OCCUPYWALLSTREET REINFORCEMENTS!

[unjonharley]

oh, and raise the retirement age, by all means. when the system was conceived the average life span was only 65 or so, i believe. but they've already done this ... i don't get full benefits until i'm 70.

The retirement age was pre retire at 62 set after wwII.. If you retired at 62 the GI's coming home could get your job.. Making the age 70 only keeps the job market full to overflow.. Shoot yourself in the foot thing..

I'm in favor of the 35-hour work week. I do everything I can to make that happen.

And retire at 45.. enjoy yourself enjoy yourself while your still in the pink..
enjoy yourself it's later than you think.. And UD.. That don't mean to be touching yourself again..

[Ugly Dougly]

I just figured it out, Dougly!!
you want to be French!
That explains so much.

If that's what it takes to enjoy the American Dream.

[Elderberry]

SSI is a tax on businesses? When did that change happen?

Always was. Employers match social security and Medicare. But raising the cap won't put any small businesses out of business, nor would it prevent growth. Little miss one percent is just mindlessly ranting again, pay her no mind.

that the best you can do, JK?

Trying to discuss these issues with you makes my head hurt.

[littleflower]

Trying to discuss these issues with you makes my head hurt.

that does not surprise me. methinks you have no practical experience in these matters, and can find nothing in your leftist literature that addresses what i am saying, so *horrors* you'll just have to think for yourself.

how on earth can you state that an extra 10-12% tax above $110,000 on small business owners - sole proprietorships and LLCs, mostly - won't hinder their growth? i agree that it won't put them * OUT * of business, but that's a big chunk of change and a pretty big burden even under the $110,000 cap. and why should upper-middle class working people be the only ones paying for social security if they decide to turn it into a straight income redistribution scheme? isn't that warren buffet's point - that people like him don't make their money in W-2 wages ..... ? that's the one type of earnings you can't hide.

i know, i know, these matters are complicated ......

[littleflower]

oh, and raise the retirement age, by all means. when the system was conceived the average life span was only 65 or so, i believe. but they've already done this ... i don't get full benefits until i'm 70.

The retirement age was pre retire at 62 set after wwII.. If you retired at 62 the GI's coming home could get your job.. Making the age 70 only keeps the job market full to overflow.. Shoot yourself in the foot thing..

i'm not sure what i was looking at .... i thought my annual report from the SSA .... but it seems that i do get full retirement at 67, which cheers me somewhat. there is no argument about old people getting jobs, most employers want young people. i know a very hard-working 60 yo who got laid off several years ago, and was told repeatedly that he was too old to hire. it is a huge problem.

[unjonharley]

It's against the law to tell a person they are old

[Elderberry]

Trying to discuss these issues with you makes my head hurt.

that does not surprise me. methinks you have no practical experience in these matters, and can find nothing in your leftist literature that addresses what i am saying, so *horrors* you'll just have to think for yourself.

how on earth can you state that an extra 10-12% tax above $110,000 on small business owners - sole proprietorships and LLCs, mostly - won't hinder their growth? i agree that it won't put them * OUT * of business, but that's a big chunk of change and a pretty big burden even under the $110,000 cap. and why should upper-middle class working people be the only ones paying for social security if they decide to turn it into a straight income redistribution scheme? isn't that warren buffet's point - that people like him don't make their money in W-2 wages ..... ? that's the one type of earnings you can't hide.

i know, i know, these matters are complicated ......

And just how many employees earning over $110,000.00 do you imagine a "small business" owner would have?

[Sola Gangsta]

And just how many employees earning over $110,000.00 do you imagine a "small business" owner would have?

Probably just one (if any).

[Sola Gangsta]

What really happened at Occupy LA? (when the cat's away the pigs play)

http://www.occupylosangeles.org/?q=node%2F2445

[Elderberry]

And just how many employees earning over $110,000.00 do you imagine a "small business" owner would have?

Probably just one (if any).

Yup, and it would be the owner (and possibly his spouse). I think Little Miss 1% doesn't understand what a small business is.

[ygmir]

And just how many employees earning over $110,000.00 do you imagine a "small business" owner would have?

Probably just one (if any).

Yup, and it would be the owner (and possibly his spouse). I think Little Miss 1% doesn't understand what a small business is.

