Page 56 of 136 FirstFirst ... 646545556575866106 ... LastLast
Results 551 to 560 of 1355

Thread: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

  1. #551
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    I hope you know that was being a sarcastic knowledge. And i was using some of the knowledge and process of thought to conclusion that the some of the right uses.
    Oh, okay then.

    Sarcastic knowledge, huh? That's ranks right up their with "economic justice".

  2. #552
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,263

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post

    You just used rhetoric to try to make a point

    "Why would you give this empty suit 4 more years?"
    I used rhetoric supported by data and actual results which seem to be ignored by those still supporting Obama. His record speaks for itself and is a disaster doing exactly what he wanted, create as much dependence as possible.

  3. #553
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,263

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Well its common knowledge that back in the 40's-70's the income tax was higher.
    And going off the knowledge that has been demonstrated here that we must of lived in a Marxist country speaking of the grave evil of social justice..
    Year $10,001 $20,001 $60,001 $100,001 $250,001
    1940 14% 28% 51% 62% 68%
    1942 38% 55% 75% 85% 88%
    1944 41% 59% 81% 92% 94%
    1946 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%
    1948 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%
    1950 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%
    1952 42% 62% 80% 90% 92%
    1954 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%
    1956 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%
    1958 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%
    1960 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%
    1962 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%
    1964 23% 34% 56% 66% 76%
    1966 - 1976 22% 32% 53% 62% 70%
    1980 18% 24% 54% 59% 70%

    The Tax Foundation - U.S. Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History, 1913-2011 (Nominal and Inflation-Adjusted Brackets).
    Tax rates don't matter, what is collected does.

  4. #554
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I always find it funny you keep posting a list of demands put forward by ...

    1) A defunct and no longer functioning committee of the New York General Council
    2) continued on by a group (Coupmedia)

    ... and while putting them forward you always cherry pick which ones you want to put. For example, I notice you don't ever put this demand which is currently the highest vote getter in regards to what demands OWS should have:
    Which has exactly nothing to do with the validity of the proposed demands I listed.

    If you had been following the thread, you would have seen I was responding to the question how can we bring about economic injustice. The best means of reaching that goal that I have seen are the 8 demands for Congress proposed by the OWS working group.



    Odd, I don't EVER see you pointing out that a TRUTHER styled demand is the highest vote getter for all the OWS Demands.
    That's because I think that proposal is futile.


    But wait, I thought you said they were just about pushing the public conversation about wealth disparity?
    Economic justice.

    Or how about the #3 vote getter, yet another clear example of OWS having a solid and direct message focused on improving the public discourse about the disparity of wealth and cooperation of the Government and Big Business.
    Would you like for me to post their Mission Statement for you?



    Oh wait, nope...got that wrong, its another thing that has absolutely 0 to do with that.
    Citizens United is one of the biggest thrusts of the class war waged on the 99%.

    So what about the ridiculous claims by conservatives that the OWS people are just a bunch of free loaders demanding free stuff? I mean, that's ridiculous right? That's just conservative propoganda. This is about wealth disparity, not people just saying "Gimme stuff right"....right?
    Right.

    Well, not exactly if we go by the votes being gathered on the list of demands that Catawba keeps pointing to. The 10th highest vote getter for the demands "Free education kindergarden through College".
    For the record, I have never once pointed to this, but now that you ask, that would make us so much more competitive in the future.


    Catawba keeps posting about revolving door legislation and revamping the security and exchange commission. But know what ranks higher than both of them based on voting? Repealing capital punishment, because that's TOTALLY about the wealth disparity in this country.
    I have supported the 8 proposed Demands for Congress, nothing else, but you seem to be enjoying your strawman.

    Catawba's continual posting of the "demands" OWS makes is no more valid list of demands representing the movement than if I posted up a list of demands from some random OWS member from some other message board. Even the voting by the one OWS site that actually has attempted to run with the ball that the NYGA dropped doesn't back up the rhetoric Catawba continually tries to push. Hell, their number one issue is ****ing 9/11 truth. Say what you want about the Tea Party, but when they voted for their actual official "demands" in the Contract from America I don't remember a birther related demand being the #1 vote getter.
    Again, if you had been following the thread you would have seen I was responding to a question of what was the best way to address our economic injustice. The best means of reaching that goal that I have seen are the 8 demands for Congress proposed by the OWS working group.

    Now you may resume with your strawman construction.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  5. #555
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Tax rates don't matter, what is collected does.
    True. It just so happens that higher tax rates result in higher collections and v.v.

