Occupy Movement Links To Communism?

[Seth]

Is Seth doing the "commies are teh evul bekuz they are teh athiest" bit again?

"Again?" Sorry, not something I've ever said. I'm merely pointing out that Communists, who are evil, are also Atheists, and that their atheism is a direct cause of the deaths of 100 million people at their hands.

Bullshit.

Absolutely.

It may well be true that their absolutist vision of politics was involved, but this does not correlete with atheism per se...

I'm sorry, but when the Marxist powers that be declare religion to be "the opium of the masses" and proceed to extirpate religion from the society by both making it illegal to practice religion publicly and by killing people of religion in large numbers to remove them as undesirable counterrevolutionary influences, there is no doubt whatsoever that atheism is the direct and proximate cause of that murderous policy. If you don't believe in God, and you believe that people who do believe in God are a threat to the new Marxist order, and you kill them because they believe in God, it's impossible to say that your atheism is not the proximate cause.

[Seth]

Occupy isn't against capitalism.

which is why it'll never achieve anything.

Bullshit. It's already achieved something.

We're now talking about the income gains of the top 1% since 1979 and the people who will be voting next November are listening closely.

bullshit yourself. "we've" been "talking" about income inequality for years, this is nothing new. haha, voting for who?

The lazy and greedy always bitch about other people's industry and success. It's what Marxism is based on, greed, laziness and stealing what doesn't belong to them.

[Seth]

given that my rep is an apparatchik totally infeodated to her party, and that, since I'm not a member of said party and disagree with the line on a number of points, I can shower her with observations and suggestions, that will fall on deaf ears as soon as it doesn't fit her own partisan politics.

The farmers in my area beat up on this guy about pesticide regulation all the time. It's necessary that there be a countervailing force to oppose theirs or these really gnarly pesticides will be used a couple miles from my house (and if they spray a fifty thousand acre field with a fumigant, friend, let me assure you that a couple miles is not nearly fucking far enough).

Find someone to oppose her, or primary her (dunno how that works in France but whatever, it's democratic so there has to be a means of opposition). If it cramps your style that much, move. I did.

HTH.

Why don't you boycott methyl bromide by not eating anything? I think about three months should do it. Walk the walk and become a martyr to the cause.

[Schneibster]

[Warren Dew]

Seth, I appreciate that you seem to be defending capitalism, but Warren Dew and myself have already made many points similar to yours in response to the same posts you're quoting on the very last page. I'm getting the sense (in the less than 24 hours since I've come back to this forum) that it's often you against the world, but there's no need to effectively shout over other people when they're on your side

Voices of economic reason are so rare it takes a few posts to recognize them. And he did give you a source for that 97% figure.

For my part, I enjoy discussing the differences between Seth's position and my own, even if those differences are minor compared to those between him and, say, sandinista.

[Warren Dew]

I'd be happy if it were taxed when it was realized. The problem is that Buffett has already set things up so it will never get taxed, even when he dies.

Really? How did he manage that, exactly?

He's already transferred about $40,000,000,000.00, tax free, to various nonprofit foundations, for example the Novo foundation, which "is dedicated to catalyzing a transformation in global society". While that sounds benign enough, it's still basically political spending that's subsidized through tax exemption. The rest of his money will be handled similarly when he dies, through his will.

As you said, what Buffett wants is for other people to be taxed more - but with the additional caveat that he hypocritically wants to keep his own money sheltered from taxes.

And how would the fact, if true, which it's likely not, that one wealthy person takes advantage of the existing tax law to reduce his tax liability militate for an entire "corporate greed" movement that's attempting to deconstruct capitalism?

It doesn't, of course. It just points up the fact that existing tax law favors the super rich over the merely rich. If you read the article I linked to and watch the video andrewclunn linked to, you'll see that a substantial portion of the occupation movement doesn't have a problem with the free market; what they have a problem with is distortions of the free market through crony capitalism - bailouts and other favorable treatment, such as this tax treatment, granted to the largest concentrations of wealth.

One might to note that Buffet, and almost all the other "ultra-rich" don't have a giant Scrooge McDuck vault that their money is kept in where they go "money-diving" every week. Their money is invested in the economy, creating products and jobs. Buffet in particular has created hundreds of thousands of jobs just within his own companies, not to mention all the millions of jobs his companies support in industry that services his business empire.

Buffett's money is almost entirely invested in big businesses, which doesn't generate most of the jobs. Favoring the Buffetts of the world favors those businesses over the small to medium businesses which do generate most of the jobs. We need to give small business a level playing field.

