35 has clearly overdosed on that kool aid. Her comment is that the 99% want real jobs not handouts. Well I'm so not in the 1%, but I have a real job and so does my wife. We work hard, we are well paid and we pay a lot of taxes. Yes, I know, good for us. My point is that there are many, many people below the 1% that are doing just fine. This fantasy dichotomy of the 1% and everyone else is nothing but politics. It is meant to cause division, anger and hate, not to solve problems.

hmmm pay less because you know they are going to move on.......if you payed a little more maybe an employee would stick it out.....and don't forget to cook your books bus ppl so really are you paying anything? I worked my butt off also, i am now retired, corruption and greed is what is destroying our country! Hell if mt husband and mine employers that we retired from could find a way to stop our pensions they would do it without blinking an eye! Where is the loyalty to the employee now a days? Long gone! And if tomorrow we lost our pensions i suppose you guys would sit back and say i didn't work hard enough! Get a clue!

Funny how people can make millions on contracts to play basketball, football, soccer, baseball, ... Why are the OWS not protesting those packages? Why are they not camped out in front of every Football stadium complaining about that inequality? So it is OK to be an athlete and make millions off of people looking for a couple hours of distraction? But being smart and making money through busness is not OK? Wait, the banks own a lot of those stadiums (Mellon Arena, PNC Park, ...), so you could go there and get back at the banks and the outlandish pay people get for doing something most people do for fun.

They're a bunch of IDIOTS!! Just think of the good that they could do through charities, churches and synagogues, service organizations, or through a trust foundation. And if they REALLY believe that government is the best mechanism for "helping others", then why not send the IRS a check in excess of their tax bill?

Nope, these are political drones, indoctrinated, bought, and paid for by a system that bows to the left-wing liberal ideology of bigger, more intrusive government.

Their cries are hollow and phony.

Um, Gloryhound, PNC Park was paid for by the City of Pittsburgh, the State of Pennsylvania, and the McClatchy group. Same for Mellon Arena; just substitue Lemieux and some investors for McClatchy. Those banks just pay for naming rights and get a luxury box for events. Just sayin'.

My family pays no federal income taxes, yet we still paid out over $12,000 in taxes last year. About 25% of our income. (Our income is around 150% of poverty levels.) This includes Payroll taxes, income taxes, state and local taxes, sales tax, etc. Who here thinks my family does not pay enough taxes? Isn't 25% of our income enough? No one in this country pays $0 in taxes. Even small children pay sales tax.

I am so tired of hearing about the 47% of Americans who pay "no taxes". It simply isn't true. And many forget that those numbers include rich citizens who don't pay federal income taxes either. It isn't just the poor.

@DFR and all the critics: Why is because the wealthy, in general, have become an ABORTION.

The wealthy, in America, are no longer conservatives. They are wealthy who want big government to enforce slave labor and their mutated ideology. In other words, they are not capitalists. They are little dictators. That's why they SUPPORT Ghaddafi. These are the wealthy that need to have at least a NORMAL amount of money TAKEN from them, because normal is NOT 0% tax.

Those who 'stand with the 99%' are the '1%' who have brains. They realize that if push came to shove there'd be an uprising in any country that has this abomination of class separation (particularly here in the US) and their money would be taken away from them completely. This is what the DOUCHEBAGGERS cannot get through their tiny little minds. That they can cry 'capitalism' straight to the guillotine if they want. Alternatively, they can end up moving to China and having their money stolen there.

So smarten up, you so called 'capialists.' Because capitalism only works when the majority of people don't feel like they are getting the shaft. Which is what it feels like right now. And at least have the smarts enough not to keep yelling at the less well off, because there are a lot more of them than there are of you.

If they want to give the IRS more money then do it there is NOTHING stopping them from doing this. Many people like Warren Buffet talk a good game but in reality he spends millions to save on taxes and is currently fighting the IRS in having to pay 1 billion dollars in back taxes. Most of these people say what these people want to hear but the reality of there actions speak otherwise.

So you were lucky enough to succeed in life and make money? This isn't a lottery game. You pay your share of the taxes. Hell somebody should have told the rest of us. YOu make a fortune then you become exempt from paying taxes. BS.

Derek - your supposed 1% doesn't realize where the majority of the jobs comes from in the US - capitalism. The 99% certainly outnumber the 1%, but if the 99% don't have jobs because they've taken out the 1% I don't know how they'll live. Seriously wake up, and take some economics classes. You spout liberal drivel and don't have any support for your arguments. Do you know what happened to Russia during the Bolshevik Revolution? Probably not, so I'll tell you, they took everything from the 1% and gave it to the 99% and lived in squalor during their communist years because their economy was crap, the government went bankrupt and are still trying to recuperate 100 years later.

I agree with many of the core issues this movement is for, but not some of the extremes on here that are not logical. Because some of the1% joined this movement doesn't suddenly validate everything. If the 1% that joined this movement aren't creating jobs, great, tax the hell out of them.

I agree wealthy individuals should be taxed more. Corporations however should not. We wonder why all these businesses are leaving the US - because they don't want to get taxed so high! Bring the taxes down for businesses and you'll see an influx of jobs. Look at states in the US with high job growth and a key factor is the tax rate. It just make economic sense for businesses to go where they save money on taxes that they can use for growing their business.

If the "rich" protestors want to "solve the problem" then just set up a trust fund or charity, toss their unwanted dollars into it, and dole it out

You think that's enough? You think that will fix the current problems?

Of COURSE it won't solve the problems. Just like taxing millionaires more won't solve the problem. The problem is rampant spending. Spending on entitlements and everything else. Even the presidents current "jobs plan" is just a diversion of federal money (that we don't have) to the states so they can pay for teachers and firefighters, that by definition should be paid for by local/state funds. We need the PRIVATE SECTOR to grow and provide more jobs so we have more taxpayers paying INTO the government. Using taxpayer money to pay teachers and firefighters doesn't do anything but dip water from one end of the pool and drop it into the other. Somehow we expect the water level to change!

"My tax rates have been historically low" -The 1%

Now I see the problem. the USA is totally against the middle class. Not 99%. Just the middle class. The poor aren't taxed, because they barely get by. That is fine. Apparently the top 1% don't get taxed either. Suddenly, I had this radical idea:

STOP LETTING THE TOP 1% WRITE OFF EVERY SINGLE DAMN THING ON THEIR TAX RETURNS. The question isn't even "Why does the billionaire pay 34% in federal taxes, just like the members of the middle class?" The question is "Why does the billionaire who is supposed to pay 34% in federal taxes, just like their middle class counterparts, NOT PAY THE FULL 34% in federal taxes?"

On an unrelated note, salary alone does not determine someone's wealth. Case in point: Is a union worker in the Midwest making $60K a year + a really really nice health insurance package really making more than a $90K a year software engineer in the San Francisco Bay Area, CA. Look at the nontaxable, extremely nice health insurance package. Then look at the cost of living expenses. Hmm...

Lovely, no one said you don't pay taxes. They say you don't pay income tax. Payroll taxes go towards funds meant to benefit you in the future: Social Security, Medicare. State and local taxes don't (including most of your sales taxes) don't go toward running the federal government. I suggest you become more involved in local and state politics if you want to pay less in these areas. Regardless, these taxes aren't applicable to this discussion.

This country is [supposedly] built on everyone having a say in how this Country is run. In my opinion, part of that right to vote is that those who can afford to contribute need to contribute to the programs, infrastructure, and services that benefit us all. I don't care if you pay $100 or $1,000 toward income tax. If you aren't poverty level or below, you need to contribute before you start pointing your elbow at the Rich and demanding the pay their "fair share". So, I am sorry if you are tired about hearing that 47% being quoted. However, it is a valid point and you need to contribute or not criticize the level of contribution of those that do.

OWS is making progress. The discussions here show that. Now it is necessary to work through the next phase of educating people about 'social justice'.

Social Justice is not about money. Trying to defend money as the pathway to social justice completely misses the point. But everyone needs to work through those discussions before there can be understanding.

Social Justice is about opportunity. Inalienable opportunity. Social Justice is more about 'life and liberty' than the 'pursuit of happiness'. Are citizens of the United States truly equal according to the current view of the Constitution? Does every voice count in our system of government? Does every person have intrinsic value in our society and economy?

Is success really only measured by money?

Funny, your definition of so-called Social Justice is not the same as those that promote it. Social Justice is equality of outcome, not opportunity. Putting a wig and lipstick and eyeshadow on a turd doesn't change the fact that it is still a turd. Trying to change the definition of an idea and an agenda from what it actually is does not change the reality of the idea or the agenda. Trying to align Social Justice with the founding principals of this country is akin to Orwellian Newspeak.

No, Svenolafson. But, it does, relatively speaking, make it one good looking turd.

Is success really only measured by money?

Success is measured by the person measuring it. Be it the individual being measured or someone else measuring them. If the person doing the measuring considers money to be important, then that is what they will use as a measurement. But the measurement could be job satisfaction, serenity, piety, land ownership, athletic prowess, or any multitude of other things. But, in all cases, the measurements are the subjective assessment of the measurer and may or may not be of any concern to the one being measured. It is unlikely that a priest who has taken a vow of poverty would care one iota about how someone measures their wealth. Or, to someone that considers family relations to be the most important aspect of life it is unlikely that they will be overwrought to be seen as less athletic. Success, unlike beauty, is defined by what an individual considers to be success rather than what others perceive.

Nerm,

Social Justice is about opportunity. Inalienable opportunity. Social Justice is more about 'life and liberty' than the 'pursuit of happiness'.

Can you actually provide us with an example, in this country, of someone that does not have an opportunity.

Education is readily available to anyone that chooses to take advantage of it. We are a mobile society where it is possible to relocate to another area if opportunities are not available where we are. Barriers due to race, religion, sex, etc. are nearly non-existent.

If a person chooses to focus on sports (cheerleading, opposite sex, etc.) in school, rather than academics, what is society's responsibility?

If a person chooses to stay in an area where opportunities are limited, what responsibility do we have?

At what point does it fall upon the individual to take responsibility if they make poor choices?

You're absolutely right, Nerm_L. Every person has whatever intrinsic value that they are willing to make of themselves, and obviously this is limited by their ability and their desire to succeed through striving for personal betterment. Everyone's opportunity starts out differently based on circumstances beyond each person's control (at birth we are all equally screwed by circumstance), but the reality is we all CHOOSE the opportunities we are willing to take in our lives and even the opportunities we are willing to see as opportunities in the first place. Our lives are what we make of them--nothing more, nothing less. That's what that pursuit is about. And you're lying to yourself if you believe every person out there wishes to equally pursue their happiness or even their life and liberty. What sort of social justice is there when everyone else is held down to the standard of the person with the lowest drive?

Consider education: How many children would be perfectly capable of passing whatever test put before them IF they wanted to succeed and paid attention in school rather than acting like entitled fools that had no idea that what they are being taught today WILL apply later in life? When people pay to go to college, they are not paying for educators to fill their brains with information, they are paying for certified credentials that say they passed. What they learn is limited to their ability and desire. I can attain the exact same knowledge for virtually nothing, if I'm willing to seek it out, and the great thing about that personal pursuit of knowledge is that I'm more likely to retain the information I learn, because I actually WANT to learn and I'm seeking it out myself. Every kid in the US has access to education, and if they strive hard, they can often qualify for free "credentials" from a certified university. Will they take their opportunities?

If we don't consider it holding everyone else down to the lowest pursuer's drive, consider for a moment that taxing Bill Gates more, for instance, is actually decreasing the value of his work--work that everyone else has benefited from in some way or another. How many poor people do you know who have computers here in the US? Now how many poor people do you know who have Malaria here in the US? Would we demand that Gates give all his excess money to the government here in order for it to be redistributed to those who have benefited by his work already, when he has seen a greater need elsewhere and put his money to good use helping to save people whose circumstances and opportunity are much more pitiable than the vast majority of people in the US?

If they dont want their money, spend it. That's what rich people are supposed to do. The deadly sin of "greed" is actually about hoarding money. The economy runs on money-moving-around. There's a rather large infrastructure setup to facilitate this kind of "consuming" activity. And if you spend it, it doesnt get laundered through the govt-- less sales tax.

Oh these wealthy liberals who want to be taxed more are humorous.

They know they can pay more than they are required to, but they don't want to be the only one's doing it. So they want to call on the government to force them to do so. That way they can feel better about themselves by forcing others, who do not feel as they do, to do likewise.

It is not about altruism, or doing the "right" thing.

It is all about the "nanny nanny boo boo!"

The idea that high earners create jobs just because we lower their taxes is a MYTH. People hire people because the people they hire make money for them. That is the only reason. Job creators are those who can make money in our economy, and if our economy has people fully employed AND SPENDING the job creators will do just fine.

Job creation is in everyone's best interest, ESPECIALLY THE "JOB CREATORS".

For the Teabaggers working for the Koch Bros. saying "just pay more taxes" that arguement is about as intelligent as a Glenn Beck Pet Rock. Empty and worthless for no "one" person contributing to bail out the US would work. For those that say, they should "give to Charity" - I'm sure they do - it's tax deductible in most cases and for those that say give to religious outlets I would say - don't - they're just propganda outlets of the GOP these days (Falwell, Robertson, Haggert (lol), Swaggert, Baker - con men one and all); for those of you saying it's the "spending" - You never say that when there is a Republican in office doing all the spending - and in the past 30 years - it's been nothing but GOP Spending - and tax breaks for the wealthiest 1.5% and the use of $4 Trillion in illegal and trumped up wars by the Bush Crime Syndicate - so once again - walk away from Fox and the liars you parrot here - it's empty. This president followed the Worst President in History into office and all the GOP has done as protect their financial interests on the backs of Americans blaming the poor and middle class tax paying citizens for their theft of our democracy and our economic and once pround moral standing. 2 years to fix the damages by Reagan alone would be possible. It will take 2 generations to fix what GW Bush and the GOP has done to this country - and they have the gaul to want MORE. NO GOP IN 2012.

@JC-1439099 -- There has been much discussion about Herman Cain of late. Mr. Cain has created a narrative about 'poor' parents that worked for their livelihood. Mr. Cain's father worked as a janitor, if I recall correctly. Were Herman Cain's parents successful?

Herman Cain has announced a 9-9-9 plan to fundamentally alter taxation. Why is that plan even debated and considered? Would that debate still be occurring if Herman Cain's father, a janitor, had announced it? Would Herman Cain's father have received any attention if he had attempted a presidential campaign?

Think of 'heroes' in our society. Thomas A. Edison, Orville & Wilbur Wright, Henry Ford, John Glenn, Albert Einstein, Chuck Yeager, George S. Patton, Steve Jobs. Were these people successful? Were they rich - is that how they are remembered?

Contrast with who in our society has wielded the most influence - J. Paul Getty, J.P. Morgan, Cornelius Vanderbilt, the Rothschild family, Andrew Carnegie, James J. Hill. These 'successful' people are recognized as successful but exactly what did they contribute to history? Are they recognized as American 'heroes'?

American heroes are remembered for their contribution to society - not for what they owned.

I've had enough of this crap of people crying for money cause they are too lazy to get a job.

