Home > Protest > Today in Oakland

Today in Oakland

  1. Travis Turner
    November 2, 2011 at 12:08 am

    8 from occupy Humboldt on the road to Oakland.

  2. Anonymous
    November 2, 2011 at 6:46 am

    let’s do this thing!

  3. Ben
    November 2, 2011 at 7:04 am

    If 8 people from occupy Humboldt leave, there will be no occupy Humboldt because from what I have seen there are only a few people at the Courthouse, but a lot of signs and junk.

  4. Mitch
    November 2, 2011 at 7:46 am

    This general strike is a wonderful thing.

    How telling that the clearly very talented graphic artist recognized that it is from another era. Perhaps our own era is waking up from its Reaganesque slumber.

  5. November 2, 2011 at 8:28 am

    Not all of us were asleep the last 40 years. Too bad it’s too little and way too late – the looting is almost complete – nothing to save – no dignity and no honor left.

  6. November 2, 2011 at 9:03 am

    We have been talking here about “Occupy Your Home”
    A one week long general strike, like Oakland’s, only nation wide.
    We will need more time to properly organize it into nation wide event. I would like to suggest maybe in February if things haven’t changed by then…
    Maybe a week long flu, or take your vacation, by whatever mechanism, just stay home.

    Shut it down, Fup the man! the 99% has had enough!

    Look for us to launch this idea if we don’t see attitudes change in the next few weeks by the current protests.

    For me, a month without work and I will be filing for bankruptcy and my family may be homeless.

    if we don’t do something this can only get worse.

    Should it really be so hard to stay solvent in America?
    So hard to send our kids to college,
    so hard for them to pay off their student loans afterward
    so hard to afford medical and dental care
    …to pay the mortgage
    …to buy food

  7. 454
    November 2, 2011 at 9:16 am

    nice poster, well done

  8. Scab
    November 2, 2011 at 9:26 am

    If you will bow down and worship ME, I will give you all you want.

    One who hath yearnings
    For equal division of unequal earnings’–

    1. to have no private property in land, and all rents from land to go to public purposes
    2. A heavy graduated tax on all incomes.
    3. The doing away of all rights of inheritance.
    4. The taking over of all property of emigrants and rebels for public use.
    5. The state to have exclusive monopoly of all credit, and handle it by means of a State bank.
    6. State ownership of all means of communication and transportation, such as telegraphs and railroads.
    7.The state to promote various productive enterprises.
    8. Compulsory labor, and the establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
    9.The combination of agriculture and manufacturing, and more even distribution of the population between town and country.
    10. Free education for all in a system of public schools; and no child labor factories.

    Karl Marx

    We’all communists now.

  9. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 9:28 am

    Someone should pick that nasty scab and flush it.

  10. Mitch
    November 2, 2011 at 9:32 am

    PJ,

    Scab’s (Marx’s) #10 is particularly terrifying:

    10. Free education for all in a system of public schools; and no child labor factories.

  11. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 9:38 am

    When you have a mindset like Scabby you have to be against anything “socialists” are for and for anything they are against. That way you don’t have to think!

  12. High Finance
    November 2, 2011 at 10:14 am

    Other than the overthrow of the United States Government, what is the objective of these “occupiers” ? Could it be just having fun for people who don’t work, getting publicity and having a fun campout party or just thumbing their noses at the vast majority of people that go to work each day ?

    I see signs in the mess outside our courthouse saying “Tax Wallstreet”, “Free Tibet” and others that are anti corporations. They have no common theme or protest.

    It is just a disgrace the feckless county Board of Supervisors don’t grow a backbone & remove these bums from our public property.

  13. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 10:32 am

    The root is corporate political power, HiFi.

    This one’s dedicated to you:

  14. Fact Checker
    November 2, 2011 at 10:54 am

    High Traitor said:
    November 2, 2011 at 10:14 am
    “Other than the overthrow of the United States Government, what is the objective of these “occupiers” ?”

