Occupy Denton

Tell that to Bill Gates, Michael Dell, Larry Ellison, Mark Zuckerberg, and the Google founders...

Sam Walton.

I like the example of the guy who got his dad's friends to buy him a baseball team, have the taxpayers foot the bill for a new stadium, and then made 5x's his investment and became governor. That's a self-made man right there.

Or a guy who inherits a ton of money, goes straight into politics without any other accomplishments in life, abuses substances all his life, gets drunk and runs his car into a river, killing his passenger and then running from the scene without getting help for that passenger, having his family cover up his crime.

All the while telling you how he cares about the poor.

But it's OK, because he has your political beliefs, right?

Or a guy who inherits a ton of money, goes straight into politics without any other accomplishments in life, abuses substances all his life, gets drunk and runs his car into a river, killing his passenger and then running from the scene without getting help for that passenger, having his family cover up his crime.

All the while telling you how he cares about the poor.

But it's OK, because he has your political beliefs, right?

which politician is this?

which politician is this?

So I see they teach history very liberally now days, google Ted Kennedy

Tell that to Bill Gates, Michael Dell, Larry Ellison, Mark Zuckerberg, and the Google founders...

And the millions of other citizens that didn't make millions, but have their own business. Go through your town and see how many locally owned businesses there are. For every large coproration in your city- there are a dozen or so small businesses.

Today's small business are tomorrow's billion dollar corporations.

Not everybody has to be a billionaire in America. But everybody has a chance to stake out there own claim, make their own business, and make something from nothing. How many times do we head stories about people arriving in American with the clothes and their back and 20 bucks in their pocket.

As to a sense of entitlement, does no one here feel that you should be able to get an education, go to work in a job that applies that education, and earn enough money for a decent house, a couple reasonable cars, a new pair of jeans every couple years, and maybe a day or two a year frolicking in the pool?

Tons of people "pull themselve up from their boot straps" and live successful lives with that life style. I talk weekly with an instrument repair man from the Czech Republic who runs his own company and feels like the king of the world with the one house, two cars, and once a year new jeans lifestyle. To him, he is in the top 1%- living the American Dream.

So I see they teach history very liberally now days, google Ted Kennedy

I literally had no idea about that... And I consider myself more educated than the average Joe on politics and history.

gets drunk and runs his car into a river, killing his passenger and then running from the scene without getting help for that passenger, having his family cover up his crime.

This has, and always will be conjecture.

But it's OK, because he has your political beliefs, right?

No, Ted Kennedy can go fluff himself. He killed universal health care in the late 70's and then later wind power off the coast of Nantucket. So no, he doesn't share my political beliefs. I just used President dumb dumb as the most obvious example of the lack of meritocracy in this country.

This has, and always will be conjecture.

No, Ted Kennedy can go fluff himself. He killed universal health care in the late 70's and then later wind power off the coast of Nantucket. So no, he doesn't share my political beliefs. I just used President dumb dumb as the most obvious example of the lack of meritocracy in this country.

The only thing that is conjecture is whether or not he was drunk.

So Ted Kennedy isn't liberal enough for you?

Wow.

Also, I don't believe the Bush family is in the top 1%. I do believe the Kennedy family is in that category.

Edited October 31, 2011 by UNT90

The only thing that is conjecture is whether or not he was drunk.

And whether or not he tried to help Mary Jo out of the car without drowning himself.

So Ted Kennedy isn't liberal enough for you?

You're making your own little stereotypical assumptions there.

Also, I don't believe the Bush family is in the top 1%. I do believe the Kennedy family is in that category.

I'm sure they both are. And 1% or not, my point stands.

And whether or not he tried to help Mary Jo out of the car without drowning himself.

You're making your own little stereotypical assumptions there.

I'm sure they both are. And 1% or not, my point stands.

Bahahahahahahaha.... Seriously?? Waits 12 hours to report the accident, leaving MJK in an underwater grave, and you think he tried to save her? Pretty clear the only person he was concerned about saving was himself. Funny, for a guy you supposedly don't agree with, you sure are quick to jump to his defense.

When you cite far, far left policies for the time in which they were presented and stated that you were/are upset because a very liberal politician blocked said policies, I don't think there is any stereotypical assumption involved.

I rarely know what is your point.

which politician is this?

Research Chappaquiddick. The details of the "incident" will shock you. If it happened in today's society, Teddy would serve a prison term.

