1% CEO runs train on Occupiers

Most of the OWS protestors are fucking clueless as to how it works it's disgusting. I think if the OWS protestors realized what most of the objectives for OWS are, they would be taken seriously.

Well, for you ignorant 16 year olds that have completely bought in to the whole "We are the 99%" sham that seems to be circulating in the media... read this, ALL OF THIS, and then come back and protest.

http://october2011.org/node/1829
 
I bet you that 99% of the people who endorse OWS don't even understand the basics/fundamentals of the movement. They instead endorse it because they feel that their failures of success are not their own faults, but instead are looking for someone else to take the blame. Which is why almost everyone in those videos like retards, because they actually are.
 
The majority of the 99% are lazy assholes thinking they should automatically get money and take more money from the ones that actually worked to get to where they are. Rich people work hard to get where they are, they shouldn't have to hand over over 1/2 of what they earn to the gov.
 
And to avoid hate, by majority I mean the many who jumped on the bandwagon thinking they'll get more money for doing nothing, yes there are some who actually know what they are protesting for but the video proves there are only a few who do.
 
If you watched the video woozy posted, rather than the clips highlighting the brain dead idiots, you'd see that there are protesters that have solid arguments. I'm not supporting the occupy movement, but there are many intelligent people with intelligent arguments. But to many idiots manage to get in front of a camera and give the whole movement a bad rap.
 
best part of this video is at 6:20 when some guy starts yelling, "did a corporation end slavery?" Really shows the intelligence of your average OWS protester. I don't know if its just selective editing or something, but every single person shown in these videos seems to not have a clue what they're talking about.
 
but the ones with intelligent arguments aren't really arguing with him, they have the same goals in mind.

and really, his point is perfect. Why are these people protesting wall street when wall street can will nothing about the change they seek? Go protest the government.
 
Im fairly confident that the occupy protesters are just homeless and jobless people that have nothing else to do with their time than to complain about it. After all, who would live in a tent in some city park in december if they owned a nice warm comfortable house?
 
People like you are pathetic. You whine and bitch every time someone (media included) profile something embarrassing said by a OWS type. And you cry about how it does t represent the movement at all and tell people to get "educated" hahah. It's a movement with no centralized leadership and no established values. So how are those 3 people any less representative of the movement then your friends or the people "you know". They arnt. Their public persona is just inconvenient to your overall narrative about OWS
 
'' - Everybody in this park wants low prices .

- No we dont, no we dont. ''

euhm what ?
 
A couple questions..

1) If Schiff's goal was to make a point, why would he engage a random crowd of laymen on the street rather than one or more of the many professors and economists who support OWS? What does a debate with a group of random people who cannot and do not represent the thing as a whole prove?

Furthermore, I remember Schiff foreseeing the 2008 crisis well ahead of time, and being aware of the shady business banks were engaging in. Why then, is he placing himself in a position opposing the OWS as a whole, if he is clearly not content with the state of affairs in the US economy? And why is the conversation only about one or two topics out of the many topics OWS concerns itself with?

2) How is it possible to pay 50% of your total income if the largest chunk of it is 35% marginal federal? It seems to me his marginal rates can add up to just about 50%, but that is a far cry from "paying 50% of your income." I'd like to see his actual tax numbers like Buffett's, or at least a conceptual breakdown including loopholes and deductions..something beyond simply listing marginal rates of various taxes

3) Why are people still under the impression that OWS is about handouts? Why do people think they are okay with the corruption in our private sector and government?

NOTE: these are NOT rhetorical questions meant to stir the pot, i'm really looking for good answers to these questions

Personally, i think it's a real shame that populist movements like this inevitably get watered down with so many random idiots that there really is no intellectual discourse going on. I think OWS should figure out some clear leadership in the form of their most qualified professors and economists and try to arrange a formal debate, sort of like Austrian economists have asked to have before. random crowds of people getting engaged in debates with CEO/economists like Schiff is a recipe for anything but a formal debate
 
also all the retards yelling that rich people should give them money need to shut up and let the people are trying to get the money out of politics talk.
 
This is hypocritical. You were bitching about how the U.S. wastes money. I provided an example of the money and resources that the OWS "movement" consumes and you call me out? Please, go be their leader so I have a reason to dislike OWS even more.
 
1) well i agree, it is an attention grabber, but my gripe with the whole thing is that it's more of an attention grabber and less of a true discourse.. if my favorite mouthpieces went down and recorded a video of them arguing with some random people on the street i would similarly be unimpressed

good to know he doesnt totally oppose OWS, but videos like this (once again, we're lacking a true statement of stances from pretty much everyone involved) make the average person watch and conclude that he is..

2) like i said, i know there are many taxes involved in the claim, but he seems to simply list the applicable marginal rates, which do NOT equal the actual percentage of income forfeited in taxes, not even close. am i wrong, or is it a gross misrepresentation for him to say that 50% of his income goes away in taxes? i also think it fails to mention diminishing marginal utility but of course that's a whole 'nother can of worms, and gets way too subjective way too fast

agreed on the debate, though i dont keep up with economics enough to recognize a couple of those names
 
Well looks like I have a new hero...I bet He could take on 99 OWS protesters in a debate by himself
 
Havn't read article yet but the first line reads "The disconnect between Congress and the people is vast."

