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!

Wall Street Protestors

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Boom_70, Oct 7, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    Perhaps we should come up with a millionaries' tax on whether you actually earned the money.

    Founded the company -- 10 percent rate

    Child of founder, but still somewhat competent -- 20 percent

    Not founder, somewhat competent -- 30 percent

    Dope with ass-kissing board and major golden parachute -- 60 percent

    Grandchild of founder, idiot -- 70 percent

    Runs a bank that trades crazy shit they can't even figure out and makes up for it by charging retail customers fees for breathing in a branch -- 80 percent

    Paris Hilton -- 99 percent
     
  2. I Should Coco

    I Should Coco Well-Known Member

    I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself, but when there's an election one year from now, what choices will these Wall Street protesters have on the ballot?

    The Republican candidate, who will no doubt be heavily backed by Wall Street.

    And Barack Obama, who will be heavily backed by Wall Street.

    Anyone else see the problem here?
     
  3. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    A plutocracy? Nobody appointed Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg, Jeff Bezos, the Waltons, Mark Zuckerberg, etc. in charge. Nobody made them insanely wealthy. ... except for THEMSELVES. They have done nothing immoral or wrong or worthy of being demonized or punished.

    It's not a plutocracy when there was nothing preventing YOU from doing anything any of those men did, except for perhaps your motivation for life, your imagination and expertise, your ability to innovate or luck.

    That is why what you are suggesting is what is actually the thing that is obscene to our core values. We are a country with a tradition of individual liberty. We value economic freedom. We don't punish success. At worst, we don't strand in people's ways to achieve their economic goals.

    You are way too concerned with what others have, and worse, now you are in finger pointing mode, ready to punish success because you've deemed some people too successful. THAT not only flies in the face of our core values, it's just a bad idea, because we have benefited greatly from the things those people have created in terms of keeping core prices down (i.e. -- lowering inflation by providing goods more cheaply), our standard of living, workplace productivity and quality of life. Punishing success is a sure fire way to stifle innovation. Have a good idea that is taking off? Headquarter it somewhere else where they don't turn you into an enemy for creating something people actually like, and from which you therefore profit.

    We should be leaving those people alone. And by doing so, it is encouragement to others to innovate and create things that can benefit our standard of living, and keep those ideas at home. If you can rich doing it, that is all that much more motivation for most people. Instead of worrying about what others have, and how much they owe you for their success, why not just concentrate on your own life; your own goals? That is essentially what our core values boil down to.
     
  4. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    Can you really say Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg didn't do anything morally wrong in getting where they're at?
     
  5. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    I guess because the guys at Goldman Sachs haven't been convicted, we can assume they didn't do anything illegal or immoral by burying their bad mortgages on AIG's or Deutsche Bank's balance sheet. Mmm hmmmm.

    The full-on Gordon Gekko character is amusing, however.
     
  6. joe king

    joe king Active Member

    I find it interesting that one of complaints posted earlier is that these rich corporations "took our money to bail them out."

    Ummm, it wasn't the companies' decision to bail them out. That came from the president and the Congress, which at the time was controlled by his party. If you have an issue with spending hundreds of billions of dollars to prop up failing and/or corrupt businesses (I know I do), don't aim your ire at those who received the bailouts as much as at those who gave them.
     
  7. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    A few points:

    --plu·toc·ra·cy -- 2. a controlling class of the wealthy (Merriam-Webster)

    Politics in our country, as you so often rail about, has been corrupted by the influence of money and lobbyists. Laws and tax codes change, regulations are stricken, loopholes are created, influential committee can be stacked. It ain't poor people who are paying the lobbyists and buying influence with our Congress critters.

    --No, the playing field isn't level in terms of economic opportunity. Never has been, nor do I advocate for it.

    --I don't begrudge anyone what they have. However, I also don't think taxing the obscenely wealthy at a slightly higher rate than that which they are paying now is "punishing success" anymore than asking the Yankees to pay a luxury tax is punishing their success. Just like a baseball league is healthier when all participants are healthy, so is a society.

    --You have very different "core values" than me.
     
  8. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    Always interesting to see where 'labor' fits in the great scheme of things.
     
  9. NickMordo

    NickMordo Active Member

    What in God's name is Herman Cain thinking? Or is he not thinking? He said the protest was "un-American" and blamed people for being poor and failing at life, basically. He's made a run for the top of the GOP and now he is trying to alienate his support base. Very smart, Cain.
     
  10. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    Godfather'sTM - the official pizza of Wall Street
     
  11. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/index.php

    The Top 10 on their heavy hitters list of lobbyists since 1989:

    ActBlue $55,093,735
    American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees $45,820,853
    AT&T Inc $41,660,404
    National Assn of Realtors $40,020,510
    Service Employees International Union $37,151,289
    National Education Assn $36,433,925
    American Assn for Justice $34,328,421
    Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $33,824,355
    Laborers Union $31,640,067
    American Federation of Teachers $31,342,403

    It doesn't quite fit cranberry's narrative of "It ain't poor people who are paying the lobbyists and buying influence with our Congress critters." I agree it ain't poor people. It's just that by and large it isn't a story of just the "ultra rich" wielding the most influence inside the Capital Dome. When I rail about special interest politics, I see a full picture, not a partial picture suited to a narrative of a plutocracy running the country.
     
  12. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    Do you mean organized labor after being pummeled for 30 years of bargain-to-impasse, permanent scabs, right-to-work-for-less legislation and a stacked NLRB? That labor? I'm sure the systematic neutering of organized labor has nothing to with our wealth disparity or the stagnation of wages. It was all bootstraps and ingenuity.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page