    Answer:
    “Procession of veterans starts at 11:00amat Vietnam Veterans Plaza, 55 Water Street, New York, NY Will march to Liberty Square (Zuccotti Park)

    Military veterans will walk in uniform to join the Occupy Wall Street protests this Wednesday (Nov. 2nd). As the 99% movement spreads across the United States, the presence of veterans at rallies, marches, and occupations is becoming increasingly visible. Veterans who served in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and even World War II have participated in the movement, speaking out for the 99%, and raising the movement’s visibility in the process. Most recently, the unconscionable treatment of Marine veteran Scott Olsen in Oakland has drawn national attention to veterans’ participation in the Occupy Wall Street movement. Read More… http://occupywallst.org/

    Occupy Wall Street (OWS) is an ongoing series of demonstrations in New York City based in Zuccotti Park in the Wall Street financial district. The protests were initiated by the Canadian activist group Adbusters.[5] They are mainly protesting social and economic inequality, corporate greed, corruption and influence over government—particularly from the financial services sector—and lobbyists. The protesters’ slogan, “We are the 99%”, refers to the difference in wealth in the U.S. between the wealthiest 1% and the rest of the population. (more) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

  15. Fact Checker
    November 2, 2011 at 10:58 am

    High Colonic said:
    November 2, 2011 at 10:14 am

    “It is just a disgrace the feckless county Board of Supervisors don’t grow a backbone & remove these bums from our public property.”

    These bums, the Tea Baggers and the Colonial Revolutionaries, all of them need to be “remove(d) … from our public property”. It’s ours, all ours! What a tool!

  16. Mitch
    November 2, 2011 at 10:58 am

    HiFi,

    If you’re confused, it might help to reread the Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence. Both summarize the goals of Occupy Wall Street admirably.

  17. Mitch
    November 2, 2011 at 11:14 am

    I think this would be the most relevant part of the Declaration of Independence, HiFi:

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

    As for the Constitution, I think the #OWS goal is to restore meaningfulness to Article 1, Section 6. Basically, the legislators and, for that matter, the executive, were supposed to be paid by the people as a whole. Today, they are paid by the corporate lobbyists, such that Article 1, Section 6 is not really in effect. Similarly, elements in the Bill of Rights are essentially obsolete today, due to media ownership concentration.

  18. Sol
    November 2, 2011 at 11:31 am

    You want the supervisors to grow a backbone but you are too cowardly to post with your own name? ROFLMAO

  19. High Finance
    November 2, 2011 at 11:36 am

    Perhaps FactLess & Mitch were so eager to insult they forgot to read my question ?

    LOL SOL !

  20. November 2, 2011 at 11:38 am

    Thousands marching in Oakland.

  21. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 12:07 pm

    Perhaps HiFi only wants to complain about who didn’t answer his question as a way to ignore his question being answered? I could understand some people not understanding what OWS is about, but not HiFi. It’s not like we haven’t had this discussion innumerable times, discussed the political and economic ramifications of wealth concentration, corporations bribing with campaign contributions for deregulation and lower taxes for corporations and the rich, decreasing wages for the working class because of increasing wealth for the elites, etc. etc. For him to pretend he just doesn’t get it is cyber slap stick.

  22. High Finance
    November 2, 2011 at 1:11 pm

    The question was simple yet seems to have escaped you.

    What is their endgame, what do they hope to accomplish with their demonstrations ? You all are answering what they are protesting. I am asking what it is they demand to achieve before ending the demonstrations.

    It appears their goal is nothing less than the overthrow of the current system. In which case their encampments will be there for decades. If so, then the actions ordered by the liberal democrat mayor of Oakland were appropriate.

  23. Mitch
    November 2, 2011 at 1:19 pm

    Hi Fi,

    There seems to have been a mistake made. It sounds like OWS didn’t realize you’d want a list of their goals. I guess I can understand why you’d be frustrated. I’d repeat my suggestion that you re-read the Declaration of Independence, but you misunderstood that to be an insult, judging by your response.

    Anyway, you can go read any “radical rag” for the last thirty or forty years — The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, The New York Times, hell, probably Popular Mechanics — and you might get some idea of what the protesters seek. If that doesn’t work, I’d recommend you check out Tom Paine’s “Common Sense” or Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount.

    Keep digging… you’ll get it!! I’m rooting for you.

  24. November 2, 2011 at 1:41 pm

    HiFi asks, “Other than the overthrow of the United States Government, what is the objective of these “occupiers”.

    The L.A. Times’, Steve Lopez, wonders if there’s an end game to the protests, too:

    http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-1030-lopez-occupy-20111030,0,4348313.column

  25. jr
    November 2, 2011 at 1:54 pm

    There have been many discussions about the need for a public bank. Today’s Open Forum article in the Chronicle http://www.sfgate.com discusses the merits of such an institution. Go to http://www.publicbankinginstitute.org for additional details.

  26. tra
    November 2, 2011 at 2:28 pm

    Social movements are notoriously lacking in “endgame” because social change is not a “game.” Unlike a “game,” the rules are not fixed and the action never really stops, it just ebbs and flows. In the Big Picture, OWS is just another wave in the overall tidal movement toward greater social justices.

    Is the goal of OWS to “overthrow the system?” Sure, in the same sense that the abolition of slavery and the emancipation of women and the civil rights movement and the peace movement all sought to “overthrow the system,” or at least those aspects of the system that were seen as most onerous and unjust.

    In this case it is the accelerating rate at which the already-rich are siphoning off more and more of the nation’s wealth that has led to the widespread feeling of injustice that animates the OWS protesters and the many millions of Americans who sympathize with them.

    Essentially, those who criticize OWS for not being specific enough about their goals or their “endgame” are really just saying “hurry up and tell us your demands.” Perhaps some of these critics are getting worried that the movement will continue to gain ground and popularity with the American public, at which point those demands might become even bolder, and harder to ignore. And I suspect they’re probably right about that.

  27. Anonymous
    November 2, 2011 at 3:19 pm

    The whole 99% versus the 1% is based on some seriously bad math. Interestingly, in a fantasy of revolution in which the total net worth of the Forbes 440 Wealthiest Americans (which was $1.37 trillion in 2010) was taken and redistributed (without cost) pro rata to each of our other 330,000,000 citizens, they would each receive $415.15.

    Isn’t it thus obvious that the wealth of those 400 rich folk hasn’t “siphoned off” any sum that would make anyone’s life any different at all? The OWS concocted an evil agent, the so-called “wealthy,” but these caricatures are merely scary ghosts. The anti-corporate sentiment is likewise misplaced. What is at work is the age-old “green-eyed monster” known as envy.

    There are only two ways societies deal with envy. We can either manage the envious feelings by positively working to improve our own lot, or, negatively, by reducing the net worth of those with whom we compare poorly in net worth. Societies who rely on the latter method always fail.

    Margaret Thatcher noted that, “The only problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.” The math above shows that is true. Instead of talking about increasing the taxes on the 1% (which will not pay for much, actually), the math above shows that if we confiscate the entire net worth of the richest 400 Americans it wouldn’t change a damn thing. Except, perhaps, make those 400 folk a bit unhappy … you think?

    Our federal debt, as of today, is $ 14,975,825,378,262.70. That is more than ten times the NET WORTH of the Forbes 400 Wealthiest Americans. This debt situation is, as some would say, unsustainable.

  28. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 3:20 pm

    The core disease is corporate political power. The corruption, wealth concentration and unstable economy and society which flow from it are symptoms of the rot.

  29. Fact Checker
    November 2, 2011 at 3:41 pm

    Fred Mangels said:
    November 2, 2011 at 1:41 pm

    HiFi asks, “Other than the overthrow of the United States Government, what is the objective of these “occupiers”.
    The L.A. Times’, Steve Lopez, wonders if there’s an end game to the protests, too:”

    The British were asking themselves this same question in 1773, some people just can’t see what is right in front of them.