Keep in mind that the "ultra-rich" do not NEED to invest or earn income at all. They have more money than one person could possibly spend in a lifetime. If they wanted to, they could shut down every company they own, fire every worker, sell off all the assets and PUT THEIR MONEY IN A GIANT VAULT AND DIVE IN IT WEEKLY if they want. At which point the economy would REALLY tank, and they would still live high on the hog for the rest of their, and their grandchildren's lives. Being wealthy in a depression is a wonderful thing. Everything's cheap as dirt.

Without production, money is just numbers in a computer. If the current depression gets much worse, we're likely to see either hyperinflation or a revolution, either of which will make those numbers worthless.

Meanwhile, the hardworking folks in the 1% and 10% do get taxed. That's what's not fair.

Which 1 and 10 percent? The bottom or the top?

I'm referring to the rest of the top 1% and 10% that Buffett and his ilk want to raise taxes on, while keeping the money of the top 0.001% sheltered.

[JimC]

I think the tactics of the protestors in many parts of the world (including Australia) should be criticised, since they seem to be all about provoking an inevitable confrontation with civil authorities after the occupation of public places by squalid camps drags on and on and on...

They seem to glory in a romantic picture of themselves as defiant outsiders; in the end, they tend to play into the hands of governments and media, who can portray them in a way that makes it very unlikely they will be joined by large numbers of people that might otherwise be sympathetic to their underlying concerns.

Having said that, I still think that the wealth gap is excessive, and the ability of the wealthy and large corporations to manipulate the political process to their own advantage needs addressing.

[Schneibster]

These things take time. It's enough for now that it's worldwide and that it's raised and continues to raise awareness of wealth inequality among many who haven't been paying attention for decades.

[JimC]

These things take time. It's enough for now that it's worldwide and that it's raised and continues to raise awareness of wealth inequality among many who haven't been paying attention for decades.

Fair point...

[Atheist-Lite]

Even Anonymous can't see that indiscriminate targetting of the super-wealthy is wrong and will have disastrous consequences. Is it someones fault to be born into money? That is discrimination as much as any other kind. To target people who operate the banking system instead of those who over-extended themselves on a spending binge is plain wrong. That isn't justice, just mindless blame-seeking and a cunning avoidence of culpability for getting yourself upto the eyeballs in debt...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s-tq32u ... r_embedded[/youtube]

[Schneibster]

This thread is about Occupy.

I'm sorry, I don't have a particularly good opinion of Anonymous. They screw up about half the time.

[Atheist-Lite]

This thread is about Occupy.

I'm sorry, I don't have a particularly good opinion of Anonymous. They screw up about half the time.

Maybe someone could move the post to the appropriate thread?

[Seth]

I'd be happy if it were taxed when it was realized. The problem is that Buffett has already set things up so it will never get taxed, even when he dies.

Really? How did he manage that, exactly?

He's already transferred about $40,000,000,000.00, tax free, to various nonprofit foundations, for example the Novo foundation, which "is dedicated to catalyzing a transformation in global society". While that sounds benign enough, it's still basically political spending that's subsidized through tax exemption.

And yet it's all charitable giving, and I seriously doubt it's all "basically political spending." And the purpose of tax exemption for non-profits is to induce people to support non-profits. It's hardly unique to Buffett's wealth.

The rest of his money will be handled similarly when he dies, through his will.

You know what his will says, do you? Last I heard, the estate tax goes back up to over 50 percent at the end of this year.

As you said, what Buffett wants is for other people to be taxed more - but with the additional caveat that he hypocritically wants to keep his own money sheltered from taxes.

Er, that 40 billion isn't his money, now is it?

And how would the fact, if true, which it's likely not, that one wealthy person takes advantage of the existing tax law to reduce his tax liability militate for an entire "corporate greed" movement that's attempting to deconstruct capitalism?

It doesn't, of course. It just points up the fact that existing tax law favors the super rich over the merely rich.

How so? Any person can donate to a non-profit and that income will not be taxed. That Buffet has more to donate doesn't mean the law favors him, it means that society benefits far more from Buffets charity than from yours. The same is true of taxing income. As has been pointed out many times, the "ultra-rich" like Buffet actually pay far more than their fair share of government revenues. As for Buffet's claim that he doesn't pay enough, I don't believe it to begin with, and his contribution to society by way of employing people and creating wealth that IS taxed, at many levels, makes that claim so much bushwa.

If you read the article I linked to and watch the video andrewclunn linked to, you'll see that a substantial portion of the occupation movement doesn't have a problem with the free market; what they have a problem with is distortions of the free market through crony capitalism - bailouts and other favorable treatment, such as this tax treatment, granted to the largest concentrations of wealth.