I have a family member who struggled for a year to find work after being laid off-and this person was laid off despite being head of the most productive team in the company along with the entire team simply because it was cheaper to pay a team in Asia. That was no secret, by the way-it even netted him a certain government benefit. During the time of searching for a job, at least 40 hours a week were spent job hunting-sometimes more than that. Naturally he was looking for a job he was qualified to perform-he was not qualified to do construction. Most jobs now actually require experience, even positions like retail. (I can tell you that from experience because my daughter applied for several retail positions a year and a half ago, and they were barely hiring anyone! Even those who were hired were considered "on call" and were not actually given hours to work unless someone else cancelled at the last minute.) Lower positions were considered, of course, but the bigwigs of some companies would not give the job searcher a call back, (sometimes after making comments stating he was qualified for THEIR jobs and the like). Often the company would say he was one of the "top two candidates" but then would not respond for weeks. A phone call to the company would bring the news that the company had gone through a complete reorg. I can't tell you how many times THAT particular thing happened. For even lower positions, he did not meet hands on qualifications due to having been at a higher level position for so long. He applied for cross industry positions as well but was considered not as qualified as other applicants. For many people it's not that they are too lazy to get jobs. It's not as "easy" to get jobs as a lot of people who haven't been unemployed seem to think.

People move from position to position, employer to employer with no dedication to a certain profession. If you stick with an employment long enough you will make it. Assuming you are actually a worthwhile asset a company can depended upon. Then again that relies upon an individual to be dedicated to an employer. However, due to this lack of loyalty, in the overall workforce, as an employer, I pay a little as possible to you, because I know you won't be around for very long. Once someone shows their ability and dedication, the raises and promotions begin.

Joey, it makes me feel good to know that there are employers like you; however, you need to know that not all employers are like you. My family member mentioned above got a great job with a blue chip company right out of college and intended to retire with them-he was a company man to the max, as was the majority of his team. The company, however, had other ideas and sold the team to another company in less than a decade. The team still remained loyal and transferred their loyalty to the new company. As I briefly mentioned, they became the top producing team in the entire company. They never missed a date or had any noncompliance issues with a single product. My family member, the head of the team, once got a glowing recommendation, the highest possible rating-he was demoted almost immediately afterwards. The understanding was that it was either the demotion or a layoff. They always lived with a sword over their heads, the spector of layoffs-anytime the whisper of the word "reorg" went around, everyone was filled with dread. After over a year he got his title back. Of course, as I said the entire team was eventually laid off in favor of the company forming a team in Asia. My family member's team had been together for over a decade and were company men and women. More than one shed a tear when they said goodbye on the last day-they still get together socially when able and talk about work.

We are a capitalist society. I would argue that means we are somewhat socialist. This means a balance between the rights of the individual and the rights of the collective. This is America, you can claim we're a Republic and not a Democracy but you would of course be wrong. Capitalists through the profit margin create wealth through leverage, they make it by using the laws, workers, and mores of the citizens of this country. They hire people to make themselves money. The only questions are do they take too much of the profit leaving those who created the product with less of the fruits of their labor and do they pay taxes commensurate with what they use from society as a whole. Do they help pay for the educated workforce? Do they pay to support the infrastructure they use disproportionately? In short progressive taxation is not only morally correct it is essential to a capitalist society functioning at its potential. Or do you just continue to believe that the "job creators" do all the work themselves?
The middle class did not exist in this or any country until "We the people" threw a little social justice (okay socialism, it's okay it's not a dirty word as the cons would have you believe) into the mix in the thirties. This was so during the boom years of American exceptionalism, which was copied around the world. During the fifties and sixties Americans had jobs which attained middle class status with retirement and health care using one salary. Taxes on the upper incomes were much much higher. Don't worry they were still rich and there will always be the rich, got no problem with that, just pay fair wages and pay your damn taxes. These are the true whiners as we all know. You know the ones that say I got here due to myself only and I still don't make enough even though I make 500 times what the average employee makes. We all believe you worked 500 times harder than anyone else. You know fair wages comes off of your taxable income don't you.

It seems to me like everyone is trying to make a very complicated situation into a simple argument with one sound bite for a solution; and, unfortuantely, it's not going to work. The problems with our country are many, they have happened over a long period, and no one solution is going to fix them. Fixing a bad tax situation that encourages companies to take their workforces overseas would be a start. More people taking responsibility for their choices would be another-that includes all levels of society and every segment of society-and if I'm pointing a finger there are three pointing back at me so I am triply responsible, BTW. In other words we all need to take a good look at ourselves, and I'll go first. Have we contributed to the problems at all? Have I? Have I been irresponsible with MY finances, with my taxes? Am I willing to work hard for things and to wait for them (It's called delayed gratification), or do I have to have everything I want right now? Do I buy things I can't afford simply because I can't wait until I have the money to afford them? (Isn't that partly what the government is doing that has us in so much debt to China, though granted on a much simplified scale?) How can I expect the government to be responsible if I am not willing to be? Am I willing to help my neighbor? (Forget about what everyone else is doing, what am I willing to do?) That's when I am being responsible.

Anybody who wants to claim that taxes are unfair to the upper 1% "job creators" needs to understand that we all pay the same tax rates up to the level of our income. These poor people who pay no income taxes would gladly pay their fair share were they able to rise to the next income bracket. No, for many years the conservatives have been I must say very successful at destroying the progressive taxation system and along with it public education, retirement funding and proper health care for all, along with a crumbling infrastructure while cutting wages for most. When the rich interests own an entire party through K street and parts of the other in our two party system this is what you get, attacks on the rights of workers to unite, attacks on Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, attacks on public education (liberal elite as they would have you believe) and cuts in taxes for the wealthy who simply buy more influence. Back to 1900 for us all.
Were the wealthy truthful with themselves they would also understand that when the society as a whole raised their economic standard of living theirs also was raised beyond what they would achieve otherwise. Who are the consumers in this economy? We are collectively. Take away the ability to earn and take away our ability to buy yours or anyone elses crap.

IF folks are suppose to get ahead in this country through education then we need to boost our education system instead of cutting it as most politicans are calling for..including the republican tea party folks. There would be nothing wrong with a fair tax..but as yet I have seen nothing that points to any type of a fair tax coming from any politican..they will not even talk about it. If they did, you can bet that tax breaks of one kind or the other for the wealthy would still be included. To say that 47 % or so pay no taxes..please tell me what anyone can buy with out paying a tax of one kind or the other as I have surely not seen one as yet. Politicans might be able to find something since whatever they get is passed on to the tax payers anyway. But each state has taxes on someting. food, gas , what ever it might be...and so does the fed. The real problems we have today have come from pay checks not keeping up with price rises///homes are a sure item that comes to my mind..home values increased yet pay stayed flat....and people wonder what caused our problems today.....?????

Are these people insane. They think the government can do better things with their money then they can. They should start businesses and hire people and pay a living wage. They are living off their trust funds and producing no income. No income means no income tax. I hope they are not saying the inheritance tax is too low. These people aren't smart enough to create wealth so they want to give it to the government and live off a stipend. Tell me again the Soviet companies that have made their mark on the world with their innovations.

ashlee, you said

I don't think you read the article. one of the "1%" explains why a few of the "1%" donating or giving away money won't solve the big problems.

I find it funny that you and a number of others cannot see a simple truth. If someone has money to give they sure as heck can give it. They could walk around handing out checks for example, or they could give it away a million other ways. The beauty of it is that they can give it straight to an individual without experiencing the loss of gov waste. If you give someone 5 thousand, they get 5 thousand. If it is taxed, the gov has to pay employees to figure it out what to do with the money, therefore less money ends up going to the "people"/cause.

Clearly it would be much more efficient for a wealthy person to write checks to cash and hand them out when they have a moment.

Regarding the rest of our nation's problems, the main thing we need to do is stop almost all cable contributions. We can solve the problem of campaign contributions with an easy solution. Politicians should not be allowed to run tv or other ads either positive or negative. The entire campaign process should be a series of debates on public television (and cable if they want to play the debates also) where all the candidates have equal access to the debates.

Just like the Cold War, political spending just seems to be spiraling upwards as they outspend each other from larger and larger pools of funds....of course those funds come from extremely powerful (because they give such large campaign contributions) groups. Our officials then create legislation that helps those groups.

End all campaign contributions!!! (aka bribes....cus nobody can take that much money and stay impartial). We all know it. It stares us in the face everyday. We must demand that our lawmakers change campaign contribution rules.

How many favors does a US president have to repay to wealthy or special interest for helping to raise a billion dollar campaign fund? How many favors are must our Congress people repay to the wealthy donors and special interests that feed money to their campaigns?

We must demand complete change to these bribery rules they currently have in place.

All debates public on cspan and any other channels that want to carry them. No other political advertising.

In terms of elections, the gov should encourage everyone to vote and they should regularly provide advertising that educates public on where to go to see Congressional voting records on all the bills. Put that in the public's view and maybe we "the citizens" will do a better job keeping our gov clean.

Also, corps are not people. That is not fair to individuals.

That's right, and this IS NOT the Socialist States of America, as much as Bozobama wants it to be.

Please keep your socialist nonsense in Europe. We can all see how well it works.

Europe has a similar system as well. Slightly different and covers multiple countries. We can only aspire to be as great as them...as well as your country. Note sarcasm please.

DFR

Wasn't created by socialism. If they'd followed the socialistic ideas, they wouldn't be in the mess their in.

United States already holds one of the largest stakes in socialism, our military is a socialised progam which we as Americans pay for. It's true Freedom isn't free it costs tax payers dollars.

russell tribeca:

Really? I guess I am not understanding then why the Greeks and Spanish and Portuguese and Italians are effectively insolvent. I guess instead I am to take away that "big business" in these countries is the culprit of societal and economic stagnation.

Meanwhile, the Germans--who actually built and make and export things of value--are picking up the tab for the time being. Are the Germans the "bad guys" too then, or are they "the good guys" rushing in to save the noble cause of socialist living?

Not big business, big banks and a select group of greedy politicians.

No problem with the Germans. Socialism is alive and well in the USA. We have plenty of government programs that are based on a socialistic idea and they've been in place for decades now. Socialism is not the "big bad word" the Fox will have you believe. Look it up. Kind of like the word "liberal" has been used by the right as a code for evil.

DFR-3634868

Yeah, the European socialist system in the death spiral, if you haven't noticed.

When Europe figures out its own economic mess (created by socialism), come back and we'll talk some more.

Yes - because we can all see how horrible countries like China and Japan are doing. Germany and France. All those horrible horrible socialist countries are on the brink of... oh wait... nevermind.

The european counties collapsing has less to do with socialistic mantra and more to do with political corruption. I love how socialism is a work of the devil. Thanks for the talking point Rush.

Kraussk

You wouldn't know what is socialism even if it hit you in face, so stop talking about it. The president is very moderate, nice try, it is your retardican buddies are so extreme right.

The argument, "europeforever," isn't about everyone paying their fair share. It's an honest disagreement about what constitutes fair.

The top 10% of earners in this country already pay 75% of the federal income tax in this country. And a lot of them work for corporations.

A lot of people are concerned that General Electric had no federal tax liability last year. Did the 300,000 people who work for GE pay any taxes? If you taxed GE 10% of its income to make them pay their "fair share," how many of those taxpaying 300,000 would have lost their jobs and not paid taxes? How many of us would have paid more for light bulbs, appliances, etc.?

Envy, jealousy and thievery are reprehensible. You should be ashamed.

And the fact of the matter is, they can give it away. Though it probably makes more sense to give it to the people or institutions of their choice rather than throwing it down the federal government rathole. You call it "nonsense" but don't make a case for your position. That simply makes your position nonsense.

Hehe, these guys are such an utterly perfect example of a Pavlovian Response to a word that it should be used to teach others.

Reminds me of that Family Guy where all Lois has to do to win the election is go up on the podium and say "Nine Eleven" a bunch of times. The word "Socialism" is used in much the same way by the right to erroneously demonize their opposition.

United States already holds one of the largest stakes in socialism, our military is a socialised progam which we as Americans pay for. It's true Freedom isn't free it costs tax payers dollars.

The military is a proper function of government. A government's function is to enforce the rule of law, protect it's citizens from the violation of individual rights (life, liberty and property), nothing more, nothing less.

To all of you people that throws socialism out like household word. Most European countries are not socialist, ITALY, SPAIN and GREECE are not socialist, yes they have SOCIAL PROGRAMS, so does that makes us socialist? England and Canada has public health system, does that make them socialist? So in this matter are we the only capitalistic system out there? lol you guys make me sick with your unintelligent and ignorant comments. Stop watching FOX. We don't live in pure capitalist country, no way you could.

That's right, and this IS NOT the Socialist States of America, as much as Bozobama wants it to be.

Name calling. Neocons - they are so "helpful" in solving the nation's problems.

The military is a proper function of government. A government's function is to enforce the rule of law, protect it's citizens from the violation of individual rights (life, liberty and property), nothing more, nothing less.

THe military's job is to protect its citizens. It does NOT "enforce the rule of law" - that is the responsibiity of police forces. Big difference.

What's stopping these fools from sending their money to the IRS? If they don't like the free market system N. Korea would probably take them but they will have to work.

And there are several laws that KEEP the military from enforcing civilian law so that there can't be a military take over of the country. But even if someone tried, a majority of the troops know what an unlawful order is.

Anyway, another large issue that needs to get fixed is this whole nonsense of "money equals free speech", basically giving corporations and the filthy rich the right to bribe elected officials. Honestly the justices that voted this in should be brought up on charges.

Well if they want to give more money to the IRS what is stopping them. They can pick what percentage in taxes they want to pay as long as they meet the minimum. This holds true for all Americans. If so many want to pay extra taxes why wouldn't they rather have it be their right rather than a requirment. Also if you want to claim your the 1% why not release to the public your last couple of years tax returns if you want to claim that position as a politically driven position.

The military is a proper function of government. A government's function is to enforce the rule of law, protect it's citizens from the violation of individual rights (life, liberty and property), nothing more, nothing less.

You forgot 'to promote health and well-being.' But that was on purpose, wasn't it?

Anyway, another large issue that needs to get fixed is this whole nonsense of "money equals free speech", basically giving corporations and the filthy rich the right to bribe elected officials. Honestly the justices that voted this in should be brought up on charges.

Agreed. It just flat out screams corruption. Our founders would be rolling over in their graves had they heard that "Money = Free Speech" in their Republic.

Isn't calling someone a "neocon" simply name calling????

Did anyone else notice that in the 3 photos they showed with this article that all the individuals inherited their money? This isn't a trend, this is spoiled little rich kids who never earned anything and just want to feel a little better about themselves. Anyone in the 1% who has earned their wealth and come from the 99% thinks this is absurd, as should everyone. The only thing holding any of us back is ourselves. This is the most free country in the world. You can go get an education at your local public library or online. Learn about things, create things, do something positive and do it in a way that allows you to profit from it and improve your position.

Isn't calling someone a "neocon" simply name calling????

To some. But no - neo-conservative is a very accurate (and technically correct) description of the current right in this country.

Voice - I agree, what a bunch of spoiled little brats. Give your money to the IRS and shut up, go away and do something productive. These are not representatives of the 1%.

I never met a spoiled brat willing to admit that they could give up more money, or lived modestly despite their means. Maybe you need to find a different term? "Spoiled Brat" doesn't describe them whatsoever.

Did anyone else notice that in the 3 photos they showed with this article that all the individuals inherited their money? This isn't a trend, this is spoiled little rich kids who never earned anything and just want to feel a little better about themselves

As opposed to spoiled little rich kids who contribute nothing to society and live off daddy's coat-tails, purchase their degrees, and exploit others their entire lives?

Yeah, these guys are sooooo bad. Lol, you're ridiculous.

