Yes we do. But allying ourselves with this conglomeration of nitwits? Our politicians are just as responsible and almost as unaccountable. They don't listen.
Occupy Wall Street Fail
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
Yes we do. But allying ourselves with this conglomeration of nitwits? Our politicians are just as responsible and almost as unaccountable. They don't listen.
You don't have a clue what you are talking about, and the above confirms it. The only derision I have is for people who are robber barons and their apologists. one of my neighbors is one of the wealthiest men in Canada, and he's not only nice, polite, and helpful, but actively works to create employment, while drawing a modest salary.
Others, like you, believe that if you can suck the board into allowing you to drive your company bankrupt, you deserve a multimillion dollar salary, just because you can get away with it.
Why would we have a say in what private enterprise does in a real democracy? How would the people be able to vote on what GM does, or what Sparky's Residential Electric (employing 4 electricians) does?
There is plenty of competition and where are the monopolies?
Oh BS... you just dumbed yourself down on that one.
Yup, although I do not believe you came up with that by yourself. That was one of the MANY things that could have been done with the bail out money.
Ok... so pay off all the foreclosures. Free Houses for the ones that got themselves into debt! And what about the ones (like me) who acted responsibly and bought within their means and never missed a payment? Shouldn't we have our houses paid off? Why should those that didn't read the fine print or did not plan get freebies?
One of the wealthiest men in Canada only draws a modest salary?
How modest... about? Just a guess.
How modest? Don't know for sure, but my understanding is that his salary is less than $1,000,000 per year. But then his house is owned by the corp, as is pretty much everything else, and it's a family owned conglomerate, so they don't publish numbers.
The profits are plowed back into the businesses. Some of which you like patronize.
Capitalism is evil until, well...
The 10 Richest Celebrities Supporting Occupy Wall Street
The 10 Richest Celebrities Supporting Occupy Wall Street | Celebrity Net Worth
The 10 Richest Celebrities Supporting Occupy Wall Street
The 10 Richest Celebrities Supporting Occupy Wall Street | Celebrity Net Worth
Hot off the Press...
$500,000 in pensions: 'Insane' even for Illinois? - US news - Life - msnbc.com
... is a $500K a year pension enough? And you just got finished talking about the lack of corruption in civile servants and if we only paid them a liveable salary.
I would bet you that these folks on Occupy Wall St. would want a cut of what he (or as you say his family/corporation) has. It does not matter how much good he does or how good he is... he's got a (let's say) $900K salary and I assure you they would want a equitable cut.
Two of the country's biggest employers (Wal-Mart and McD's) are constantly under assault by the Occupy Wall St. types.
You missed the point. Monopolies and Oligopolies used to be illegal. Now they are not so much anymore. And if you dig into the cross-linking lines of ownership, you'll find it's the same relatively small group owning everything, including firms that are supposed to be "competing".
The way it works is, you own controlling interest in two firms and set them against each other under an ordinance of "maximizing profit". Everyone gets stressed and works more for less pay while the owner of both gets profits one way or the other, regardless of who wins or looses. Then he uses those profits to buy up more in order to increase his monopoly. The result is a tyranny operating under the guise of "free market", and tyrannies are exactly what Americans had revolted against in the first place. They turned into fertile ground for exactly that which they split from England to get away from. So ironic.
You think so, eh? You mean it would never occur to you to do that if you were one of the Wall Streeters? Crumb, it's one of the first things I would try to make protesters look bad. Just salt them with some goons.
Actually, I did. It's not that complicated. Doesn't take anything more than elementary-grade arithmetic to figure out.
Said attitude being why it wasn't handled that way, so instead give the trillions to those who caused the debacle in the first place. Somehow that was deemed more acceptable. Go figure.
But, since you're in a mood/state-of-mind for personal accountability/responsibility etc., how about this:
What percentage of your taxes do you think goes to pay interest on government debt?
Now, what if you were able to pay off your share of the national debt, such that next year your taxes get reduced by the interest that is not accruing from your share of the debt?
Suppose 30% of government revenue goes to pay interest on the national debt. If you can pay off your share of it, then your taxes should go down by 30%, right?
Give people the option to over-pay their taxes, in order to reduce taxes in the future, by reducing their share of the principal upon which interest is accruing.
Now... who do you think would object to that idea?
The lenders perhaps? I bet they would rather see a national debt stay in place, so they can keep juicing taxpayers year after year.
Dole Foods?
Revenue of 6.8 BILLION in 2010 and billionaire David Murdock is 140 in the Forbes 400 and took a bankrupt food company and made it into DOLE Food Company. Employs 40K workers.
Setting market prices is common. Oil, seafood, produce, the list goes on. Heck it is illegal to sell gas cheaper than the market price here in Massachusetts.
I know so. There are so many whackos in this movement there is no reason to send in what you call goons. Why should they?
Or you could have simply read it in an article as I did.
I've said all along they NEVER should have been given the loans. NEVER. But that does not exonerate the person that got the loan without reading the fine print and taking everything into account. Including that juicy introductory rate that was going to shoot up after so many years.
Well that is no secret. Those that lend money what a return... they want some interest. I bought a car last year and I put a whole bunch of cash down. My check was cut and I was at the dealership ready to finalize and the lender didn't want so much cash as they wanted the extra interest. I simply said the check was cut and I am not cutting another. Pizzed they were.