So, what you're saying is that Occupy protesters are too stupid to realize that their actual enemy is government, which is the source of "crony capitalism" to begin with? You see, you can't be a "crony" if government doesn't have the power to use the law to protect your interests. "Crony capitalism" is just another name for government corruption, and the solution to government corruption is never more government, it's less government and more free markets.

If Occupy Wall Street renames itself and moves to DC and calls itself Occupy Government and undertakes to deconstruct the regulatory framework of Progressivism that CAUSES "crony capitalism," then I'll be right there with them.

One might to note that Buffet, and almost all the other "ultra-rich" don't have a giant Scrooge McDuck vault that their money is kept in where they go "money-diving" every week. Their money is invested in the economy, creating products and jobs. Buffet in particular has created hundreds of thousands of jobs just within his own companies, not to mention all the millions of jobs his companies support in industry that services his business empire.

Buffett's money is almost entirely invested in big businesses, which doesn't generate most of the jobs.

Crap. Investment is investment, and Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway directly employs more than 47,000 people. That does not count all the people who have jobs with companies that service Berkshire, or that work for companies that Buffet invests in, like McDonalds.

Favoring the Buffetts of the world favors those businesses over the small to medium businesses which do generate most of the jobs. We need to give small business a level playing field.

What? What are you talking about? How does Buffet's success impede "small to medium businesses" in their ability to prosper in the least? Buffet is not only a business owner, he's an investor. His favorite thing to do is to acquire successful companies and make them more profitable, and making the previous owners fabulously wealthy in the process. He's a philanthropist of notable proportions and supports all manner of good causes to boot.

You need to demonstrate how "favoring the Buffets of the world" somehow impedes "small to medium businesses," particularly since those with substantial investment capital to invest are the very persons who fund a good many small businesses, turning them into medium and big businesses.

What is this "level playing field" you seek, and how will taxing Buffet's ilk produce it, specifically?

Keep in mind that the "ultra-rich" do not NEED to invest or earn income at all. They have more money than one person could possibly spend in a lifetime. If they wanted to, they could shut down every company they own, fire every worker, sell off all the assets and PUT THEIR MONEY IN A GIANT VAULT AND DIVE IN IT WEEKLY if they want. At which point the economy would REALLY tank, and they would still live high on the hog for the rest of their, and their grandchildren's lives. Being wealthy in a depression is a wonderful thing. Everything's cheap as dirt.

Without production, money is just numbers in a computer. If the current depression gets much worse, we're likely to see either hyperinflation or a revolution, either of which will make those numbers worthless.

Still, no matter how inflated the money supply, being wealthy is always better than being poor in a depression.

Meanwhile, the hardworking folks in the 1% and 10% do get taxed. That's what's not fair.

Which 1 and 10 percent? The bottom or the top?

I'm referring to the rest of the top 1% and 10% that Buffett and his ilk want to raise taxes on, while keeping the money of the top 0.001% sheltered.

Well, I'd have to see proof that he's advocating that. Last I heard he wasn't excluding himself.

[Seth]

I think the tactics of the protestors in many parts of the world (including Australia) should be criticised, since they seem to be all about provoking an inevitable confrontation with civil authorities after the occupation of public places by squalid camps drags on and on and on...

They seem to glory in a romantic picture of themselves as defiant outsiders; in the end, they tend to play into the hands of governments and media, who can portray them in a way that makes it very unlikely they will be joined by large numbers of people that might otherwise be sympathetic to their underlying concerns.

Having said that, I still think that the wealth gap is excessive, and the ability of the wealthy and large corporations to manipulate the political process to their own advantage needs addressing.

They are Marx's "useful idiots" and they are being organized and manipulated by Marxist hard-liners, and will be sacrificed and disposed of as necessary to forward the hard-line Marxist revolutionary agenda. They just don't know it because they are idiots.

[Seth]

These things take time. It's enough for now that it's worldwide and that it's raised and continues to raise awareness of wealth inequality among many who haven't been paying attention for decades.

Fair point...

Horseshit point. It's the Marxist dialectic of class warfare, nothing less, nothing more. The Marxists think they have an opening to foment violent revolution to overthrow the government and institute hard-line Marxism. They're wrong, but they're trying anyway. They're not going to succeed because most people understand that Marxism and Communism are not a rational replacement for capitalism because they need look no further than the defunct Soviet Union, China, Cuba, Venezuela and the other Marxist shit-holes of the world as proof the ideology is dangerously insane.