Voice of Reason Yep, they did not earn the money they inherited it. If they had earned it they would have enough sense to realize how inefficient the government is a wealth redistribution. If they had earned it they would not be feeling the white guilt. Spoiled kids that are clueless. They still do not realize that they could have set up a trust fund for payments to a reputable charity and done more per dollar to help the poor then to give it to the government so it could blow it on Solyndra, Clean Coal technology, a new bus for the president, a study of hookers in Columbia, which we paid for ....

If they want to share their wealth is their will, not a government mandate , many successful entrepreneur like Steve Jobs born from poor families. However, there are many rich politicians that "support" those protesters , like Nancy Pelosi but don't share their greed. Democrat Maxim Waters also support this movement even she is under investigation for the ethic committee for use his power ti give bailout money to her husband bank.

So what's next after wealth redistribution? What about life's other unfair situations?

Should we now redistribute college GPA scores and average them across all the country's students to arrive at one (low) score? Hey, some people are just smarter than others, how is that fair? Some people don't like to study that much, why should they have a lower GPA?

What about physical attractiveness? Should we have the government pay for plastic surgery so that plain or ugly people are not at a disadvantage, or perhaps it's cheaper to have the attractive people disfigured so everyone is on a "level playing field"?

Stop the nonsense people!

Funny how they say thats what they WANT but for some reason they don't seem to VOLUNTARILY pay more taxes. They will be taken seriously when they demonstrate that they have been doing just that.

Funny how they believe the government shouldn't control a woman's right to choose because it's her BODY but if she was rich the government should have total control of her MONEY. BOTH are her possessions! Anyone that thinks differently never worked hard for their money/

If the top 10% makes 90% of the $$ then they should be paying their fair share of 90% of the taxes, not 75%

They already do thats the argument. Thank you

Voice - Somehow I doubt you actually KNOW anyone in the 1%. If you did, you wouldn't use absolute terms like "Anyone in the 1% who has earned their wealth and come from the 99% thinks this is absurd"

... Absurd?? Really?? You you 100% sure of that??

I grew up in a sociao-economic group that put me (daily) in direct contact with businessmen (and women) who did what you suggest. They earned it. They started with NOTHING and built empires. They understood (and still understand) that there is no way they would have been so successful if it hadn't been for two things... publicly funded projects (like roads, bridges, school, police & first-responders) and the middle class. They understood (and still understand) that they're success would not have been possible if the government hadn't built the roads & bridges their products used to reach teir markets. They understood (and still understand) that their businesses would suffer greatly without a well educated work-force. They understood (and still understand) that safe, stabble communities bring prosperity to everyone, not just themselves. They understood (and still understand) that they NEED a healthy middle class, if only so they have customers to sell to.

As for getting an education "at your public library", I'm pleased to hear they still exist in your community. They're few and far between in 99% of our neighborhoods.

Finally, how do you get an education online, these days? Google, Yahoo, Bing, et al?? They will only get you so far. You want to DO something, you need MUCH more than an idea. If you're referring to getting an 'online degree', do you have a suggestion on how one would PAY for that (without a big inheritance) ??

May I suggest you come down from your ivory tower and have a look around. You may be surprised to discover that you too are a 99%er.

Broke,

"Anyway, another large issue that needs to get fixed is this whole nonsense of "money equals free speech", basically giving corporations and the filthy rich the right to bribe elected officials"

As opposed to unions?

Unless you allow no group to pool money together every group needs to be allowed to pool money together.

Shuklack, I'm ridiculous? Maybe you should look in the mirror, I never said there was anything "sooooo bad" about them at all but it's disingenuous to say "protesters find allies in ranks of the wealthy". Those who inherited their wealth are not representative of the 1% at all, they're the minority whether they "live off daddy's coat-tails" and don't protest or they "live off daddy's coat-tails" and do protest. Additionally, it's no one's fault they were born into wealth and you're a closed-minded fool, not some holier that thou "progressive", for stereotyping children of the wealthy by assuming they "contribute nothing to society", "purchase their degrees" and "exploit others their entire lives" so where's your "very accurate (and technically correct) description" of them?

Geotigg301, with your clearly lacking education ("sociao"?) I highly doubt your claims about your "contact" but nevertheless, you're clearly narrowminded in regard to the internet. There are scholarly articles available everywhere online, technical sites and helpful professionals. A 13 year old kid made an iPhone app that was downloaded millions of times, @ $.99 that quite a profit.

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2008/01/14/the-decline-of-inherited-money/

Shuklack-As opposed to spoiled little rich kids who contribute nothing to society and live off daddy's coat-tails, purchase their degrees, and exploit others their entire lives?

What about the millions who shun responsibility and never attain job skills or education and so have no money, yet still produce 5 or 6 offspring who then need housing, education, clothing, food, health care and incarceration who have to be supported by TAX PAYERS? What's THEIR contribution to society except for their costs and the burden they place upon all the rest of us?

Poverty's solution essentially boils down to this: If you can't feed'em, don't breed 'em!!!!!!!

I find it pretty humorous that the greedy people, that don't have the money, think that the greedy people, that do have the money, should share. Maybe they should just go to work instead of sitting on their rear and they could be one of the other greedy people.

I believe it's a strategy for personel use attention, maybe they are not 1% more like the 99 % , they probably saying this as a pick up line to date someone from the crowd of thousands

Geo "They understood (and still understand) that they're success would not have been possible if the government hadn't built the roads & bridges their products used to reach teir markets"

So we are to believe if it wasn't for our Government we still wouldn't be able to cross a river without a boat? That the people in the US are so stupid that we would still be wondering around without some way to get from a to b?

To those ranting about those "socialist" countries - Sweden, Great Britain, Germany, France, etc. - at least they haven't had their ratings demoted like the "Great" USA! And they're taking care of their citizens like this "great" country doesn't. Doesn't sound like we have any right to disparage other countries until we can proudly say that everyone here has good and reasonable access to jobs, education, retirement and health.

Judy,

We don't have reasonable access to jobs? we don't have education? You aren't allowed to retire? and I am not sure were you are going with "health"

Just be honest with everybody you want to have everything but want somebody else to do the work for you.

"Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."

Famed economist Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850)

Every economy that has ever tried significant redistribution has failed. Is the United States next?

I stand with the 1% that stand for we 99%. Taxation rates that have not been seen since Truman was President. Eisenhower taxed the nation's wealthiest at the rate of 91%. Now they are at 15%, (per Warren Buffett).

Historical low tax rates, historical high in military spending = disaster.
Budget Breakdown for 2012

Defense-related expenditure
2012 Budget request & Mandatory spending[18][19]
Calculation[20][21]
DOD spending
$707.5 billion
Base budget + "Overseas Contingency Operations"
FBI counter-terrorism
$2.7 billion
At least one-third FBI budget.
International Affairs
$5.6–$63.0 billion
At minimum, foreign arms sales. At most, entire State budget
Energy Department, defense-related
$21.8 billion

Veterans Affairs
$70.0 billion

Homeland Security
$46.9 billion

NASA, satellites
$3.5–$8.7 billion
Between 20% and 50% of NASA's total budget
Veterans pensions
$54.6 billion

Other defense-related mandatory spending
$8.2 billion

NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM
Classified[22]

Interest on debt incurred in past wars
$109.1–$431.5 billion
Between 23% and 91% of total interest
Total Spending
$1.030–$1.415 trillion + Classified budget
2012 Budget of the United States federal government

Total revenue
$2.627 trillion (estimated) per Government Printing Office

50% for the military and a $1.1T deficit--exactly how every empire falls

europeforever-

What's a BS argument is these "rich" who want to pay more tax. May *ss they do. I bet if you look at all their tax returns they take every deduction and tax avoidance trick their accountants can get away with. What they want is to look like they care while stealing everyone elses hard earned money through higher taxes that they will have a way to avoid. It's all just class warfare being waged by the Progressives using useful idiots and jealous underachievers to advance their 'take over everything' agenda.

Broke,

"Anyway, another large issue that needs to get fixed is this whole nonsense of "money equals free speech", basically giving corporations and the filthy rich the right to bribe elected officials"

As opposed to unions?

Unless you allow no group to pool money together every group needs to be allowed to pool money together.

Tom, that's the idea. ANY and ALL money going towards buying the favor of political candidates (directly or indirectly thru PAC's, etc.) should be outlawed. Only then will our so-called representatives do what's best for this country and truly represent We The People...

See: http://www.getmoneyout.com

aqua...

I kind of think there's something 'missing' with those people...all that money, but no 15 minutes of fame. They now get that 15 minutes.

I kind of think there's something 'missing' with those people...all that money, but no 15 minutes of fame. They now get that 15 minutes.

Right, they can't possibly just be standing up for something they believe in, there must be some ulterior motive.... (garbage logic).

The reason Europe is in trouble is not because they have social programs. It is because some of the countries spend more than 100% of their GDP year after year. It doesn't matter what you spend it on, whether it is daily pudding for the royal palace ball room or social programs, you can't spend more than your nation produces.

cjsk,

Since most of the unions are supporting "Occupy" I don't really think they or most on here think unions shouldn't be able to continue what they have been doing, and if you look a little you will see that unions donate at far greater rates than corporations. (to campaigns that is)

There becomes a real gray area when somebody gets to pick who can and who can't pool money together to support a candidate. The Dems hate Corporations donating and the Repubs hate unions.

To the "Wall Street" protestors: why have you skipped mega millionaire George Soros' doorstep? Or the mega nursery-building Beyonce and Jay-Z's door? Oh, and bring your own bathroom and grow your own food -- get rid of your phones and Macs and any other capitalist device you are using while you're protesting-- so you can be TRULY anti-capitalist, self-sustaining and all that. Have the courage of your own convictions for once.

Let's look at things objectively, please. If every bit of production and profit right now was turned over to government, we'd still be stuck because there is a general lack of productivity. The government provides services to the people, not productivity--the private market is required for that, and that is absolutely what is needed right now to either reclaim some of the dollars that presently leak to foreign markets or to increase exportation and bring back some of the outflow as part of the cycle. As far as I know the government doesn't export very much of anything but military, and even in a "fair" system, where everyone was given everything they needed, we would find that without IDEAS and INGENUITY, we would still have a dearth of jobs. Without jobs, good paying jobs, we'd still have a lower end economy that required massive charity (either true altruism or government enforced altruism) in order to survive.

Everything the government touches is in tatters at the moment, and not just because there's a revenue flow problem, but rather because government does nothing but grow and create new expenses mainly because the method of budgeting is horrendously backwards. The fact of the matter is if they don't spend their full budget, they don't get as much the following year, so they ALWAYS spend it in full, and then when they have a new need, they tack the cost on top of their already over-bloated budgets. We do not need to run that way, and having run that way for so long is part of the reason why inflation is a constant, because there is rampant waste, and there will continue to be rampant waste until will address the issue of how budgets are made. They would not require so much in the first place, if they would revamp their budgeting process.

The people in this story, with the exception of the last interviewee, were all wealthy by inheritance. That's fine. They want to give it away because they feel they don't really deserve it--because they didn't work for it, it wasn't their idea or their ingenuity that created it. I don't knock them for that. What I do knock them for is not realizing that no amount of money given away solves the true problems. Why don't they take their million dollars and start a business and employ some people? Because they don't have ideas.

I have ideas all the time, but no means to implement them, and in this anti-business environment, where I have to worry about increased taxation, increased regulation as a means of revenue improvement for the government, and regulators who would prefer largesse to actually doing the jobs they are paid to do, which is why our government requires regulators for the regulators, even if I had the means, I'd be afraid of how the game would change on me and ruin my best laid plans, putting the ideas down like unwanted puppies and quickly de-employing anyone I managed to employ by those ideas. That's where the financial disparity is in this country.

But our real problem is something else. If you asked 100 people what would make them truly happy, 99% of them would say they don't really know. That is our primary problem. We have entirely too many people sitting around, who don't really know what they want to do with their lives, who live in this monotonous loop of consumption and complaint, attempting to appease the brain's primal urge to solve something by drugging themselves with meaninglessness. PURSUE HAPPINESS!!! Should our nation be in the business of not only providing the means of pursuit but the very pursuit itself?

Prag, another problem with Greece f is way too many work for the government and there is too few private sector to pay for those in the public sector.

Geotigg301, I apologize, my response to your post wasn't adequate and I'm disappointed with it. It was rushed as an edit and the clock ran out.

I do actually "KNOW" quite a few people in the 1% having worked at the corporate office of a Fortune 100 company for 3 years as well as many small business owners. I've had daily contact with the highest level executives making well over $500,000/year, socialized with these people after work, at their homes, corporate outings, sporting events, etc. They're normal people who, in most cases, are more intelligent than most, put in more hours than most and have far more responsibility than most. They don't sit in "ivory towers" or look down upon anyone other than those who, though capable, fail to put forth an effort to help themselves.

You're right about one thing, perhaps just that one thing, that they completely realize the necessity of a good infrastructure, educated workforce and a secure environment, but they also realize that the private sector would be far more efficient at providing many of those services. They understand the sickening amount of bureaucratic red tape and waste that diminishes and in many cases prohibits these publicly funded services from being "up to par". They understand that the solution isn't to simply throw more money at our problems but to change the way we go about approaching them. No, most of the 1% has no problem paying their "fair share" but their "fair share" is being exploited. Why is it just the 1% that has to pay their "fair share"? The government has more than enough revenue to meet all the needs of this country but it's poorly spent, in many cases it's simply wasted for no logical reason.

I'm acutely aware that I'm in the 99% and I'm not writing this from any semblance of an ivory tower. While I'm a part of the 99% and I, like many of the OWS protesters am a 20 something with tons of debt, mostly from school loans, that I'll be paying back for years to come. I'm also a part of the 53%, albeit barely, but at what point does the 1% become the 5% become the 10%...? We keep wanting more and more but want those who have earned theirs to give to those that haven't rather than working for it ourselves. And yes, there is a wealth of knowledge at all of our fingertips, just look around. In an instant, from anywhere, you can find out just about anything. Go sit in on classes at a local college or university, not paying for it won't get you a degree but you'll get the knowledge, it worked for Steve Jobs! I found a second thing you're right about, "you need MUCH more than an idea" to do something, you need to get off you @ss and actually do it and you need the work ethic to see it through.

Tom - Plymouth,

Don't get so caught up in the whole left-right paradigm. It's a farce and a distraction. Politicians on both side are all beholden to the same big money special interests for the most part.

...And there is no "gray area" in NO ONE (individual, business or any other entity). Take private money out of the equation, PERIOD.

From http://www.getmoneyout.com:

"No person, corporation or business entity of any type, domestic or foreign, shall be allowed to contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidate for Federal office or to contribute money on behalf of or opposed to any type of campaign for Federal office. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, campaign contributions to candidates for Federal office shall not constitute speech of any kind as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution or any amendment to the U. S. Constitution..."

". Those who inherited their wealth are not representative of the 1% at all

Really? Are you going to actually make the argument that the great majority of the 1% came from something other than priviledge?

o wealth and you're a closed-minded fool,

And you're not? Hahaha. COH please.

not some holier that thou "progressive", for stereotyping children of the wealthy by assuming they "contribute nothing to society", "purchase their degrees" and "exploit others their entire lives" so where's your "very accurate (and technically correct) description" of them?

Hey, Lack of Reason - you do realize stereotypiing these people because they had an inheritance is EXACTLY what you did? My response was to illustrate your stereotype by offering you the dichotomy of that argument, which is why I began the sentence with "As opposed to" - which apparently went over your head.