I was joking with you a bit. Who knows Petros. Do they? I wouldn't doubt it. All successful businesses twist arms to get tax breaks. If they don't get them they simply threaten to or take their business elsewhere. Someone is going to give them the tax breaks.
Warren Buffet May Owe A Billion Dollars In Back Taxes
Using only publicly-available documents, a certified public accountant (CPA) detailed Berkshire Hathaway’s tax problems to ALG researcher Richard McCarty. Now, the American people have a better idea of how much in back taxes the company could owe Uncle Sam.
According to page 56 of the company report, “At December 31, 2010… net unrecognized tax benefits were $1,005 million”, or about $1 billion. McCarty explained, “Unrecognized tax benefits represent the company’s potential future obligation to the IRS and other taxing authorities. They have to be recorded in the company’s financial statements.”
He added, “The notation means that Berkshire Hathaway’s own auditors have probably said that $1 billion is more likely than not owed to the government.”
...
Warren Buffet May Owe A Billion Dollars In Back Taxes - HUMAN EVENTS
NBC Gives Roseanne ‘Behead-the-Rich’ Barr New Sitcom About Mobile Home Life
Roseanne Barr's Comeback Comedy 'Downwardly Mobile' Lands at NBC - The Hollywood Reporter
Roseanne Barr: Rich Should Be Beheaded If They Don’t Give Up Wealth
Roseanne Behead Wealthy | Roseanne Barr Guillotine | Video | Mediaite
Using only publicly-available documents, a certified public accountant (CPA) detailed Berkshire Hathaway’s tax problems to ALG researcher Richard McCarty. Now, the American people have a better idea of how much in back taxes the company could owe Uncle Sam.
According to page 56 of the company report, “At December 31, 2010… net unrecognized tax benefits were $1,005 million”, or about $1 billion. McCarty explained, “Unrecognized tax benefits represent the company’s potential future obligation to the IRS and other taxing authorities. They have to be recorded in the company’s financial statements.”
He added, “The notation means that Berkshire Hathaway’s own auditors have probably said that $1 billion is more likely than not owed to the government.”
...
Warren Buffet May Owe A Billion Dollars In Back Taxes - HUMAN EVENTS
NBC Gives Roseanne ‘Behead-the-Rich’ Barr New Sitcom About Mobile Home Life
Roseanne Barr's Comeback Comedy 'Downwardly Mobile' Lands at NBC - The Hollywood Reporter
Roseanne Barr: Rich Should Be Beheaded If They Don’t Give Up Wealth
Roseanne Behead Wealthy | Roseanne Barr Guillotine | Video | Mediaite
Well I didn't. It occurred to me while I was walking down the street, whereupon I did some quick mental calculations. When I got home I confirmed it by doing some arithmetic, with a pencil, on paper, no calculator.
In the years just before GM got a bailout, the company was so MBA'd that they were selling cars at cost, with 100% of their profit coming from interest on the financing.
Alec Baldwin: 'Occupy Wall Street' Hypocrite
Morgan Stanley, the legendary Wall Street investment banking company founded by J.P. Morgan that took $10 billion in federal bailout funds back in 2008 during the financial crisis, is a "Corporate Partner" providing funding to the Carol Baldwin Breast Cancer Research Fund. Named for and listing as chairwoman actor Alec Baldwin's breast cancer survivor mother.
With Alec Baldwin himself serving on the Fund's "Advisory Board."
Merrill Lynch, owned by the Bank of America, is also a "Corporate Partner" with the Baldwins, the company famously teetering on the edge in the 2008 crisis and being purchased by BOA. It was eventually revealed that Merrill Lynch used some $3.6 billion to pay out in "bonuses" -- approximately a third of the amount received in federal TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program).
Morgan Stanley, the legendary Wall Street investment banking company founded by J.P. Morgan that took $10 billion in federal bailout funds back in 2008 during the financial crisis, is a "Corporate Partner" providing funding to the Carol Baldwin Breast Cancer Research Fund. Named for and listing as chairwoman actor Alec Baldwin's breast cancer survivor mother.
With Alec Baldwin himself serving on the Fund's "Advisory Board."
Merrill Lynch, owned by the Bank of America, is also a "Corporate Partner" with the Baldwins, the company famously teetering on the edge in the 2008 crisis and being purchased by BOA. It was eventually revealed that Merrill Lynch used some $3.6 billion to pay out in "bonuses" -- approximately a third of the amount received in federal TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program).
.. And if that company operates within the bounds of the law, it has every right to be run as they, themselves see fit... It is the right of the shareholders to vote in a BOD and assign the leadership on the basis of their conscious. It is not the right of some snot-nosed college student that is mad at anyone that has more than them to control the company.
So since they are all above table they'd have no qualms about cracking open their books to public scrutiny to ensure no foul play?
Ever heard of the IRS?
It's a teensy tiny little fringe org in the US gvt... You're probably not familiar
Nope.
How about the SEC?
No, no wait up a sec.. Lemme guess, they're all corrupt and/or incompetent.
How about the SEC?
No, no wait up a sec.. Lemme guess, they're all corrupt and/or incompetent.