Had a really long conversation about how to make democracy work.
 
I highly doubt he is underpaying his employees. Most professionals in the finance/economics fields who work in the private sector are very highly paid. If he was underpaying them, they would leave to a different firm. And there is no moral reason for him to overpay his secretaries, janitors, low-skilled employees more than they are worth just because he is rich.
 
Alright well you all are talking about giving the wealth back to the people.

How about indirectly placing money back into the system for people to make. I guarantee Mr. 70,000,000 doesn't need 70,000,000 and could easily put a lot of that back into the economy, not by paying taxes.
 
99% of the fuckers protesting at these rallies are idiots who just want more money without working for it. The half-assed speeches they give are quite similar to the half-assed papers that kids write to half-ass their way through economics class in high school. They use big words like "socioeconomic," "unregulated," and "economy" when they don't really know what they're talking about. I'm far from being in the 1% but I can certainly say that this "movement" is pure bullshit and isn't going to get anybody anywhere.
 
I agree that rich people have responsibilities, if not an obligation to share their wealth.

The "new idea" you seem to pose sets yourself up perfectly to be owned. I believe you are suggesting philanthropy, which many rich financiers do engage in, and many schools who have strong finance/economics programs encourage their students to be philanthropists if they are successful.

BUT...How about instead of Mr. 70M paying high taxes, he pumps money back into the economy by buying yachts, lambos, and mansions!?

My point is that too many people do not realize the amount of effort and time required to become successful in finance, and that these "rich, greedy, viillains" donate millions and millions of dollars each year. OWS has good intentions, but so many Occupiers do not know what they are talking about. That Schiff video was spot on to how I feel.
 
he's comparing himself because in a way they are comparing themselves to him. yes it is unfair that he, a rich CEO compares himself to middle class citizens, but in a way it is also unfair that they compare him to every rich person in the world.

yes there are people who underpay and overwork their employees, and they are to some extent assholes for doing so, but this guy has a point. basically what he's saying is, if you hate being the overworked/underpaid ones, instead of complaining about it why don't you bust your ass to get to the top so that you yourself can benefit the middle class working group that you once belonged to. some legacies are handed down on a silver platter but other people have worked night and day to be successful, and to me the 99% is just complaining that they themselves can't be as successful as them. if they had stopped complaining at the start of this, they would already be well on their way to success by now.

that being said, to some extent I see both sides of this argument. personally i find the whole movement very farfetched, and I don't consider myself as a true supporter of either side. in a week there'll be a video up of some CEO getting his ass handed to him in an argument and i'll probably agree then with what the occupiers are saying, but for now, that video just made me laugh.

"how many people do you employ?"

HAHA she shut up instantly.
 
what are the vast majority of occupy protesters doing to help this country? fucking zero. some of them are missing work for days at a time to go protest what is quite honestly a lost cause. yes, there is a HUGE amount of corruption in the 1% and big business, but there are also a decent amount of people who aren't out to fuck the little guy over. all I'm trying to say is that this is not the way to go about changing the economic status of an entire country, nor will we be straying from capitalism anytime soon. capitalism has been used in the USA since pretty much the beginning and it works. this is how capitalism works. there's a small upper class and that's not going to change. are there better, more fair economic systems? absolutely. is it going to chance? probably not.
 
I gues you are the retard.

OWS does not equal Occupy Washington DC. Although similar in intent, that article and Occupying Washington DC are basically argued for by Schiff in the video. "You need to occupy the legislators who make the rules, not the people that exploit them. Otherwise there will ne no change."
 
The occupiers are in fact doing good to help this country, or at least the motives behind the movement are valid. Granted, there are so many idiot protesters. What are the better economic systems? Although imperfect, the capitalist system is the best economic system.
 
the point is that things need to change. its been that way for a while. its because of the OWS people that the discussion is being brought up and is on the news.
 
the motives are indeed great, but this isn't the most productive way to go about it. capitalism is absolutely the best system, however what i meant is that the way we're using it could be changed for the better. but nothing's perfect, and i'm not going to come out and say that i know how to make the economy and the country great, because i don't.
 
I am not proposing anything. All I want to say is he doesn't need 70 million and AMERICA does, if AMERICANS want that money they are going to have to work just as hard as mr. 70 million did, probably harder, but at least the money is there for them.

The Schiff video was on point but only to shut up the people that want hand outs. So he gives 50% of his income to the GOVERNMENT in Taxes, big fucking deal. You are still sitting on more money than you need and thats the bottom line. In the 40s 50s the fed told you how much you needed and if you were making way more than you needed, they took 90% of it, literally.

In a free world with no regulation the smart business venture for Mr. 70 Million isn't investing 50% of his paycheck into a company that is $16 trillion in debt...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top