Hypocrit.

so where's your "very accurate (and technically correct) description" of them

You intentionally take that quote out of context. I hope your dishonesty on the vine doesn't spread to other facets of your life.

They are NOT the "99%." They are a small faction who want handouts, also known as "redistribution." And these so called rich ones joining them, they all have ulterior motives, mainly to get what they think are the masses to join them, and they'll gain power from them. What a joke.

I found the comment that the top 10% should pay 90% of the taxes if they make 90% of hte money very interesting as it sounds like a reasonable argument for having disproportionate taxes on the rich. I have always struggled with the idea of how do you balance taxing those who can afford it more than those who can't versus taxing everyone as a portion of their income.
The problem with idea after i thought about it is that the incentive to work hard is lost. I can sit on my a$$ and do nothing while my government takes care of me and others pay for that government to function; or I can work hard to make more money that will mostly get spent on people that are sititng on their a$$.
Can we please go to a flat tax on everything over about $20,000 or just go to a sales tax only system with everyone getting a certain amount of tax-free coupons each year to cover food/clothing/basics.
Also can anyone explain to me what loopholes your upset about other than the low capital gains tax? I only get to write off a small portion of the money I give to the local womens shelter. Increase the amount I can write off and I will give them more which will be spent more efficiently on the needy than giving it to the government...

cjsks,

I was trying to point out the same thing you were, but sides take equally, neither one is better than the other.

My question for you is how to campaigns get funded it nobody is allowed to donate?

Shuklack, there's a reason I included a link to the Wall Street Journal in regards to wealth and inheritance. I knew someone as narrow-minded as yourself would blatantly disregard the claim as false, as you have, but I though you'd at least be reasonable enough to check out the link, apparently not!

I can understand where the top 1% are coming from wanting to help out, but do you think giving our government more money will actually help. They cannot manage the amount they have now. They have been living beyond their means for longer than I have been alive. If we give them more money to mismanage we will still be in the same position, but with less expendable income for us as individuals.

I also want to reiterate something by GirDirt up top there. He is right that we already support one of the largest Socialist programs in the world. OUR MILITARY, and yet I don't hear many complaining about that. I have no problem supporting that system as I would have no problem supporting a health care system as well. They both would be there to protect the American people one way or another. What I don't support is how mismanaged our taxes are.

Maxim80, I'm afraid that as most Americans never leave America that their understanding of the rest of the world is that "its not a very nice place" as well as "they wish they could live here". Nothing could be further from the truth but let's not let truth get in the way. Most European countries are social democracies. But, "social, socialistic, socialism"..........the S word. Liberal, socialist, socialism.............look behind the tree, a socialist. Remember, first its Libya then Africa.........it speaks volumes. We drive German cars, use Finnish tech for cell phones, drive Japanese cars, buy anything and everything from China....But I'll be damned if I'm going give in to socialism. Ah Pink Floyd got it right........we don't need no education.....divine intervention is all we need. You can count on it.

My question for you is how to campaigns get funded it nobody is allowed to donate?

Tom - Plymouth, that's a good question. They would be funded using a reasonably sized/limited public pool of funds (tax dollars).

I realize that you might not like the sound of that at first, but when you consider the amount of money currently being donated to campaigns, most people will end up saving money, and it achieves the ultimate goal, of taking special interests out of the political/election process, no matter who they are.

It will once again be a government by The People, and for The People.

how to campaigns get funded it nobody is allowed to donate?

hm.... good question actually. Personally I feel that all campaigns should have a spending cap, so that no matter how rich candidate A is, he/she gets the same air time as candidate B. In this same spirit, perhaps we should make it so that the AMOUNT a person is allowed to donate is capped, so myself and Bill Gates both are capable of donating the same amount of money.

cjsks, I was asking seriously. Of course it is always easy to shoot holes in others ideas, but I wonder in a system like that, once you got into office if you would ever be able to be voted out? Nobody would have much money to point out how bad you were, and if there is only so much money you could just have a bunch of puppets running against you draining the money pool so no real candidate would ever have a chance.

IDK, just a thought.

There is nothing stopping these people now from giving more to the IRS. Also people like Warren Buffet talk a good game but the reality is much different...he is fighting the IRS over 1 billion dollars owed in back taxes.

Shuklack, there's a reason I included a link to the Wall Street Journal in regards to wealth and inheritance. I knew someone as narrow-minded as yourself would blatantly disregard the claim as false, as you have, but I though you'd at least be reasonable enough to check out the link, apparently not!

I did read it, despite that you placed the link without any explanation as to its purpose.

The 3 data elements he cites, is irrelevant to your point. I will explain why....

1. inherited wealth is different than being born into a life of priveledge. You don't need to inherit wealth when the family you are born into already has the connections and influence to ensure that you will be highly "successful" in wealth ventures outside of the pre-existing estate.

The study he cites is a decade old as well, not accounting at all for the last 10 years of collapse.

2. The poll which asks what their 'source of wealth' is - no sh!t they aren't going to say inheritance, but chances are that silver spoon played a large role in their success.

3. Again, wealth inherited is not the same as being born into priviledge - which is why I called it priviledge

1. According to a study of Federal Reserve data conducted by NYU professor Edward Wolff, for the nation's richest 1%, inherited wealth accounted for only 9% of their net worth in 2001, down from 23% in 1989. (The 2001 number was the latest available.)

2. According to a study by Prince & Associates, less than 10% of today's multi-millionaires cited "inheritance" as their source of wealth.

3. A study by Spectrem Group found that among today's millionaires, inherited wealth accounted for just 2% of their total sources of wealth.

in a system like that, once you got into office if you would ever be able to be voted out? Nobody would have much money to point out how bad you were, and if there is only so much money you could just have a bunch of puppets running against you draining the money pool so no real candidate would ever have a chance.

It doesn't take money to point out an opponents short comings, it just takes someone with a voice. The internet is great at bringing things to light that people would prefer remain in the dark. Also, if all the candidates received the same amount of money for their campaigns, then everyone running would have an equal shot at getting their points across.

NOTHING upsets a RIGHT WING CONSERVATIVE more than an argument for reasonable fairness.

Democracy require PARTICIPATION.

If our country is at WAR...sacrifice.

Instead, Bush lowered taxes.

I'm don't know what they are trying to tell you at Fox "News" but if you think they are wanting the wealthy to "share their money" or "redistribute their wealth" than you couldn't be further from reality. These protests are about things like fair taxation that will allow us to reduce the deficit. Justice for corporate executives who helped to drag down the world's economy. And now a call ( that probably wont succeed this time around) to amened the constitution to eliminate or reduce the influence on the government by big business.

Tom, yes I took you seriously, it was a good question. I think if a candidate was performing poorly it would come to light still. Much as it is today, it would be the responsibility of the news media, and the opposing party's candidates(s), and well-informed voters to determine if someone should be voted out. I don't think we need super-PACs to tell us that.

There is no perfect system, but it's pretty hard to find any real downside to getting money out of politics.

For a crude example - take on of these hip-hop artist's children....

Their parents buy them all they would ever need, the best connections, the best education, the "in" for whatever they desire, the advertising, the attention, and the investment (from outside sources) for their talentless children....

Those kids didn't inherit anything, but that priviledge was 100% the reason they were able to put out that crappy album that people still bought simply because it was advertised and plugged.

So yes, wealth begets wealth. The 'inheritance' thing is spin.

I, for one, am SO proud of you1%ers! And for those of you who lost someone and received wealth I extend my deepest sympathies. They must have been wonderful people to raise someone like you!

I don't want all your money I just want to see a fair system so we can ALL live a decent life. But YOU know that.

Thank you so much for standing up and being counted! God bless!

Brok, just to play devils advocate, If you can use the internet to bring issues to light, why can't I use the television or newspapers? (because they cost money?)

I guess what I am saying is it one of those things that would be almost impossible to regulate.

For example what if I threw a huge party and at the end I talked about how great so and so it. Is that OK?

Hal why not go after corrupt government who caves in to the influence?

RI MOM those Bush tax cuts also made it possible for 47% of Americans to not have to pay federal taxes...In those terms I agree with your argument.

Brokinarrow

how to campaigns get funded it nobody is allowed to donate?

hm.... good question actually. Personally I feel that all campaigns should have a spending cap, so that no matter how rich candidate A is, he/she gets the same air time as candidate B. In this same spirit, perhaps we should make it so that the AMOUNT a person is allowed to donate is capped, so myself and Bill Gates both are capable of donating the same amount of money

You do realized their is already a public option to finance elections. You can contribute with your tax returns. McCain elected for the public financing option for his campaign as did Obama. But wait, Obama realized he could make more money outstide and backed out of his pledge to use public financing. Also, the amount any one person can directly donate to a candidate is already capped.

Tom - well I think the media would be able to handle things over TV and radio just fine, they ARE pretty good about talking about scandels and such. It may well end up being difficult to regulate, and your example there is good one showing how difficult it could be (because technically you're just throwing a party right?) But I'm sure you'll agree that we can at least make an effort to get the issues corrected :-)

STLMike - Good point there.

STLMike - Again, it's not so much a Left vs. Right issue. Campaign finance is a "systemic" problem.

Just to clarify one point, you said "the amount any one person can directly (key word) donate to a candidate is already capped". However, we know that PACs, super-PACs, and other groups can indirectly, fuel a candidate's campaign with UNLIMITED sums of money.

Get the money out, and use limited public funds.

I find it pretty humorous that the greedy people, that don't have the money, think that the greedy people, that do have the money, should share. Maybe they should just go to work instead of sitting on their rear and they could be one of the other greedy people.

Let's put things in a little perspective here.....I don't believe the 99'rs think that ALL the rich are greedy or evil or should give all their money to the government. I think they see the fact that the gap between the rich and poor has increased for some time now, that some on Wall Street did take more than they should have (and by questionable methods) and that raising taxes on the rich by 3% or 5% would not either keep the USA from being the best economy in the world, nor destroy jobs. We can define rich in the end (whether it's $250K, $1Million, or $1 Billion) but I don't think that's the main point the majority of Americans (check the polls) are trying to make. Most believe we need to cut spending, waste and raise revenues to support programs that most people think are needed in America. Not all the poor are deadbeats, not all the poor are illegals or black (most qare white), the middleclass is suffering too, Democrats AND Republicans can be corrupt , not everyone can be rich, there is a lot of money and influence in politics, and America needs to compete and win in the future.

Your characterization is a bit one-sided.

Let's not forget that the media makes a considerable amount of money off of the status quo as far as elections go, the media is corporate america in the first place and holds a certain amount of ownership of the government as fundamental lobbyists, and the media controls almost everything you hear and most of what you think, so things are not likely to become "Fair" in the elections department anytime soon. It's fine for people to argue that corporations aren't people too and should not be allowed to donate (to the moguls I imagine such talk is cute), but it's another thing entirely to try and make every person who's running have an even shake at speaking their mind so that they are heard by the people. The media can't control who gets elected if everyone was just given the right to speak--that could mean someone reasonable might get elected. I'm absolutely certain you'll find that the call for equality in America ends right at the gates to NBC, FOX, CNN, et al.

You're right about one thing, perhaps just that one thing, that they completely realize the necessity of a good infrastructure, educated workforce and a secure environment,

I wonder why that is? Probably because there going to get far more use out if it than any one else.

but they also realize that the private sector would be far more efficient at providing many of those services.

I wonder why that is? Not because they cut corners, ignore regulation, skip safety procedures.

No, most of the 1% has no problem paying their "fair share" but their "fair share" is being exploited.

Yeah just them, not every other tax paying American.

Why is it just the 1% that has to pay their "fair share"?

That's because they use more than there fair share.

The government has more than enough revenue to meet all the needs of this country but it's poorly spent, in many cases it's simply wasted for no logical reason.

That I agree with.

In reading the previous posts, I am impressed with the post that maksim80
made in regard to "socialism" apparently the conservatives who regularly post don't understand what "socialism" truly is.
Just because the US provides "Social" programs doesn't make it "Socialism". Just as, if we were to completely eliminate the government, we may not be an Anarchy, but all of the corporations would be in open war with each other to develope the monopolies we are starting to see blossum all over the US right now. The US had laws at one time that made monopolies illegal, because HEALTHY competition stimulates the economy, where monopolies charge whatever they want, because they are the only game available.
In regard to the 1%, just as in every part of every society, there are a percentage who take advantage of others and try to blame the others for being gullible, or bringing it on themselves. Still others understand that by paying their fair share to the Fed, they are, in reality, taking responsibility for stimulating our economy, which is what the greedy will NOT do. By supporting comsumer protection, we are all making sure the greedy CANNOT operate this way with impunity.
That is what I am seeing, as a former Republican, even those who are being taken advantage of are trying to justify further limitation of consumer protection, and the promotion of those who are working to destroy the US from within.
My hat is off to the people who have decided to communicate that they are willing to do their part, as all of us in middle and lower income have been doing all along. If taxes aren't raised at the highest levels, then there will be no other choice than to raise our taxes, and for the smaller middle class to take on even more resposnibility that we already can't afford to take. This will result in more of what is already happening, an even smaller middle class.

What about the millions who shun responsibility and never attain job skills or education and so have no money, yet still produce 5 or 6 offspring who then need housing, education, clothing, food, health care and incarceration who have to be supported by TAX PAYERS?

First off, even welfare recipients have to pay sales tax.

Welfare reform is just as badly needed as campaign finance reform, and no one is denying that. But the answer is NOT to just cut off everyone on welfare. The answer is to make temporary assistance less attractive than actual jobs, but that depends on jobs being there in the first place.

I personally think if you want to collect welfare, you should have to do community service of some kind to get it. After all, it's a paycheck, you should work for it. And that's just one idea.

I think a lot of people are confusing a couple of things. Firstly, the United States is not a democracy and never was. It is a republic. "...and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands..." Sorry that is a huge pet peeve of mine.

Secondly, we do not tax a person based on their net wealth. This is not the Soviet Union. The United States taxes income.

I would also encourage these sympathetic "1%ers" to start a business or to invest in new technology to create jobs. There are plenty of emerging fields that could use their money. Renewable energy, vertical farming, water desalination plants, improved w/w tx plants, geoengineering, etc. Even our crumbling infrastructure. Please, put your money and sympathy to good use and invest and create commerce. Don't throw it away to the wasteful government money pit.

These trust fund brats don't really want to pay more taxes. They want YOU to pay more taxes.

It is interesting that the inherited wealth is down there. The guy that got up at 4 in the morning every day for 30 years to open his McDonald's franchise is not there. He worked hard, he hired people, he paid boatloads of FICA and Income taxes, and he expanded his operation. Now he makes 6 figures, and has a 7 figure net worth, thanks to the value of his business and his real estate.

Ditto for the guy that owns several dozen rental buildings who is up all night with renters. He makes a few thousand a month and is counting on his capital gains to finance his retirement.

Ditto for the gal that went to SUNY and got a law degree. She worked 100 hours a week for 9 years "paying her dues". Now she is a partner pulling down 500 large. She will pay nearly half of that in taxes ( maybe more if she lives in NYC or other high tax municipalities).

The hard working people who bust their butt every day continue to finance this country and pay the bills. People that take risks that put 2nd mortgages on their homes to finance businesses are being ostracized by the lazy entitled leftists.

The solutions are shockingly simple. If you feel guilty about inherited wealth, give it away. If you don't like corporations, don't buy their products. If you think Europe is the answer, move there. If you want to stay and make our country better, get a job, start a business, make yourself useful and vote.

Quick aside, but many major colleges will have football pep rallies this afternoon and this evening. The attendance at pep rallies at dozens and dozens of large state universities will dwarf the crowds at the OWS rally. Except reporters will not be there. Just a little perspective. OWS is a insignificant event by insignificant people.

Better yet, why don't we require that every government job opening requires training a welfare recipient to fill it?

Better yet, why don't we require that every government job opening requires training a welfare recipient to fill it?

Seeing that the fed has been under a hiring freeze for the last couple months - and for an indefinite future period of time....

"The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price." -Ronald Reagan

These 1 percenters who have decided to "join" the 99ers are probably young liberal democrats. They don't understand anything about money because they inherited it. What about creating more wealth instead of spreading around the wealth we have? Do not change the tax code, it'll only make things worse.

First of all, to those who say that our top rate of 91% in 1960 meant that the richest people paid 91% of their salary then vs. 15% of their salary now, you are simply WRONG. You all need to learn a bit how tax brackets work!! LOL

That said, I make a low 6-figure income, we are squarely middle class, in our late 40s, and my wife no longer works. The way we got here was through hard work, a public university education, a few academic scholarships, and some student loans that I paid off early. We have a nice home, have saved 10% or more for our retirement as well as for our kids' education for over 20 years, have one kid in college without student loans, and another will be there in a few years. I handle our investments myself, and I have done well over the years by not paying needless fees... luckily I learned long ago how to read a financial statement and annual report! We have been successful because we did without OFTEN! We did not have expensive vacations, or new cars (I bought my now 10 year old/170,000 mile Volvo used), and our kids did not have the newest toys, computers, cell phones, or cars... EVER. We did all that we were supposed to do, worked hard, saved until it hurt... and it worked out.

The problem is that most of the people in our country no longer know how to work hard. Our government also does not seem to understand that it is morally and fiscally wrong to finance debt on the back of our future generations! For this mess to be fixed, it will REQUIRE massive cuts in the feel-good socialist safety net that has been carefully woven in our society since FDR. All entitlements need to be reduced, postponed, and perhaps some eliminated. The giant Ponzi Scheme known as Social Security needs to be pushed back to age 75 or 80... because it was NEVER intended for people to collect SS for 30 years, but from the first woman to get a check until now, this is what has happened! All non-essential government expenses need to be eliminated immediately. All federal and state employee benefits (including retirement and health care) need to be reexamined to put them in line with the private sector... so this means if the local Catholic school pays a teacher $40,000 a year, then a comparable teacher at the public school should not be making $80,000 since we are paying for it! This is a necessity in ALL of government.

The government will NEVER be able to afford a massive WPA-like program to employ all of those unemployed, so it should not waste the $ trying. BUT, if government employment is a political necessity, then we should enlist a huge army of American labor to build a wall on our southern border, to man these borders, and also to search-out the 15 million or so illegal aliens in the US already and return them to Mexico or wherever they came from illegally. Once these people are GONE, there will be plenty of jobs for the poor and uneducated to do... with the chance to work themselves into much more.

In reality, our nation manufactures more today than EVER before... but because of efficiency (computers) it is merely able to do so with FAR less people. (This is something that the unions and the right wingers never seem to want to discuss… or admit, as it’s a lot easier blaming Communist China This is much the same issue we had decades ago on our farms. There was a time that 60% of our population was needed to produce our food, but today with efficiencies this has been replaced by only 2%. (And when 60% of our population worked on farms MANY people starved in our nation, whereas today our biggest health problem is obesity.) Today it just does not take NEARLY as many people to build a car or any widget as it did 40 years ago. THAT is just the reality!

Once our government expenses are DRASTICALLY slashed, the tax increases need to begin FAST and HARD! Naturally, the rich make the most, so they need to pay a lot more in federal income taxes. The death tax also needs to be returned, and the ability to shelter huge assets through trusts needs to be capped – perhaps with a 90% death tax on assets over $1 Billion. (So , no worries Mr, Buffet, your 17% income tax will no longer be a lower percentage than your secretary, as your annual income taxes will go up a LOT, AND the Billion$ you planned to leave for Mr. Gates’ foundation would be taxed at about 90% when you die.) All classes of society need to pay a bit more, and all write-offs need to be reduced or eliminated... even the sacred ones like mortgage exemptions need to be capped at something like $10K a year in interest, and zero for those making over $500,000 a year, the property tax write-off needs to be capped at $10K a year and zero for the top earners, and business expenses need to be capped at around 25% of income with a maximum amount for the top brackets. Oh yeah, capital gain distributions need to be taxed at the standard tax rates, so no more 15% there for Mr. Buffet either. BUT, the poor in our society currently pay zero and merely suck the life from everyone else, and after the welfare programs are slashed, they will need to get jobs to pay some sort of federal taxes -- if only a VAT-like sales tax that ALL of us will need to pay. (This is the one part of Cain’s 9/9/9 tax that makes any sense! Though 9% is too high of a sales tax for the poor – 5% for all seems reasonable) BUT, the working poor will need to pay something too, gone should be the days of a person having zero in withholding and getting back $10K checks from the government! My suggested tax brackets would be something like this:

PROPOSED TAX TABLE, MARRIED JOINTLY

EVERYONE 5% Federal Sales Tax on all purchases

----------------------------------------------------------------------

$0-$20K.... 5% of income (NOT CURRENT AGI, but very close to real income)

$20,K-$200K.... $1,000, plus 10% of income over 20,001

$200K-$500K.... above, plus 25% of income over $200,001

$500K-$1M.... above, plus 40% of income over $500,001

Above 1M.... above, plus 50% of income over $1,000,000

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

DEATH TAX First $1M shielded

$1-999M taxed at income tax rates

$1B or more taxed at 90%

People that take risks that put 2nd mortgages on their homes to finance businesses are being ostracized by the lazy entitled leftists.

Hmmmmm.......is that supposed to be an unbiased opinion?

Better yet, why don't we require that every government job opening requires training a welfare recipient to fill it?

Most federal jobs require a college degree. The Bureau of Labor Statistics studies show that salaries (including benefits) of government jobs with the same jobs (same job titles and qualifications) in the private sector make LESS in government.

You may be using the statistic that the "average" government worker makes more than the "average" private sector employee.....a apples-to-oranges comparison that right-wing conservatives like to use (among lots of other myths).

Your statements are laughable.

So most federal jobs require a college degree. The federal government pays for people to go to college all the time. Why not send them to college with purpose? Why not give direction to people who otherwise have no direction?

*edit* We do not only have federal government, by the way.

The problem is that most of the people in our country no longer know how to work hard.

Rick, you lose credibility making a statement like that.

I did quckly see your tax on inheritances (up to $1 Million NON-taxable).

Just remember, Sherlock, under YOUR Federal sales tax (or Cain's), when you spend that inheritance you WILL be paying tax on it. You might want to really think (or know the subject) before you come out with a proposal.

The federal government pays for people to go to college all the time.

Just another myth....look it up.

That's funny, because I know several poor people who have had their educations paid for by the government. I don't require looking it up, having witnessed it myself.

So rather than give direction, we should just continue with handouts with no motivation or purpose beyond maintaining present destitute circumstances?

1% makes a nice soundbite and all that but the figure is more like 1/10%. That is the number of people who are directly involved in the wholesale destruction of America. These people are entrenched in DC, and feel it is their right to do what they are doing. BTW, I have known trust fund babies. It seems that regardless the crumbs they throw to charity, they are by and large the most entitled, worthless non contributing people I have ever had the misfortune to meet. I have much more respect for a hard working poor man than a non working rich one.

europeforever :

Your country may be socialist, but that won't save you. Just like it didn't save Greece.

Even France has its socialist fever right now, and while taxing everyone more, they spend even more. So socialism is no sense.

All federal and state employee benefits (including retirement and health care) need to be reexamined to put them in line with the private sector...

They are on the Federal side for the most part - not including politicians and military. Your average federal employee has health benefits on par with any large organization's health program. Around 250-300 dollars a month for health alone (not including dental) pre-tax. Retirement pensions are changing rapidly, now it's a combination between TSP (basically a 401k) and basic benefit package which is around 1% of your high-3 average salary for each year of service.

so this means if the local Catholic school pays a teacher $40,000 a year, then a comparable teacher at the public school should not be making $80,000 since we are paying for it!

My brother teachs 8th grade public education, 33K salary. Of course he gets Summers off (sort of, he still has to go into work a couple times a week during the summer)

That's funny, because I know several poor people who have had their educations paid for by the government.

If they meet the proper qualifications, I'm sure.

Robin Steele

BTW, I have known trust fund babies. It seems that regardless the crumbs they throw to charity, they are by and large the most entitled, worthless non contributing people I have ever had the misfortune to meet. I have much more respect for a hard working poor man than a non working rich one.

Mitt Romney is a trust fund baby. I'm sure you're right about him.

Oh, here's the payscale for GS employees (the most commonly used) - there are others for different types of employees, but GS is the norm.

GS 15 would be your big-wigs... the mucky-muck commander types. Roughly equivalent to a high ranking General.

AlMightyDollar, I don't even know where to start.

You're right about one thing, perhaps just that one thing, that they completely realize the necessity of a good infrastructure, educated workforce and a secure environment,

I wonder why that is? Probably because there going to get far more use out if it than any one else.

This assertion is based on what exactly? Does someone driving a $100,000 vehicle receive any more utility from a public roadway than someone driving a $10,000 vehicle?

but they also realize that the private sector would be far more efficient at providing many of those services.

I wonder why that is? Not because they cut corners, ignore regulation, skip safety procedures.

Actual no, not because of those things but rather because capital projects would be awarded on value, which is quality and price, rather than "leveling the playing field" by setting the price well above market value and having all bids use those prices, known as "scale", thus driving up the cost of the project immensely, getting projects finished on-time rather than lingering for years in a tangled web of bureaucracy. By hiring, firing and paying teachers and other public workers on merit rather than via a blanket contract that covers everyone regardless of quality.

No, most of the 1% has no problem paying their "fair share" but their "fair share" is being exploited.

Yeah just them, not every other tax paying American.

You're right, every tax paying American is having their fair share exploited. The key phrase there is "tax paying American". Nearly half of income earning American's don't pay income tax, that seems fair. What's "fair" about someone making $34,000/year, working hard to earn a modest 3% raise and ending up with less money the following year because they're paying 10% more in income tax?

Why is it just the 1% that has to pay their "fair share"?

That's because they use more than there fair share.

"(T)hey use more than (their) fair share"? Because they get housing assistance? Free medical care? Entitlement checks? What benefit do the 1% USE that is more than their tax contribution? I'm not saying "fair" is based on use, it's certainly not, but your argument was that they "use more than (their) fair share".

The government has more than enough revenue to meet all the needs of this country but it's poorly spent, in many cases it's simply wasted for no logical reason.

That I agree with.

Not many people could honestly disagree with that, even Congress and the President admit as much. Unless we're going to gloss over the $500 billion of Medicare/Medicaid waste that was cooked into the "savings" of Obamacare or the billions of dollars the Pentagon can't account for.

"Like" the Trust Fund Babies, and huge Inheritors are willing to pay more taxes--they've probably had money their entire lives.

This is ridiculous. Most haven't worked a day in their life, except for the ones who are continuing the old Family Successful Business or businesses.

Sure, it easy. The money fell right into their lap, without the hard working parent or relative earning the huge money saving it, believing they would see more hard days in their later days--some get inheritance upon inheritance from Aunts and Uncles who have no children.

BS. As to Mitt Romney, and the Kennedy's, they are the exception, with a few others.

The 1% in this article never earned or worked a day for their money - it was given to them. Of the 1% that did actually work for their money, has any of them actually voluntarily given the IRS additional money to ease the deficit? I didn't think so and even senile Warren Buffet has yet to voluntarily give any of his money to the IRS. The OWS are a bunch of deadbeat Socialist who believe that everyone else "owes them" and should support their worthless lives. The deadbeats need to take a bath, wash their hair, clean their clothes and get on with supporting themselves.

Rick 868962

Best post I have seen in weeks!

The OWS are a bunch of deadbeat Socialist who believe that everyone else "owes them" and should support their worthless lives. The deadbeats need to take a bath, wash their hair, clean their clothes and get on with supporting themselves

.

Repeating that over and over again won't make it true. Try to come up with some facts to back that statement up. You must be out of ideas if you're resorting to repeating the same thing.

The military is a proper function of government. A government's function is to enforce the rule of law, protect it's citizens from the violation of individual rights (life, liberty and property), nothing more, nothing less

Picking and choosing which parts of the Constitution you want to acknowledge and misinterpreting other parts is typical for a neo-con/repub/t-bagger.
1. The function of the US Military is not the enforcement of law. In fact, the US Armed Forces (Active Components) are expressly forbidden from enforcing domestic law with a few specific exceptions. The sworn purpose of the US Military is to defend the Constitution of the United States. Don't make the mistake of thinking its there to defend you or your property.
2. All functions of the United States Government in accordance with the Constitution of the United States are proper government functions. That includes "promote the general Welfare". We did not create this country and Americans did not fight and die throughout history for the benefit of Exon/Mobile or Wal-Mart. It is for the benefit of ALL Americans. Sorry to burst your bubble but try reading the Constitution instead of just waiving it around in the air.

JoeB-460595

The 1% in this article never earned or worked a day for their money - it was given to them. Of the 1% that did actually work for their money, has any of them actually voluntarily given the IRS additional money to ease the deficit? I didn't think so and even senile Warren Buffet has yet to voluntarily give any of his money to the IRS. The OWS are a bunch of deadbeat Socialist who believe that everyone else "owes them" and should support their worthless lives. The deadbeats need to take a bath, wash their hair, clean their clothes and get on with supporting themselves.

Amazing Joe, how old are you. You sound just like my dad did in the 70s when the Vietnam War Protesters were in the streets. Funny enough, after I enlisted he changed his tune and ended up opposing the war. It's funny how people like you are opposed to any program that might cost them a little more in taxes until they find themselves unemployed or struck down by catastrophic disease or accident. Then they are the first to call their Congressional Representatives and whine about the unfairness of the system.

In reality, our nation manufactures more today than EVER before...

Nice try Rick. I hear the Republican National Committee is looking for a Presidential Candidate. Have you thrown your hat in the ring?

Manufacturing in the United States as a percentage of GDP:
1980: 24%
2008: 13%

The top 40 richest americans are worth a combined 1.3 trillion dollars (cash and investments). If you were to split that money up to every american it would be a little over $5,000 per person.

I am all for the rich paying more in taxes but I find it a joke that people really believe that raising tax rates will solve all of the country's money woes.

Nice try Ol_Doc!

Nice try Rick. I hear the Republican National Committee is looking for a Presidential Candidate. Have you thrown your hat in the ring?

Manufacturing in the United States as a percentage of GDP:
1980: 24%
2008: 13%

1980: 24% of $2.768 trillion = $664.32 billion

2008: 13% of $14.369 trillion = $1,867.97 billion

I can't speak to Rick's claim of "EVER" but in regard to your rebuttal, US manufacturing was about 2.8 times greater in 2008 than in 1980. And just so I'm not a hypocrite, it's still 9% higher in 2008 when adjusted for inflation.

I am all for the rich paying more in taxes but I find it a joke that people really believe that raising tax rates will solve all of the country's money woes.

Scott, I don't think anyone is saying it will save ALL the country's woes. People are also talking about cutting spending in a responsible way.

Also, they are not saying to confiscate all the money of the richest 40 Americans. Most are talking about putting tax rates back to what they were when Bill Clinton was in office and things were fine with growth and taxes.

For those of you objecting to all of these public protests and comments as, "Socialist Crap.."

...then why do you continue to use the INTERNET?

What is your logic for saying that they should not continue using the internet??

If you are in the 1%, you stay there by making your own sign and not paying someone else to do it.

Starderup Exactly, that's why it's erroneous to call the 1% "job creators".

I think the comment was in jest...

maybe she has money because shes learned to not blow it on things that arent a necessity.

Lol, you people are far too serious. That comment had me laughing for 5 minutes.

Well, I have a suggestion for these "1% who stand with the 99%":

If your so rich, do what other rich people and corporations do and HIRE SOME LOBBYISTS FOR YOUR CAUSE!!! Seriously, I mean that. If you guys really are that rich hire some freaking lobbyists!

That's the problem though, these people standing with the 99 aren't rich and powerful ENOUGH to drown out the lobbyists of the mega-corporations and truly filthy rich that DON'T want things to change. Lobbyists in all forms and any other form of legalized bribing need to be OUTLAWED, only then will democracy return.

Brokinarrow, organizations with lobbyist include Green Peace, Goodwill, the Red Cross, the Seirra Club, cancer awarness groups, AARP ...

What is the definition for rich? Is being rich being able to retire around 55 and have a couple of million dollars waiting for you in retirement?

If so we Government employees and teachers are those damn filthy rich people.

Your point Gary? Why should these groups voices be louder simply because they have more money than another group of citizens?

Gary...

You forgot about one of the biggest special interest groups of all...the teachers' unions from across the nation. Not only do they possess humungous lobbying power, they also direct our children to believe that they deserve it.

Brokinarrow, you cannot stop or otlaw lobbyist but you can set term limits to those that made politics a career.

Hey Gary: What good is a term limit when the lobbyist will just buy the next guy in line? Just wonderin

I have to agree with Unregistered User on that one Gary. You might get someone in every now n then that refuses to be bought, but human nature and history have shown that more than likely it will just be puppet after puppet pulled by the same strings.

Gary, we have term limits they are called elections. We can kick these people out any time we want, but you know what the same people keep electing the criminal Charley Rengel, and the people elect Waters, Pelosi, Reid and Frank, but you know what the same people elect McCain, L. Graham, ect..

The problem is we are too stupid to vote for somebody else.

Also, there is a group of citizens aiming to do just what you say can't be done Gary (outlawing lobbyists): www.getmoneyout.com, give it a look and I highly advise anyone that values their freedom and right to be counted to go and sign the petition.

Tom,

I can agree on that only I will say that we are too Lazy and not too stupid. A lot of people go in and vote then just check Republican or Democrat and viola all votes cast. It takes time and energy to research each candidate something I think people just don't do. I know it's hard to take the time to look at everyones backgrounds and ideas, but if we really want things to change we have to start voting on indiviuals and not groups. Just my thoughts.

I am guessing Gary's point is that NO group should be able to buy a politician. That should be illegal. But it isn't.

terriels, it is illegal but our representatives have set it up so it is almost impossible to enforce.

If people like Al Franken, Timothy Geithner, and Charles Rangel (just to name few) can openly break the law, not get punished and get voted into some of the most powerful positions on earth, what chance do the rest of us have?

some sanity please

That was hilarious

Gary those groups aren't worth shi+. Greenpeace does scant little if anything for the environment as they cruise the worlds oceans in what is likely one of the most inefficient, foul boats still afloat. AARP exists for the insurance industry, that is all. They could care less about the retired folks. I could go on...

You're probably broke or soon will be. Why do you fight for people and corporations who could care less about you?

seriously? Read the Article, some are entrepreneurs.. just because they didn't interview one for this specific article doesn't mean they aren't there.

westandwiththe99percent.tumblr (.com)

Great Point! I completely agree.

It seems like the peope in this article who inherited the money seem to think that everyone should be as "lucky" as they were and everyone should just inherit what they get or else expect it to be given to them by the wealthy via the government. I wonder if they would think differently if they actually had to take the risks and put in the hard work that so many others had to do to earn their wealth.

Expecting a copy/paste question from Kooshton... I don't expect to be broke any time soon. Living within my means unlike the government does. If I loose my job, I'll cut back. I fight for the people who risk their own wealth to innovate new products and sign my paycheck along with hundreds of others. Oh, by the way, these people actually do care about me and their employees too. Too bad it seems you haven't had this kind of experience but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just doesn't make the news.

These kids inherited their money. I did not see a sign representing someone who worked hard to become one of the 1%. If they want to give away money they never worked for, so be it. However, those who used initiative, hard work, and creativity in order to become one of the 1% do not deserve to be punished for putting in the blood and sweat required to do so.

I am a middle class wage earner. I too have worked hard for the money I have earned. Why in Gods name should the wealthiest 1% be given tax BREAKS and have tax LOOPHOLES when I struggle to pay my taxes? When Warren Buffet is paying less in taxes than his secretary, something is terribly wrong with the tax system.

JJ-3340756

Maybe the answer should be less government

Because "less government" worked so well with the banking industry in the 2000's.

I think it's interesting that these people didn't earn their money, but are okay with the idea of giving it away. They inherited their money which means they're not likely to earn as much back in the future, yet they're unselfish enough to share. Sounds like solid character to me.

What about the very rich who did have to work paying it forward for the next guy? Of course not because these days it's fashionable to hoard your wealth while you blame the little guy for his misfortune. We feel no societal obligation at all.

We are on a planet spinning in the middle of space. We're all on this island together. We have a responsibility to be kind to one another. I'm proud of these young millionaires.

Oh, and by the way, how many of you would have called them lazy, dirty hippies if you'd seen them protesting? Interesting that some of them have enough cash to buy and sell you. Perhaps we shouldn't judge a book by its cover, hmm?

I agree Marci, But Warren doesn't pay less than his secretary, He pays a smaller percentage, which adds up to a LOT more money than his secretary. Yet I agree no matter your income, your taxes should be of equal percentages without a loophole to get out of it.

Marci, I wish articles such as these and many people could make a separation between working hard and other aspects that lead to financial success.

I believe you do work hard. So do I. However, I do not risk my income or savings into starting a business or a developing a new innovative product. It is the folks that take these risks (in addition to hard work) that earn their wealth. Of course some take these risks, work hard, and loose their money too but we don't hear about them very often.... It is this risk/reward prospect that give the incentive for free people in a capitalist society to innovate, create jobs andn improve the standad of living in our country.

Most people who work hard are not in the 1%, and if all it took was hard work, most people that I know would be in the 1%...and let's be honest, in a lot of cases, that hard work is supported by good luck or talent that the public is willing to pay for i.e. professional sports players, A-list actors, directors, musicians and singing stars...no matter how "hard" they worked, people like Bruce Springstreen, Oprah Winfrey, Albert Pujols, Michael Jordan, JR Rowling, would not be multi-millionaires without the talent they were born with and nurtured, and some good luck thrown in...so let's stop acting like the 99% are sitting on their asses, doing nothing but accepting government hand outs and marching in these protests, it is simply not true!

@Scott get real, most people who are signing the paychecks are NOT risking their personal wealth, that is what alot of these protestors are upset with...we hear stories everyday of CEO's and other upper management who get their million dollar pay checks and bonuses, even as they lay off people and run their company into the ground, i.e. the bank bailouts of the past few years or Donald Trump saying that he did not declare "personal bankruptcy" but his companies did, several times over...

Thanks for the reply.

I respectfully disagree that "most people who are signing the paychecks are NOT risking their personal wealth". I think Most ARE.

The stories you talk about, and I hear them too, make the news but that doesn't mean that most business owners or leaders are like this. I understand that people may be so upset with the relatively few "bad apples" but how do we come up with a solution that addresses these exceptions without also punishing the majority of those who have earned their wealth made the by making "legitimate" financial risks?

Government may not be very efficient, but it is not that simple as if I lose my job, I cut spending, it don't work. You still have military to run, still have people on Medicare and SS, What you going to you cut them off and let old people die off? Some of you don't know what you talking about. Less government? Articles of Confederation didn't work, that why US was created with strong federal government powers. Think before you ask something, you don't like government, GO TO SOMALIA, see how that working out there

Marci, I wish articles such as these and many people could make a separation between working hard and other aspects that lead to financial success.

I believe you do work hard. So do I. However, I do not risk my income or savings into starting a business or a developing a new innovative product. It is the folks that take these risks (in addition to hard work) that earn their wealth. Of course some take these risks, work hard, and loose their money too but we don't hear about them very often.... It is this risk/reward prospect that give the incentive for free people in a capitalist society to innovate, create jobs andn improve the standad of living in our country.

, Yes, But the problem is that the people who have taken risks and created succesfull businesses and have become wealthy because of that are not only NOT creating jobs any longer (they are hording their record profits) but they have been keeping their workers wages stagnent for the most part over the past ten years while their own profits have sky rocketed. Trickle down is a joke. These wealthy corporations are not improving anyones standard of living but the CEOs. Thats what this march on wall Street is all about.

Marci, Thanks for the reply and for not suggesting I move to Somalia (like others have done) simply because I have a different view.

You bring up a good point. I agree many businesses are making solid profits and reinvesting less. I'm still not sure how taxing them more will help incentivse them to hord less and invest/risk more. I'd be more interested in solutions that would drive that behavior.

From what I see where I work, there is a lot of uncertaintly about the potential of increased regulations and taxes. Believe me, most business owners don't want to sit on a pile of cash. The returns on savings are not as attractive as investing into future growth.

Thanks again for a thoughtful reply.

Good point maksim. Most of the people shouting "Lazybums" wouldnt know what to do in a situation where they actually had to fend for themselves. In countries with no government it's not the hardest working who are doing well and running things, it's the guys with the most guns and followers. I also find it strange that most of the people who are so committed to a "dog eat dog" "survival of the fittest" world don't even believe in evolution. And if you don't believe that 99% of the 1% inherited their money, then you have your head in the sand. Keep pushing the "dog eat dog" mentality cause we are the hungry ones and you will be eaten.

@maksim80,

My comment of cutting back was specifically in response to Koston's statement that seems to imply that we as individuals are all doomed to be broke. I didn't say that the govermnet should cut back, only that I would. Agree that the government has various commitments that are not cut as simply as mine. But maybe that's where koshton has a point... The government may be doomed to go broke.

On another note, too bad you think that anyone who sees things differently should move to a different country. I could suggest that you move to Greece but I don't see how that helps any of us work toward a stronger solution through sharing ideas. Let's all keep in mind that these debates, if done in an open and respectful manner is what makes this country great. Just becuase our elected officials can't provide that example, doesn't mean we have to act like they do.

Take care!

@Scott no I would say that MOST large companies are not run by the people who founded them, they are run by CEO's that are hired by a board of directors and draw a salary, regardless of the financial decisions they make that affect the many workers that are employed by them...even IF the company is run by the founder, their salary is separate from the company's money, yes if the company does poorly and it affects their stock ( if it is a publicly traded company) they can lose money, but if they are getting millions in salary and benefits, they can make decisions that benefit THEIR wealth to the detriment of their employees...do you really think donald trump uses his own money to finance a new business venture? He gets loans from banks and investors, and if that business venture fails, the banks and investors are screwed, not his personal wealth...

Most people who "worked for their 1%" can't really call it work. Now, if you created a business from scratch and did do a lot of work... I applaud you and somewhat agree.

However, that isn't usually the case. There's generally very little "work" involved and certainly no "blood, sweat, and tears". It generally boils down to exploitation. The only "work" involved is getting the timing right for the big windfall. Then it's just a matter of investing.

I think it's important to remember that before this wealth was inherited by these little weasels, it was created by someone who worked for it. Wealth does not just happen. That is, unless you're the government and can legislate private money into your own pocket. But that's yet another reason for a limited government.

I work hard for my money everyday and I say tax me more. Tax me more and my "weasel" kids will have less to inherit.

The distinction between Income tax an Capital Gains tax has to part of this discussion -- the majority of these 1% (whether they built the company that created the wealth in the first place or not) are actually "living off" the proceeds of investments (ie Capital Gains) -- NOT "income" that is generated by a business / a monthly a or bi-weekly in the form of a paycheck. Nothing wrong with that...

As a country, we need to recognize this distinction and amend the tax code to reflect taxation that makes sense where it makes sense -- capital gains in excess of X percent for example... Not for the "little guy" who has retired and now hopes to make ends meet off of a lifetime of investment (and yes, Capital Gains) through a 401k.

Unfortunately a lot of legislation models in the past have painted with too broad a brush, and the little guy (a huge voting block) is now conditioned to believe (by virtue of experience) that raising the capital gains tax means a dent in his/her income stream. Repubs will wave this banner as "Captial Gains tax increase = BAD for the middle class", the average voter will fall in line, and the richest maintain their capital gains.

Some Sanity Please, I couldn't agree more. If they REALLY cared about the movement, they would spend less money on lattes and get some premium cardboard! Or even those signs that you wear with placards on each side. You know, the ones that make them look like sign-and-person sandwiches? Otherwise, they're just posers.

Government is not efficient when it comes to spending money.

The reason the Government is not good at spending money is because most of it is siphoned off by the wealth that gets the contracts.

Please stop already with the "America has the highest corporate tax rate" garbage...just look at GE...paid little to no taxes with record profits....there are a ton of loopholes in the tax system specifically for business....I prepare taxes for a living so please don't even go there....very few if any businesses actually pay the 35% tax rate that they always complain about....

Go 99%ers!!!

Whether or not they "worked hard" and "earned" their money has nothing to do with it. These protesters are not asking for a hand-out; they are simply asking that a wall of money not be put in front of basic human rights.

It is shameful that in our country you have to have a stack of cash to get better when you are sick. It is shameful that in our country that banks are allowed to penalize the poorest of the poor. It is shameful that in our country there is the notion that "if you just work hard enough" then you can eat, get a higher education, go to the doctor, or find a job that pays a living wage. Shame!

These people are not jealous of rich people, they just want a chance to work a job that pays them enough money to eat food every day and pay for the necessities of life. We have 14 MILLION (documented) people in this country looking for jobs. We have over 50 MILLION people in this country who are uninsured.

Anyone who thinks that all those millions of people deserve or want that are lying to themselves. The rich have to pay more in taxes simply because no one "deserves" or "needs" that kind of money. Not when it can be used for the greater good. Do not the ends of helping millions justify the means of taxing the few? Money is nothing. Human rights are everything.

I did not see a sign representing someone who worked hard to become one of the 1%.

What jobs pays enough to become a multimillionaire or a billionaire? And how much hard work comes with those jobs?

Is that hard work like digging ditch's? Or loading 50 pound bags on pallets all day?

AllMightyDollar - Corporate CEO would be one such job, ask Bill Gates. And yeah, I'm fairly sure it does take a lot of hard work to get there, because I've seen what corporate environments are like. While it may not be physically demanding, it is a VERY stressful environment and there are lots of political games that you have to play.

AllMightyDollar - Corporate CEO would be one such job, ask Bill Gates. And yeah, I'm fairly sure it does take a lot of hard work to get there, because I've seen what corporate environments are like. While it may not be physically demanding, it is a VERY stressful environment and there are lots of political games that you have to play.

Don't forget that 90% of those games consist entirely of who you know (or knows you).

It's really not a 'merit' based system, as people so naively like to think.