  6. #556
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    That hardly supports your claim. And what is your definition of "The far right"?
    It hardly gets further right than the example I provided. Those that define the progressive tax rates for the rich under Republican presidents Eisenhower, Nixon and Ford as Marxist.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  7. #557
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,263

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    True. It just so happens that higher tax rates result in higher collections and v.v.
    Really? why did tax revenue go up after the Reagan tax cuts and after the Bush tax cuts were fully implemented? Why did Clinton raise taxes and still add 1.55 trillion to the debt? You see, Adam, spending is the problem, not tax revenue

  8. #558
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,968

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Which has exactly nothing to do with the validity of the proposed demands I listed.
    About their individual validity? Nothing. About them in any way shape or form representing the OWS movement? A fair bit.

    That's because I think that proposal is futile.
    Does not change the fact that it's just as serious a proposal of a "demand" as any of the ones you've listed, and has actually recieved more votes than any of the ones you've listed.

    Would you like for me to post their Mission Statement for you?
    Sure, it'll be interesting to see where free college, trutherism, and the Patriot Act and Capital Punishment fit in.

    Citizens United is one of the biggest thrusts of the class war waged on the 99%.
    And yet this movement supposedly focused on "economic justice" and raising the public discourse about wealth disparity seemed to find repealing the patriot act and 9/11 truth more important to vote for.

    I have supported the 8 proposed Demands for Congress, nothing else, but you seem to be enjoying your strawman.
    Yes, you've supported that while failing to acknowledge there are far more than 8 proposed demands being voted for and that the 8 you list aren't even the top vote getters. At best they're the ones put forward by a now defunct and no longer supportered working group.

  9. #559
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,263

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    It hardly gets further right than the example I provided. Those that define the progressive tax rates for the rich under Republican presidents Eisenhower, Nixon and Ford as Marxist.
    I don't think you have a clue as to what you are proposing. Seems you have no problem with the Federal Govt. demanding more revenue from you so they can spend it where they want and deem necessary vs. you keeping more of what you earn and designating it to where you choose. Doesn't make a lot of sense to most people to have that kind of attitude. You want to soak the people who are paying the most in taxes now while letting the 47% of income earning families not pay any FIT. That is why you have little credibility.

  10. #560
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    True. It just so happens that higher tax rates result in higher collections and v.v.

    *Buuuuuuuuzzzzzzz* Wrong! Please read this:

    There is a distinct pattern throughout American history: When tax rates are reduced, the economy's growth rate improves and living standards increase. Good tax policy has a number of interesting side effects. For instance, history tells us that tax revenues grow and "rich" taxpayers pay more tax when marginal tax rates are slashed. This means lower income citizens bear a lower share of the tax burden - a consequence that should lead class-warfare politicians to support lower tax rates.

    Conversely, periods of higher tax rates are associated with sub par economic performance and stagnant tax revenues. In other words, when politicians attempt to "soak the rich," the rest of us take a bath. Examining the three major United States episodes of tax rate reductions can prove useful lessons.

    1) Lower tax rates do not mean less tax revenue.
    The tax cuts of the 1920s

    Tax rates were slashed dramatically during the 1920s, dropping from over 70 percent to less than 25 percent. What happened? Personal income tax revenues increased substantially during the 1920s, despite the reduction in rates. Revenues rose from $719 million in 1921 to $1164 million in 1928, an increase of more than 61 percent.

    According to then-Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon:

    The history of taxation shows that taxes which are inherently excessive are not paid. The high rates inevitably put pressure upon the taxpayer to withdraw his capital from productive business and invest it in tax-exempt securities or to find other lawful methods of avoiding the realization of taxable income. The result is that the sources of taxation are drying up; wealth is failing to carry its share of the tax burden; and capital is being diverted into channels which yield neither revenue to the Government nor profit to the people.
    The Kennedy tax cuts

    President Hoover dramatically increased tax rates in the 1930s and President Roosevelt compounded the damage by pushing marginal tax rates to more than 90 percent. Recognizing that high tax rates were hindering the economy, President Kennedy proposed across-the-board tax rate reductions that reduced the top tax rate from more than 90 percent down to 70 percent. What happened? Tax revenues climbed from $94 billion in 1961 to $153 billion in 1968, an increase of 62 percent (33 percent after adjusting for inflation).

    According to President John F. Kennedy:

    Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now.
    The Reagan tax cuts

    Thanks to "bracket creep," the inflation of the 1970s pushed millions of taxpayers into higher tax brackets even though their inflation-adjusted incomes were not rising. To help offset this tax increase and also to improve incentives to work, save, and invest, President Reagan proposed sweeping tax rate reductions during the 1980s. What happened? Total tax revenues climbed by 99.4 percent during the 1980s, and the results are even more impressive when looking at what happened to personal income tax revenues. Once the economy received an unambiguous tax cut in January 1983, income tax revenues climbed dramatically, increasing by more than 54 percent by 1989 (28 percent after adjusting for inflation).

    Historic Tax Cuts and Economic Growth | Lessons of Lower Tax Rates
    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •