1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Rich: Deal with it and pass me the grey poupon!

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by printdust, Oct 26, 2011.

  1. printdust

    printdust New Member

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/numbers-income-top-one-percent-skyrocketed-over-last-153005722.html

    Shocking news. Shocking.
     
  2. mustangj17

    mustangj17 Active Member

    Shouldn't you be occupying Wall Street?
     
  3. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    That data's four years old.

    I bet the last four years have been even better.
     
  4. Care Bear

    Care Bear Guest

    I recall this exact same conversation occurring on page 4 or 5 of the Wall Street protestors thread. I remember Ragu making some economic points that I actually understood (my fault, not his).
     
  5. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Yeah, something about how there are more pies, and that the 99 percent has been receiving an additional piece in addition to what they were receiving, and should be happy with that while the 1 percent is eating the rest of the pies.
     
  6. Azrael

    Azrael Active Member


    The pop culture reference in the subject line is nearly 25 years old*. Antique performance art? Throwback thread?

    *Unless he's referencing 50 Cent on Beanie Sigel's 'Go Off.'
     
  7. silvercharm

    silvercharm Member

    The Occupy (pick a city) outfit seems fixated on the country's top one percent in wealth, but complete silence on the 49 percent of this country that pay no federal tax.
     
  8. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    And again, if the 1 percent would pay the 49 percent more money to do their jobs instead of shipping them to China, the 49 percent would have money available to pay taxes.
     
  9. Brian

    Brian Well-Known Member

    Louis CK rather succinctly tells us why that is while talking about bank fees. Taxing someone with so little money that it literally makes them worse than broke is not a system we should be aiming for.

    "I had five dollars that I couldn’t have for three days until they charged me another 15. Leaving me with -10. What does that mean? I don’t even have no money any more. I wish I had nothing. But I don’t have it. I don’t have that much. I have not ten. Negative ten. I can’t afford to buy something that doesn’t cost anything. I can only afford to get something that costs you give me ten dollars."
     
  10. Azrael

    Azrael Active Member

    You mean tax the poor?

    Or tax Exxon and GE?
     
  11. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Tax the poor so they have some skin in the game.
     
  12. Azrael

    Azrael Active Member

    Makes more sense just to use them as a renewable source of cheap protein.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page