Marci, You don't get the problem....those rich people who make their money off of capital gains and investments, only get those taxed at 15%. Those of us who earn a salary (actually WORK) for the money (ie my husband is a brainsurgeon who went through grueling training for 15 years after high school and works at a high stress, evening, holiday, weekend, middle of the night job on average 16 hours a day), gets taxed at 45% when you add federal, state and local income tax. WE HAVE NO LOOPHOLES!!!!!!! The public schools suck because of kids with broken homes and teachers who are protected by unions and we have to pay outlandish tuition on top of school property taxes to get a decent education for our kids. We "make too much" for financial aide. I drive a 10 year old car with over 100,000 miles and shop at the thrift store. Is that what you would expect from a neurosurgeon's family??? Take more of our salary...HELL NO!!!!

Brokinarrow, exactly right and a hell of a lot of backstabbing!!! The rich need to stop whining and pay their fair share of Capital Gains Taxes!

First of all, to those who say that our top rate of 91% in 1960 meant that the richest people paid 91% of their salary then vs. 15% of their salary now, you are simply WRONG. You all need to learn a bit how tax brackets work!! LOL

That said, I make a low 6-figure income, we are squarely middle class, in our late 40s, and my wife no longer works. The way we got here was through hard work, a public university education, a few academic scholarships, and some student loans that I paid off early. We have a nice home, have saved 10% or more for our retirement as well as for our kids' education for over 20 years, have one kid in college without student loans, and another will be there in a few years. I handle our investments myself, and I have done well over the years by not paying needless fees... luckily I learned long ago how to read a financial statement and annual report! We have been successful because we did without OFTEN! We did not have expensive vacations, or new cars (I bought my now 10 year old/170,000 mile Volvo used), and our kids did not have the newest toys, computers, cell phones, or cars... EVER. We did all that we were supposed to do, worked hard, saved until it hurt... and it worked out.

The problem is that most of the people in our country no longer know how to work hard. Our government also does not seem to understand that it is morally and fiscally wrong to finance debt on the back of our future generations! For this mess to be fixed, it will REQUIRE massive cuts in the feel-good socialist safety net that has been carefully woven in our society since FDR. All entitlements need to be reduced, postponed, and perhaps some eliminated. The giant Ponzi Scheme known as Social Security needs to be pushed back to age 75 or 80... because it was NEVER intended for people to collect SS for 30 years, but from the first woman to get a check until now, this is what has happened! All non-essential government expenses need to be eliminated immediately. All federal and state employee benefits (including retirement and health care) need to be reexamined to put them in line with the private sector... so this means if the local Catholic school pays a teacher $40,000 a year, then a comparable teacher at the public school should not be making $80,000 since we are paying for it! This is a necessity in ALL of government.

The government will NEVER be able to afford a massive WPA-like program to employ all of those unemployed, so it should not waste the $ trying. BUT, if government employment is a political necessity, then we should enlist a huge army of American labor to build a wall on our southern border, to man these borders, and also to search-out the 15 million or so illegal aliens in the US already and return them to Mexico or wherever they came from illegally. Once these people are GONE, there will be plenty of jobs for the poor and uneducated to do... with the chance to work themselves into much more.

In reality, our nation manufactures more today than EVER before... but because of efficiency (computers) it is merely able to do so with FAR less people. (This is something that the unions and the right wingers never seem to want to discuss… or admit, as it's a lot easier blaming Communist China This is much the same issue we had decades ago on our farms. There was a time that 60% of our population was needed to produce our food, but today with efficiencies this has been replaced by only 2%. (And when 60% of our population worked on farms MANY people starved in our nation, whereas today our biggest health problem is obesity.) Today it just does not take NEARLY as many people to build a car or any widget as it did 40 years ago. THAT is just the reality!

Once our government expenses are DRASTICALLY slashed, the tax increases need to begin FAST and HARD! Naturally, the rich make the most, so they need to pay a lot more in federal income taxes. The death tax also needs to be returned, and the ability to shelter huge assets through trusts needs to be capped – perhaps with a 90% death tax on assets over $1 Billion. (So , no worries Mr, Buffet, your 17% income tax will no longer be a lower percentage than your secretary, as your annual income taxes will go up a LOT, AND the Billion$ you planned to leave for Mr. Gates' foundation would be taxed at about 90% when you die.) All classes of society need to pay a bit more, and all write-offs need to be reduced or eliminated... even the sacred ones like mortgage exemptions need to be capped at something like $10K a year in interest, and zero for those making over $500,000 a year, the property tax write-off needs to be capped at $10K a year and zero for the top earners, and business expenses need to be capped at around 25% of income with a maximum amount for the top brackets. Oh yeah, capital gain distributions need to be taxed at the standard tax rates, so no more 15% there for Mr. Buffet either. BUT, the poor in our society currently pay zero and merely suck the life from everyone else, and after the welfare programs are slashed, they will need to get jobs to pay some sort of federal taxes -- if only a VAT-like sales tax that ALL of us will need to pay. (This is the one part of Cain's 9/9/9 tax that makes any sense! Though 9% is too high of a sales tax for the poor – 5% for all seems reasonable) BUT, the working poor will need to pay something too, gone should be the days of a person having zero in withholding and getting back $10K checks from the government! My suggested tax brackets would be something like this:

PROPOSED TAX TABLE, MARRIED JOINTLY

EVERYONE 5% Federal Sales Tax on all purchases

----------------------------------------------------------------------

$0-$20K 5% of income (NOT CURRENT AGI, but very close to real income)

$20K-$200K $1,000, plus 10% of income over 20,001

$200K-$500K above, plus 25% of income over $200,001

$500K-$1M above, plus 40% of income over $500,001

Above 1M above, plus 50% of income over $1,000,000

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

DEATH TAX First $1M shielded

$1-999M taxed at income tax rates

$1B or more taxed at 90%

So, you have been ignoring the commentary from people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and Mark Zuckerberg.

And yeah, I'm fairly sure it does take a lot of hard work to get there, because I've seen what corporate environments are like. While it may not be physically demanding, it is a VERY stressful environment and there are lots of political games that you have to play.

Do you realize that was the point I was trying to make with my post? As if there stress is greater than some one working there azz off and still not able to make ends meet.

Don't forget that 90% of those games consist entirely of who you know (or knows you).

It's really not a 'merit' based system, as people so naively like to think.

That is the 100% truth of the matter.

Do you realize that was the point I was trying to make with my post? As if there stress is greater than some one working there azz off and still not able to make ends meet.

Couldn't tell which way you were going with it, thought you were saying the higher paying jobs were "cushy". Text is a tricky medium at times ;-)

JJ-3340756

These kids inherited their money. I did not see a sign representing someone who worked hard to become one of the 1%.

The Koch Brothers also inherited their money from Daddy. They added to their fortune by buying off Republican politicians. Mitt Romney also inherited his money from Daddy. He added to HIS fortune by becoming a corporate raider and firing American workers. T

Those are the sort of rich people who do not support the OWS people. That's how a lot of them "worked" to make their fortunes.

JJ: Why is it that when you say "creativity," I immediately think you're talking about tax loopholes, offshore accounts and lawyers?

I am a supporter of the Occupy movement. I am part of the 99% but that doesn't mean I am destitude. I don't want hand outs, I don't want free post secondary (there are already enough slackers in university and they're paying, imagine if it were free). I don't want to be told how I am going to recieve my medical care. I don't necessarily care about a "fairer" tax code. I just want my government to be beholden to my vote and your vote, not some rich corporate campaign donor or union donors. I also want to be able to start a business without industry lobbyists asking for monopoly creating regulations. Regulations that preclude any innovative start-ups from competing. Start-ups that may offer better solutions then those "too big to fail" entities. Basically I just want a fairer playing field where we can all prosper.

jj. The tax cuts bush got for the top 1% in the first term CREATED 0 JOBS IN THIS COUNTRY!NOT ONE ! ZERO! NATTA! And as far as deregulating ? Well look how well deregulating the financial industry (n 1999 grahm leachy) wored.Think much!?

I agree. Yeah tax me! You already got your inheritance! If they raise taxes you still get off because you're probably living modestly off the interest. The big chunk of change was already taxed. This story might lend some credibility if there were more (or any) examples of people who got to be the 1% because of their own hard work. Good grief.

Maxx - following the 2003 tax cuts, the unemployment rate fell from 6.3 to 4.4 in 2007. Why do you believe that no jobs were created if the unemployment rate dropped significantly?

well maybe because a new goverment group was created call homeland security with 200k+ jobs or the fact we went to war and sent contractors over to do military work, or it could be from the fact those unemployed went for the low wage jobs helping create the current issues of teens with no job experince or it also could be due to the fact that lots of them got part time jobs and fianlly there was an upswing in people joing the military.

We can all be in the 1% with hard work... oh wait that doesn't make sense.

At 16,000$ per year you are not asked to think.

And you clearly shows that in your comment.

chris-1399438

At 16,000$ per year you are not asked to think.

And you clearly shows that in your comment.

Evidently, you're paid not to think at a much higher salary. Jerk.

He is right, you are a better person and your points are valid if you make more money. Paris Hilton is worth more than Steven Hawking is, so I think we need to look to her for guidance on the mysteries of the universe.

zkysr - I haven't heard Hilton's remarks regarding the universe..... however, I might be inclined to take her advice regarding perfume over Hawking's.

Paris Hilton would be nothing without her heritage. What's your point ?

@chris-1399438

"Paris Hilton would be nothing without her heritage. What's your point ?"

That your personal attack is snide.

Adrift, what is considered 'their fair share'? What net percentage of their income should the government be allowed to tax them at? What percentage of total income taxes should be paid by the upper 1%?

I agree that everyone should be taxed fairly, just wondering what people who keep using the term 'Fair' think that actually is.

Well, I think if you make over 2mil a year 50% sounds fair. 1% at 10,000 a year up to 50% at 2mil a year. That sounds fair to me. If you find it hard to live on a mil$ a year then you are completely out of touch with normal people and are definitely part of the problem.

yea great idea.... there goes all incentive to work. we become a society of doing just enough instead of going the extra mile. you must be looking for a handout... here's a mirror see if you can figure out where the problem lies.

Where did the incentive to work go? What makes you people think someone is happy living on welfare? With the exception of some single mother baby factories out there, most people on welfare hate being on it and would love nothing better than to get a goodpaying job. Notice I said "good paying". If you receive 1000$ a month in welfare you are not going to take a job flipping burgers for 500-600$ a month just to lose any government benefits and end up even poorer than before. You can look down on a person in that position all you want but until your kids have been hungry, you don't know what you are talking about.

So, livinginthewoods, it's okay to be too proud to flip burgers, but not okay to be too proud to live off welfare instead? Please explain.

livinginthewoods said ,implied ,alluded to.., nothing of the sort. summguy!

You're broke or soon will be. Why do you fight the battles of people and corporations who could care less about you?

There are people who work for these corporations. They are the first who would be affected.

wow you sound so greedy and heartless, you rather hoard (or spend lavishly on yourself) your money than to do good things with it. THAT is what is wrong with society today.

wuzzaflyboy

Tax you..fine. Just leave me the h*** alone. I worked my a** off for my far less than 1% and I not interested in having it redistributed, except as I CHOOSE..to my family and the causes that I SUPPORT.

Your taxes allow you to live in a relatively safe and developed country. If you dont want to pay taxes for that luxury - move to Mexico and enjoy.

It not about your wealth redistributed, but have you pay what you really should be paying

No, it's totally about redistribution of wealth. The rich have it and the 0.99% flea baggers want it.

What is it about the conservatives who usually make nothing more than a middle-class wage that think that increasing taxes on the rich means they'll be affected.

Yeah, you do make way less than the 1%. You're the working poor, you'll probably ALWAYS be poor. They're not talking about you. Quit pretending you're some upwardly mobile entrepreneur.

LULZ

You deserve everything you have worked so hard to get and I applaud you for that, America needs entrepreneurs. However; that doesn't exempt you from paying your fair share. You should be paying the same tax rate as the lowliest worker in your employ and the same as the 1% of tax paying Americans, no more no less.

It's nice that the Trust Fund chaps want to give more so just do it guys and gals and leave the rest of us alone! 53% pay NO ifederal income taxes.The federal government throws away money like a sailor on shore leave!

And I worked my way up from the bottom without gov"t assistence to become successful so you self absorbed"where is my cushy job" types can rant all you want but my solution is to give you a job in the Military so you can get a dose of real llife and an education like I did in Nam

You sir are my HERO!! Thanks for your service! I'm not rich but I make a good living, I worked my way up from unloading trucks to the position I earned today. Most of the people in this country pay no Federal income tax, but they do pay sales taxes. Lets end this bickering and just put into place a flat tax. Both parties are bad because they are filled to the brim with crooks. It's time we stop looking at politicians and start looking at Leaders. I'm supporting Herman Cain. He is the closest thing to "us" the people of this still great country. I've been to Europe if the 99% could spend a couple of weeks there , they would kiss the ground when they got back home. Do we have problems with corp. greed? sure do look at Obamas friend at GE , they pay no taxes. I'm sure Bush had some that did not either. Hey everybody they want us divided, Dems and GOP thats how they control you. "A house divided can not stand" You are being ruled. Lets unite, lets FORCE change at the ballot box the GOP does not want Cain they are pushing Romney, we can't afford 4 more years of Obama. Get behind Cain, I believe in this man.

wuzzaflyboy, How many accountants or attorney's do you employ to search for loopholes? Me, I can't afford one.

wuzzaflyboy, if what you say is TRUE, then the ONLY thing you must worry about is what the GOP-baggers are PUSHING: A FLAT tax or a 9-9-9 plan which would PUNISH YOU by increasing YOUR TAXES. Pull your head out and STOP ROOTING FOR YOUR ENEMIES.

Did I read your comment right?

F you. Pay the same percentage as the other people who work. You think because you have more money than others, that means other people don't "work their a**es off?"

There a lot of middle class that worked their a** off and they are being taxed more then you wuzzaflyboy. They can't get healthcare for pre-existing conditions. You are despicable. If this country continues on the path of the hell with the middle class. There is as chance of an uprising in this country. I don't think they will torch the low rent district. They know where the gated communities are. I hope not!

It's nice that the Trust Fund chaps want to give more so just do it guys and gals and leave the rest of us alone! 53% pay NO ifederal income taxes.The federal government throws away money like a sailor on shore leave!

And I worked my way up from the bottom without gov"t assistence to become successful so you self absorbed"where is my cushy job" types can rant all you want but my solution is to give you a job in the Military so you can get a dose of real llife and an education like I did in Nam

I applaud you for your service and your hard work. But to spread around lies about how 53% do not pay federal income taxes is not helping. From the latest records I can find, it is more like 38%. Of course, this says nothing of the income of the individual. Because of loopholes, some of this 38% could be very well off. Also, those who do not pay income tax still pay other federal taxes, such as those on gasoline and payroll taxes. Every time I see someone post about a certain percentage not paying federal income taxes, it is higher than the last time. In just the last week I've seen 40%, 48%, 50%, and now your 53%. PLEASE stop spreading propaganda! You are not helping "your side" by spreading false rumors that can easily be disproved by facts.

There are people who work for these corporations.

Yes, they're called "Chinese" and "Indians."

Maybe I'm off the mark here, but I feel like @wuzza was saying exactly what the Occupy Wall Street protesters are saying....Tax YOU, not ME because I work hard but am not in the 1%. So since I am not in the 1%, I want to be able to do what I want with my money. All of you who are all over @wuzza but are on the side of the Occupy movement are hypocritical.