Bahahahahahahaha.... Seriously?? Waits 12 hours to report the accident, leaving MJK in an underwater grave, and you think he tried to save her? Pretty clear the only person he was concerned about saving was himself. Funny, for a guy you supposedly don't agree with, you sure are quick to jump to his defense.

When you cite far, far left policies for the time in which they were presented and stated that you were/are upset because a very liberal politician blocked said policies, I don't think there is any stereotypical assumption involved.

I rarely know what is your point.

Well with this post its pretty clear you're a little too stuck to the right vs left narrative that has overtaken any substantive debate, so I guess I'll throw you in the category with UNT Flyer and just not bother. We're still on the same side dude, the richest of the rich are doing everything they can to drown out our voices with $$$. Maybe one day you'll see it to.

Research Chappaquiddick. The details of the "incident" will shock you. If it happened in today's society, Teddy would serve a prison term.

Wow. I listen to conservative talk radio and watch the History Channel often. I feel like one of these two would have brought this story up at least once.

I'm in shock. A scandal like this should have ruined any politician, regardless of political party.

I can't believe I'd never heard about this.

Well with this post its pretty clear you're a little too stuck to the right vs left narrative that has overtaken any substantive debate, so I guess I'll throw you in the category with UNT Flyer and just not bother. We're still on the same side dude, the richest of the rich are doing everything they can to drown out our voices with $$$. Maybe one day you'll see it to.

I don't blame the richest of the rich for anything in my life, because I control who and what I am.

If I wanted more, I should have worked harder.

Quit worrying about what other people have and concentrate on making yourself better. You will lead a happier and more successful lifeif you follow this advice.

As far as the political stuff, I was just responding to your post and playing by your rules.

I like the example of the guy who got his dad's friends to buy him a baseball team, have the taxpayers foot the bill for a new stadium, and then made 5x's his investment and became governor. That's a self-made man right there.

So? Taxpayers voted to foot the bill...ever hear of "voting"? Could have said no, correct? Like Dallas did for the new Cowboy stadium that Arlington also got...Oh, I forgot, the Dallas citizens never had a chance to vote on that one. I'm not a fan of taxpayer subsidizes for "private" enterprises...Obama, are you listening? But, the voters in Arlington had a say...just like the students at UNT had a say regarding the fee for Apogee. I could care less if only a few were capable of getting their rears off their couches to go vote. They had the opportunity to say one way of the other. If they are too lazy to go vote, they get what they deserve...they, in effect, have voted by their lack of interest and initiative.

So be it. I find nothing wrong in the situation you describe. Again, why knock someone just because they have money and know how to make more? Arlington loves the stadium and what it is doing for their city it seems...good for them. The next folks who buy the Rangers will make the current owners even richer...so what?

I could care less if only a few were capable of getting their rears off their couches to go vote.

Voting was entirely online. Getting off the couch was unnecessary...

Five pages in and you guys have less focus than the Occupy movement. Pat yourselves on the back, fellas.

These people need to refine (or maybe actually define) their narrative. I think it's idiotic that people are saying the occupy wall street folks are all for redistributing wealth and basically just trying to push their socialis views. That's a simplistic and wrong view of what these people are protesting. I'm sure there is a portion of the group that is BUT I don't think socialist take over is the actual agenda. They need to be more clear to gain support, they need to make people realize they are against citizens united v. Fec, which is one of the most ridiculous decisions ever made, corporations are not people (and if you think that, you're dumb. End of story), they need to talk about the fact that deregulating the banks was and is a terrible terrible idea and is partially to blame for why we are at this place we are now (Fannie and Freddie can be thrown in there too, I realize that). And how can people argue that a person that makes a obscene amount of money should be taxed less than the average Joe? Yeh I get it, they probably worked hard to get there, I don't think they should be taxed a ridiculous percantage amount more than most, just maybe the same amount as regular people, yes they look like they are paying more because they may be paying millions, that's relative, for some of these people a million is equivalent to $100 for someone like us middle false folk, sucks to lose it but it's certainly not going to break me by any means. And the job creator thing is bunk. They've had what, 8 year with the bush tax cuts? Where are the jobs? I just don't understand how people can be so against this movement. This is not some Bolshevik revolution like some seem to think.