JK;
sometimes, dear pal, you can really be a dick(in the prejorative sense)...............

[Elderberry]

JK;
sometimes, dear pal, you can really be a dick(in the prejorative sense)...............

Hmmm... I wasn't really trying to be. Is it time for some introspection? Wait, what was it I said that was so dickish anyway?

[littleflower]

And just how many employees earning over $110,000.00 do you imagine a "small business" owner would have?

Probably just one (if any).

Yup, and it would be the owner (and possibly his spouse). I think Little Miss 1% doesn't understand what a small business is.

yes, there would be one, and it would likely be the owner.

he or she perhaps makes $210,000/year, which means they could afford to buy a cheaper house in JK's neighborhood. now would you please tell me why this person deserves to pay an extra $12,400/year in taxes - on top of what he already pays - to balance social security? and do you not think that extra $12,400 might possibly be used in his business?

even if you give that break between 110,000 and 250,000 .... it's the same problem. you're funding social security on the backs of the working middle class instead of the 1% .... the billionaires ... many of whom pay NOTHING in SS tax because their income is not on a W-2, Schedule C, or 1065.

the fact is, JK, you don't know how to answer my question.... it's too far outside your fucking little paradigm .... so you play a little name-calling game. how cute .....

[Elderberry]

Why waste my time on someone who's mind is already made up? And I wouldn't give any break between $110,000 and $250,000 either. Now how do you like them apples?! My only question is why would anyone not making over $110,000 even care? And why would anyone making over $100,000 even worry about paying a bit more! Stupid and selfish. Oh, I answered my own questions.

[theCryptofishist]

Please, jk, just plonk her. Each of you knows what she/he feels and isn't going to change, and the dialogue isn't snarky, just spiteful.

[littleflower]

fishy, it's not spiteful .... JK and i have been sniping at each other since the beginning, but we get along fine when we see each other. i'll stop ... his last response was pretty much what i was expecting, anyhow.

[ygmir]

I disagree with plonking........
I find their back and forth, informative. I'm learning a lot, from both points of view, things I had no idea about.
My only frustration, is the petty name calling, condescension, and, general incivility that's creeping in. (that was my point above, JK........I love your intellect, it's just the rude stuff makes it so tough)
It's enlightening (well to me anyway) how CA and JK seem diametrically opposed to LF's point of view, and vice versa. Sure, it's two against one (most of the time) but, if kept civil, so much good info is spewing forth, ideas certainly I've not had, and "slants" on things I've not thought of. And, the sharing of information such as this, to me, is what discussion is all about.
You don't have to agree, or be changed, to have a great debate, discussion, conversation.
Nope, I'd bet all 3 are set in their ways.
But, I, for one, appreciate what they're all putting out there.

so my vote:
Carry on, just try to be civil............

[theCryptofishist]

My only frustration, is the petty name calling, condescension, and, general incivility that's creeping in.

And that's my spite. I know it's hard to hear tone over the internet, but this seemed a lot more like scoring points than "productive dialogue".

[ygmir]

My only frustration, is the petty name calling, condescension, and, general incivility that's creeping in.

And that's my spite. I know it's hard to hear tone over the internet, but this seemed a lot more like scoring points than "productive dialogue".

agreed.

[cowboyangel]

I bring you all back to the "entitlements " that really need reforming...no bid military contracts, off shore tax loopholes, diminished corporate tax rate, tax gifts to oil and timber and mining, bloated insane military budget, rip off credit card industry, pay day loan centers, stupidly low tax rate for the puss-sack 1%

SSI and Medicare are not the problem. Republicans and their ass licking remora fish democrats are the problem.

[BlackRockCityPimp]

This is why voting no longer works. When you try to get voters registered the police will threaten to arrest you for having a table. We all know how dangerous tables are in California. One person is San Diego was already arrested for a table violation. This time the police just watched for awhile. Tax dollars well spent.
[youtube][/youtube]

[Elderberry]

I bring you all back to the "entitlements " that really need reforming...no bid military contracts, off shore tax loopholes, diminished corporate tax rate, tax gifts to oil and timber and mining, bloated insane military budget, rip off credit card industry, pay day loan centers, stupidly low tax rate for the puss-sack 1%

SSI and Medicare are not the problem. Republicans and their ass licking remora fish democrats are the problem.

