"Occupy" Protests

^You started TheDoctor when you said that we are defending our wealth or something like that. You started by implying things that aren't there and painting us with a brush designed to make us look like selfish greedy b*****ds. So don't come to me preaching about not attacking individuals. You are a socialist (which for me is not that far from degrading into a communist) and I can very gladly live with it. And you will post your ideas and I will post mine. Deal with it. We disagree.

The T wrote: ^You started TheDoctor when you said that we are defending our wealth or something like that. You started by implying things that aren't there and painting us with a brush designed to make us look like selfish greedy b*****ds. So don't come to me preaching about not attacking individuals. You are a socialist (which for me is not that far from degrading into a communist) and I can very gladly live with it. And you will post your ideas and I will post mine. Deal with it. We disagree.

I implied nothing.  I stated I did not know what the motives for the libertarian viewpoints were.  There are those libertarians who are so on principle (even if I believe they are misguided) and those who are libertarian simply because they don't want the big bad government to come take their wealth.  I did not in any way imply you or others in this thread were one or the other.  If you took that to imply that you were of the latter variety then you might want to revisit my post.  And yes, I would say we disagree quite strongly.  But let's keep it civil.  Doesn't look good for the site to have to S.C.s slinging mud at each other.

The T wrote: I don't agree with your disagreeing.

Ok TheDoctor I can live that.

Wait a minute, wait a minute- I just realized I'm not the wealthy elite of the country because I have not been abusing my power of making businesses sell me anything I want for any price I name.

I think we need to agree that we need to lower corporate taxes now. Our taxes are the highest anywhere in the world and it's keeping this country uncompetitive. Most of those taxes fall on the backs of small to medium sized businesses!

Epignosis wrote: The Doctor wrote: Epignosis wrote: Wait a minute, wait a minute- I just realized I'm not the wealthy elite of the country because I have not been abusing my power of making businesses sell me anything I want for any price I name. You're obviously doing something wrong, Robert.  My comment was to point out that there's often a cry to raise minimum wages, benefits, etc. for workers, but this doesn't do anything.  We've raised minimum wage many times, but people stay poor regardless. One reason for this is that companies are not forced to sell goods and services at a set price.  In other words, companies merely pass on their expenses to customers.  Hence, the cost of living goes up. So people make more money, but their expenses increase too.

Also, ask the supermarkets why they have such high prices.

Epignosis wrote: The Doctor wrote: Epignosis wrote: Wait a minute, wait a minute- I just realized I'm not the wealthy elite of the country because I have not been abusing my power of making businesses sell me anything I want for any price I name. You're obviously doing something wrong, Robert.  My comment was to point out that there's often a cry to raise minimum wages, benefits, etc. for workers, but this doesn't do anything.  We've raised minimum wage many times, but people stay poor regardless. One reason for this is that companies are not forced to sell goods and services at a set price.  In other words, companies merely pass on their expenses to customers.  Hence, the cost of living goes up. So people make more money, but their expenses increase too.

Well, one point that could be made is that we haven't raised the minimum wage in keeping with the cost of living.  We may have raised it several times, but it hasn't been enough.  But then I'm also in favor of maximum wage laws, which would stop companies from raising their prices to pay for their executives outrageous salaries and bonuses. 

It's quite simple actually Robert.  FDR proposed something similar back in the day.  A 100% tax on all wages over what in today's dollar would be approximately $300,000 per year.  Income taxes would not decrease as that money the company saved would either be passed on to other employees who would then pay taxes on it, or it would be passed on to stockholders in the form of dividends (at least a portion) which would also then be taxed.  

The Doctor wrote: It's quite simple actually Robert.  FDR proposed something similar back in the day.  A 100% tax on all wages over what in today's dollar would be approximately $300,000 per year.  Income taxes would not decrease as that money the company saved would either be passed on to other employees who would then pay taxes on it, or it would be passed on to stockholders in the form of dividends (at least a portion) which would also then be taxed.

Do you know how many companies you would ruin through such a measure?  By limiting someone's income, you limit their purchasing power and ability to start fresh businesses.  Other businesses (luxury goods, real estate, etc.) will fall apart, thereby causing people to lose their jobs.

In other words, this idea would be keeping people out of work.  The middle class will have more money, the upper class will have less, sure, but I'd say 30% of your population would be destitute and unable to find work.