If people were TRULY interested in an 'Everyone pays their fair share' system, the they would be for everyone having to have some skin in the game and pay the same percentage (excluding thoe below the poverty line of course). But that's not what people commenting here seem to want. They want to pay less percentage...which they already do, becase they think the rich owe them something. And they think that's "their fair share" when in fact...it is far more than their fair share. "Fair Share" is everyone pays the same part of their income pie to taxes....But I've seen very few here advocating for that. Again, hypocrisy.

It seems the height of irony to be paying NO federal income tax (47% of the country) and be protesting, calling for the other 53% to be paying MORE taxes. Look in the mirror...We should ALL be doing our part...we should ALL have the same skin in the game in relation to income. Even if the protests are limited to the top 1%, those top 1% are paying the lions share for the infrastructure, schools, etc....that the other 99% use....yet, it's not good enough. When is enough, enough...and when do we stop moving the line of what is considered "rich"? I would bet for most of you...that line will be at the very least, just a tad more than YOU make...and as you make more, you continue to move that line....because it's not your problem...you couldn't possibly afford to pay more...but that guy who makes 10k more than you can..until you are making that 10k more....and then it's the guy making 50k more than you....and we go on and on until all we have to villify are those making millions...until, of course, you use innovation, risk your savings and start a business and become on those making a million dollars....and THEN it's the guy making a BILLION dollars that's to wealthy for his own good....

Some of you here commenting strike me as the kind of person who goes to a pot luck dinner and brings nothing, but complains that Nancy over there only brought one tray of cookies and not two....Boy...that Nancy...she must be greedy. Yeah...but that can't be right...because THAT would be ridiculous, huh?

Thats the thing, its not even about taxing you more. Its about TAXING THE TOP 1% who pay on average 15% OF THEIR INCOME more!!!!!

You get it, but there are so many ignorant, FOX beaten, dumba$$es who dont!

This BLATANT bullsh!t that the top pay 34% + is a LIE!!!

The majority of the top %'s income IS NOT taxed at 34%. NO payroll tax above 102k, and NO tax above 15% on capital gains...yet they dont seem to GET IT!!!! THEY DONT ACTUALLY PAY 34%!!!!!

If you want to give more do it, DONATE TO A CHARITY - IMPROVE THE WORLD!!! Why do you support taking money from someone who has earned it? You can talk about people inheriting money all you want, fine their parents earned it. I'm saving so my son doesn't have to pay for college out of his pocket like I did. I paid for my college, I lived in a crappy apartment, I paid my dues. If I can make it better for my kids why shouldn't I? If you want to take 4% and donate it then DO IT!!! If you donate to a charity then you know your money is going to help a specific cause, if its taxed guess what, YOU HAVE NO SAY!!!

Do you really believe the government is efficient enough to spend the taxes their receiving? You hate the war? Taxes go to pay for it. You think there is to much spending on the military? Taxes pay for that too. The government never spends money efficiently, why would you give them more?

Jeremy-588841

The OWS movement is NOT about taxing YOU or people like Upgradedd more!!!

Its about taxing those who DONT pay there fair share now more...GET IT?!?! You CURRENTLY pay more so THEY, the top 1% dont have to!!!

Jeremy, perhaps if everyone paid what they owe, your kid would not have to pay to go to college. I know of many other countries where the state pays for college. Also, the problem is that everyone says "give to charity if you want,but I am saving for this really important thing..." So very little actually gets donated in the grand scheme of things. Perhaps it would be better, if the American people could actually split up their tax percentages to go to certain things. American A thinks that defense is most important to 50% goes to defense. American B, however, thinks research funding is most important, so they apply 50% of their taxes to that. Thus, the American people essentially determine the budget. Just a thought.

I have what I consider to be an equitable solution to those who scream that 50% (or whatever) of the population pays no federal income tax (ignoring the fact that these statistics include some rich individuals as well as poor). How about EVERYONE gets the first $20,000 of their income tax free? Then the rest of their earnings would be taxed at a flat rate. Say any earnings over $20,000 gets taxed at 35%. Then those earning $40,000 would pay a rate of 17.5% (or $7000). And those earning $1,000,000 would get taxed at 28% (or $280,000).

If everyone got their first $20,000 tax free, there couldn't possibly be any complaints that the system isn't fair, could there?

I 100% support closing loopholes across all tax brackets, making the tax code simpler and more broad. As for the "fair share" argument, I often wonder when folks will take a look at the empirical data, rather than repeating what partisans and politicians say. The "rich" have never, as a percentage of federal tax, paid more. This isn't some wingnut opinion, there are raw treasury/CBO figures:

Sure, everyone pays into transfer programs like SSI. But in terms of funding normal functions of government, the "rich" shoulder an ever increasing share.

The federal government is the problem, end the fed.

Ron Paul 2012

BBell,

Of course the rich pay a larger percentage of federal taxes than ever before. They have more money than ever before. That does not mean they pay a higher percentage of their income, however. Big difference!

The problem with the rich is that they tend to hoard money and not put it back into the economy. The rest of us can't afford to do that. Which is why the middle class drive the economy, not the rich.

The same people talking about "ending the Fed" as a solution, are also talking about ending taxation in the States, and withering away the entire non-profit public sector.

What can you expect from REPUBLICAN TEA PARTY, PRO-BIG-BUSINESS ANARCHISTS, posing as "Independents," that pretend to obsessively support parts of their version(s) of the U.S. Constitution, so as to benefit the rich, themselves and their peers, and not everyone else?

Cain's 9-9-9 plan is the most idiotic thing I've heard of. Essentially he wants to create a federal sales tax ON TOP of the state sales tax! I don't know why everyone seems so reluctant to go back to the tax set up we had in the 90's. Things were pretty good then and I don't recall hearing the rich complain about not having enough money...

Brokinarrow,

You need to take a look at the tax codes of Europe. That's what Cain is modeling his tax structure after. Look at Sweden's or Germany's, and you will see amazing similarities.

Here's a real question for you though, do you think businesses just eat it on the taxes they are currently charged? Or do you think they already increase the prices on their goods to cover the taxes they have to pay? I know for a FACT they increase the prices or else they go belly-up.

Does anyone actually believe that if we increase the taxes on corporations, they are just going to go sulk in a corner that they can't make as much money?

They are going to raise the prices of their products, and the consumers will have to pay it. That is the way the world works; CONSUMERS PAY ALL OF THE TAXES ON BUSINESSES! It's a fact of life, and any time you are considering a change to the tax codes, you have to keep this in the forefront of your thinking.

if you think 9-9-9 is similar to Germany's and Sweden's tax code your on crack.... 9-9-9 is just something Cain copied from domino's 5-5-5 deal.

Mire - lol yeah i saw that debate too. FL Acct - Do sweden and germany charge both a state sales tax (or province, whatever its called there) AND a federal sales tax? Also, what works for one country isn't necessarily going to work here.

I do see your point on the corporations tax though. maybe if corporations weren't allowed to spend millions on "lobbying" congress they could save even more and therefore afford to pay slightly higher taxes without turning around and gouging the customer.

I wonder why no conservatives have responded to your post. Could it be that they are only interested in arguing and complaining? Since they would never say a negativeword about the "patron saint of trikledown lies" they just choose to ignore it. Typical conservatives, if they cannot yell "socialist!" at your position they just ignore it.

Here's a conservative response.

What were the tax rates under Reagan? I think it was 28% capital gains tax and 38.5% highest tax rate. Sounds fine with me.

Does everyone get the rates as they were under Reagan? No more exclusion from income tax for sale of your home (except for one time after 55). No more earned income tax credit. Drop most of the deductions for education. Reduced personal exemptions and deductions for children. Increased payroll taxes for individuals.

I'm in ... how about you?

Read this a couple times and it made absolutely no sense. Please try harder next time.

what didn't make sense maybe I could explain a bit better?

The entire thing doesn't make sense. Please try again.

What kooshton is, I believe, trying to tell you is that your perspective or opinion of what this article is presenting doesn't seem to mesh too well with what others seem to see very easily. And that your perspective seems to be viewed through the lens of someone that doesn't comprehend devastating economic hardship.

@Moped: thank you for clarifying absolutely nothing. I may or may not agree with you or the OP, but someone is going to have to do better.

GirDirt

So what is the messege here, because all I can read is that a few rich "liberals" are making a point, that they have it better off than others, and want to help the ones they identify themselves with?

So liberals identify with poor people? Holy incoherent batman!

Well i'm unemployed and have a disabling hadicap I should be the one bitching, but i've grabbed myself by the bootstraps and pulled myself up, and contunue to fight the fight worth fighting by sending out tons and tons of applications and looking for internships, not just giving up and sitting on my ass and blaming others for mishaps that could of been in our out of my control.

when did liberal become about poor or rich? I'm saying it's mostly liberals at these protests, as the tea partists are more likely to go along with the conservative pov.

@GirDirt You're fighting on behalf of people who could care less about you. That's truth. Accept it or not. I wish you well.

kooshton - um... only thing i think GirDirt is fighting for currently is a JOB....

????????? english your 3rd langueage?

I bet they are broke!!! Wheres the proof ya know! More Liberal BS, to stir the pot.

"These self-declared "rich kids" feel perfectly fine giving away their PARENTS hard earned money that their parents spent an entire life-time EARNING through hard work and sacrifice. They would not think this way if they had to earn the money for themselves."

Wow. I didn't know manipulating and rigging the system was work. But it's also good to know that your perspective on high income earnings justifies selfishness.

actually if you read the article there are also entrepreneurs, just because they weren't interviewed for this specific article doesn't mean they aren't there.

westandwiththe99percent.tumblr (.com)

Well said, Ashlee. Just becaue these kids were honest about where there money started from doesn't mean they aren't hard workers who stand to lose their fortunes if don't continue to do so. Trying to discredit their opinions because they inherited the money is weak. It's still their money they're willing to have taxed, not their parent's. These are only a few interviewed and there will be more.

MR MIKE-544932

I bet they are broke!!! Wheres the proof ya know! More Liberal BS, to stir the pot.

I didnt realize they had to present their W-2's for credibility. Of course its BS - it disagrees with your fringe, hard line political philosophy.

You didnt read the article about who makes up this group of "rich kids", did you? *smh* Read what is written, not all are trust fund kids.

America, the place where we all want to look like the hero, but no one wants to personally pay the price. The land where we(as individuals and as a whole) help our neighbors, but only if it is in our best political, social and financial interest.

Divided we fall.

Facts and Truth... I was under the impression that the US was a democracy. I was also under the impression that in a democracy majority rules. If that is indeed the case than how can it follow that what 99% of the population wants and is calling for is tyranny? Sounds like you and the Beckies have been drinking the "they will kill you for what you have" koolaid for wayyyyy too long now.

The US is a constitutional republic, not a strict democracy. What is the difference?

Rights!

In a strict democracy, the majority rules. There are no limitations on what the majority can do, and minorities are constantly trampled by the majority. Remember, in this sense, minority can be attributed to any characteristic, not just race. Wealth, religion, lifestyle, creed, political affiliation, age, health, whatever.

In this case, it seems what the OWS group wants is to do is strip certain people of their rights as guaranteed by the 14th amendment of the constitution. Fortunately, even if they were 99% (which you can clearly tell from just these comments that they are not) or just the simple majority, they can't legally without repealing the 14th amendment.

Amazing that the framers of our government could understand that mob rule isn't what's best?

I didnt realize they had to present their W-2's for credibility.

And also their long form birth certificates.

Facts and truth, well you wouldn`t know the truth if it hit you in the *ss. all you rightwingers keep saying is we want to take the poor little rich guys money that he worked so hard for. thats just simply not true, thats just a fox news and the other paid propagandest who always create a falsehood of fear and uncertainty for no other reason then to further their agenda. and as you can see from the last election it works, but i can tell you that if the people that voted for the republicans with their jobs,jobs, jobs, BS lies and had known what their real agenda was. that their " republican governors"were going to take away collective bargining, create a deficit to give tax breaks to the rich, defund our schools, do away with SS MC MC and any regulation that gets in their way, fight any reform, fillabuster everything, down grade our countrys credit thru lies and fear, defund any office with power to watch over wallstreet, banking, insurance, and the healthcare industry, refuse to fund unemployment insurance who are victims thru no fault of their own without bush taxcuts, want to cut everything except defence, refuse to raise any taxs on the rich blame it all on Obama and make the poor and the elderly pay for it, and to top it all they made it where they can hide unlimited election money thru PACS, and now their are supressing the democratic vote thru legislation in republican controled states. and if any of us in the 99% no matter what your party is, need to stay focused on whats best for all of us and country and not let a few with money and power dictate who gets the best education and jobs and e good life and who gets kicked to the curb. and as i`ve said a 1000 times before any politican that signs a document to never raise taxes will run this country in the ground and never listen to what the people want or do whats best for the country period. there for should not be allowed to serve in any legiislative goverment "city state or federal" 

Alboyano: I appreciate your classic Liberal non-factual, untruths. Your indoctrinators have trained you well. It is had to tell based on your writing if you are an American or not. Your response is little more than parroting what generations of Socialists and entitlement seekers have said for over a hundred years. Please, at least get some new material.

Your observations are silly. I am neither a right winger (as you call it) nor a Republican (you prove in your writing you don't know what that means).

You clearly demonstrate your ignorance of macro and micro economics, which is surpassed easily by your lack of understanding of how the American form of Capitalism functions.

Here's the real danger: ignorant, unqualified, poorly educated people like you get to vote. You couldn't pass an American Constitution Test if your life depended on it.

Your absurd assertion is that the "rich" should pay all the taxes and you and your kind should pay none. You don't know the numbers. You simply and mindlessly choose class warfare. What percentage of the Federal Government's Revenues SHOULD you and your kind pay?

Give us all here, on this site, a real number that you and your kind should pay in taxes. Do you have the backbone to do that, Al-boy?

You lack any credentials for speaking out intelligently on this matter. Are you being paid to be a mouth piece for the OWS movement or are you a volunteer?

As far as politics go, you don't know jack about how legislation and laws are made in this country. Otherwise, you and the squatters around this country (PSSST - camping out is not "occupying". Learn the English language sometime soon.) are changing nothing except your Facebook updates.

You don't know the numbers. You don't know the processes. You don't understand economics. You ignore the facts. Basically, you are unqualified to be anything BUT a Liberal Parrot who needs hand-outs from the government. Good luck with that.

I can name name MANY of 1% (that you've heard of) that are on record as in agreement. How are you going to respond to those people?

My response would be the same as my comment above. Give your hard or your parents hard earned money to the Government. No if I was the 1% I think that I could spend it much more wisely than any Govt. If I felt I needed to give it away, hummm let me think I have a few people who helped me years ago, I wouldnt mind helping them now. Lets tax the rich more cause they busted there butt to get there!! I am not rich at all, but I work hard and went from poor to middle class by working hard and not taking handouts..

If you're middle class, WHY DO YOU CARE?!?! This does NOT affect you! You will never be rich! It's just fascinating to witness people like you fight for people and corporations who don't give a flying f**k about you!

It's not about the money. It's about the system!

I never said I cared..... Your simply not comprehending my words. I'm pretty sure that the intellignet thing to do would not give money to a disfunctional Govt. If I feel like Im not paying my fair share I'd do something productive with the revenue that Ive aquired, rather than throw it away! Enough said about that! Glad my professor taught me a little bit in college about finances...