Edited October 31, 2011 by mattmartin817

I will say though some of those kis are really dumb. I read about one kid that was complaining about having like 90,000 in student loans because he wanted to go to a ridiculously expensive private school. That's your own fault, should have gone to state school.

Five pages in and you guys have less focus than the Occupy movement. Pat yourselves on the back, fellas.

Achieving the impossible is nothing to sneeze at.

I passed the occupy Fort Worth group at lunch. All 4 of them. Look like homeless hired to hold signs.

Makes me proud to live in Texas

These people need to refine (or maybe actually define) their narrative. I think it's idiotic that people are saying the occupy wall street folks are all for redistributing wealth and basically just trying to push their socialis views. That's a simplistic and wrong view of what these people are protesting. I'm sure there is a portion of the group that is BUT I don't think socialist take over is the actual agenda. They need to be more clear to gain support, they need to make people realize they are against citizens united v. Fec, which is one of the most ridiculous decisions ever made, corporations are not people (and if you think that, you're dumb. End of story), they need to talk about the fact that deregulating the banks was and is a terrible terrible idea and is partially to blame for why we are at this place we are now (Fannie and Freddie can be thrown in there too, I realize that). And how can people argue that a person that makes a obscene amount of money should be taxed less than the average Joe? Yeh I get it, they probably worked hard to get there, I don't think they should be taxed a ridiculous percantage amount more than most, just maybe the same amount as regular people, yes they look like they are paying more because they may be paying millions, that's relative, for some of these people a million is equivalent to $100 for someone like us middle false folk, sucks to lose it but it's certainly not going to break me by any means. And the job creator thing is bunk. They've had what, 8 year with the bush tax cuts? Where are the jobs? I just don't understand how people can be so against this movement. This is not some Bolshevik revolution like some seem to think.

Oh but if wasn't for Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission we wouldn't have little gems like this going around:

And how can people argue that a person that makes a obscene amount of money should be taxed less than the average Joe? Yeh I get it, they probably worked hard to get there, I don't think they should be taxed a ridiculous percantage amount more than most, just maybe the same amount as regular people

In 2009, the top 1% of taxpayers paid an average effective tax rate of 24.01% while the bottom 50% of taxpayers had an average effective tax rate of 1.85%. If you want to raise taxes on the rich, fine, but explain to me why "fair" means the wealthy pay 13X the average burden of the "average joe".

The higher your AGI the higher your tax burden as a percent of your AGI. Period. This data is readily available from multiple sources including the Department of Treasury. If Warren Buffet actually pays 17%, then he is an extreme outlier.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

Well with this post its pretty clear you're a little too stuck to the right vs left narrative that has overtaken any substantive debate, so I guess I'll throw you in the category with UNT Flyer and just not bother.

Really? I consider myself quite moderate and open to lots of solutions. I noticed you decided to "not bother" when I asked why you cited a study that claimed "80% of all new income created in the US has gone to the top 1%," which was based on a ludicrously small statistical sample. In order to have a substantive debate, you have to get through the talking points.

These people need to refine (or maybe actually define) their narrative. I think it's idiotic that people are saying the occupy wall street folks are all for redistributing wealth and basically just trying to push their socialis views. That's a simplistic and wrong view of what these people are protesting. I'm sure there is a portion of the group that is BUT I don't think socialist take over is the actual agenda.

THEY don't even know what their agenda is. It's all over the place. Some are socialists, some are communists, some are regular Americans trying to make their lives better, and some are just kids with nothing better to do.

And how can people argue that a person that makes a obscene amount of money should be taxed less than the average Joe?

They're not. The average effective tax rates are as follows:

Top 1 % - 24.0%

Top 5% - 20.4%

Top 10% - 18.0%

Top 25% - 14.6%

Top 50% - 12.5%

Bottom 50% - 1.85%

The rich pay a hell of a lot more in taxes, in both percentages and raw dollars, than the average American.

Source: The Tax Foundation

They've had what, 8 year with the bush tax cuts? Where are the jobs? I just don't understand how people can be so against this movement. This is not some Bolshevik revolution like some seem to think.

It is not tax rates that are killing jobs - it is uncertainty in the markets.

Edited October 31, 2011 by UNTflyer

If Warren Buffet actually pays 17%, then he is an extreme outlier.

http://www.taxfounda...s/show/250.html

Warren Buffet makes a salary of $100,000 a year. That is what is considered "income."

The rest is capital gains income, which is already taxed at the corporate level.