That pretty much sums it up.

[Elderberry]

I used to scoff at people talking about voter suppression, but with how blatant it has become, I am certainly singing a different tune now. And not to be partisan, but guess which party are the most agregious practitioners.

This is why voting no longer works. When you try to get voters registered the police will threaten to arrest you for having a table. We all know how dangerous tables are in California. One person is San Diego was already arrested for a table violation. This time the police just watched for awhile. Tax dollars well spent.
[youtube][/youtube]

[ygmir]

I used to scoff at people talking about voter suppression, but with how blatant it has become, I am certainly singing a different tune now. And not to be partisan, but guess which party are the most agregious practitioners.

This is why voting no longer works. When you try to get voters registered the police will threaten to arrest you for having a table. We all know how dangerous tables are in California. One person is San Diego was already arrested for a table violation. This time the police just watched for awhile. Tax dollars well spent.

So, it seems the issue, was because it was private property, and the table being there?
The police state it's ok to register people, but, not set up a table.
Why, would not private property rights, count?
Why couldn't they have moved the table to the public area, where it'd be ok?
Sort of like someone setting up, on your front lawn, to me. Yeah, do it on the public sidewalk, curb, whatever. But, if it's my lawn, I should have the right to say, I don't want a table, etc, set up there.

Folks seem to have no respect for private property. Like the owner, or not, your land should still be under your control. And, if not for some, then, not for all.....



Don't I recall many dem voters being intimidated in Chicago and other places? Mostly urban?
Wasn't there some thing, about busing illegal voters into areas, and registering them near the polling places, with instructions, and pay, when Bob Dournan (sp?) lost Orange county way back when?
Something, somewhere, about farm workers, being registered dem. and told how to vote, and required to do same?

I'd submit, as with most tawdry acts of the sort, it's not one sided.........

[littleflower]

Occupy L.A.: 30 tons of debris left behind at City Hall tent city

Sanitation officials said Wednesday that they expect to haul away 30 tons of debris from the Occupy L.A. encampment –- everything from clothing to heaps of garbage to oddball curiosities left behind by the protesters who lived at the City Hall tent city for two months.

Andrea Alarcon, president of the city Public Works board, said workers already have removed 25 tons of belongings from the City Hall park, all of it heading straight to a landfill.

Sanitation crews also have vacuumed up about 3,000 gallons of water that had washed into a catch basin in recent days and are testing it for hazardous materials, she said.

The sheer volume of personal belongings left behind after the early morning Los Angeles Police Department raid has astonished city workers: books and CDs, luggage and boom boxes, mattresses and dining chairs, cellphones, electric razors, a small red guitar with its neck snapped –- all surrounded by dozens of collapsed and empty tents.

...
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2 ... -city.html

[Ugly Dougly]

30 tons seems hard to believe. How many people were there? I heard 400, apart from the 1200 cops.
For comparison the 3000 gallons of water (probably from rain) weighs about 24000 pounds, or 6 tons.

[ygmir]

30 tons seems hard to believe. How many people were there? I heard 400, apart from the 1200 cops.
For comparison the 3000 gallons of water (probably from rain) weighs about 24000 pounds, or 6 tons.

anything to downplay/rationalize, hehehee............
and, 400? Hell, all "you guys" seemed to be touting "thousands" of people were there.........
hhhmmmmmm.........

I wonder, does anyone know how the cleanup of the OWS stuff, compare to teaparty rallies?
I'm sure it depends on people present and such, but, just wondering if any comparisons have been done?


Again, I support the idea..........I reject the one sided, sacrosanct opinions of some who post about it.

[Ugly Dougly]

I'm not rationalizing. 30 tons is a lot of anything.
It's a political situation, people exaggerate!
Here is a LA Times article. True, 1400 police, 1000 protestors. 200 arrested. That's still sixty pounds per protestor.
Ang Ygmir, buddy, I am not "you people" - I am Ugly Dougly.

[Bob]

You haven't loaded debris boxes after Burning Man, obviously.

[unjonharley]

80 000 plus to repair OPDX parks.. Joe citizen (99%) will be picking up the tab..
The pimps, whores, dug dealers, street bums and general dead beats that did the damage will just fade into the dark shadows..

THere next big plan.. To occupy another well kept park and destroy it this week end..