    “The Boston Tea Party was a direct action by colonists in Boston, a town in the British colony of Massachusetts, against the British government and the monopolistic East India Company that controlled all the tea imported into the colonies. On December 16, 1773, after officials in Boston refused to return three shiploads of taxed tea to Britain, a group of colonists boarded the ships and destroyed the tea by throwing it into Boston Harbor.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party

  30. November 2, 2011 at 3:45 pm

    Anon @ 3:19,

    1% of 330,000,000 is 3,300,000 not 400.

    So let’s talk about the wealth of the top 3.3 MILLION wealthiest Americans, not just 400.

    Whose math is bad?

    A nice attempt at sowning disinformation, but you are dumber than High Finance if you really believe this.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  31. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 3:58 pm

    He just got the decimal point in the wrong place, Bill. I’m SURE it was an honest mistake.

  32. Anonymous
    November 2, 2011 at 4:33 pm

    How is a strike going to liberate Oakland? How is allowing city employees to take the day off and requiring the Police to work make any sense? How do 15% of the government school teachers help the students? (Whoops bad example.)How does shutting down the port help anybody?

    Has anybody looked at Oakland, Berkeley, or San Francisco lately? Run by liberal Democrats for how many years?

    Steve Jobs was worth about $9 billion plus made a Corporation that has bounced from number 1 or 2 in size in the United States, was he bad? Is Apple bad? How would you keep him and his company from making so much money? How would you take his money from him? Did he harm any one?

  33. November 2, 2011 at 4:35 pm

    Apple outsourced all their manufacturing to Asia. They could manufacture here and still make a profit.

    Does that answer some of your questions?

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  34. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 5:12 pm

    It’s great that his company and he make a lot of money. It would be even greater if they paid more in taxes to support the country and paid better wages to domestic labor. Tax rates should prevent democracy and economy destroying concentration of wealth and political power. How hard is it to understand that when too much wealth is in too few hands the will economy tank? How hard is it to understand that unlimited political contributions destroy democracy by corrupting our representatives? How hard is to understand that corporations whose only motivation is market share and quarterly profits are sociopathic citizens at best and shouldn’t be allowed to use their economic power to gain political power?

  35. Anonymous
    November 2, 2011 at 5:19 pm

    Highboltage: I did not miss a decimal. The point was that the top 400 hold the very most net worth. I, of course, understand that you want to confiscate the net worth of all the 1%. How kind of you. But envy is as envy does. That’s the point. Think about that. It is unsustainable.

  36. tra
    November 2, 2011 at 5:28 pm

    “…you want to confiscate the net worth of all the 1%.”

    You are hallucinating. Seek professional help.

  37. Mitch
    November 2, 2011 at 5:33 pm

    Anonymous 5:19,

    Perhaps you’ll be able to see how dishonest your statistics seem to us if you apply them to the bottom 50%. For example, “since the bottom 50% of taxpayers only pay [your number here] in income taxes, anyone can see that these people could have their taxes completely forgiven and it would make no difference to the economy.”

    See? It’s easy to make dumb statements like that. But you only get away with it in certain circles when you say things like “the wealth of the top 400 would only give $400 to each of 330,000,000 Americans.”

    Think about that statement for a moment.

    If you were living on $15,000 per year, $400 for medications might make a HUGE difference in your life. Multiply by 330,000,000, and you might understand why more and more people feel that giving tax discounts to the wealthiest Americans is a national disgrace.

    Are we actually supposed to be happy that changes to our tax system have reduced taxes for the 400 folks who already have billions? When there’s 15% un-or-underemployment for 330,000,000, and when millions of Americans have no access to regular health care?

    Are we supposed to be pleased for the Forbes 400 while the majority of 7 billion humans can barely keep themselves fed?

  38. November 2, 2011 at 5:33 pm

    I just want to tax the 1% until they squeal. I don’t want to confiscate all their wealth. We need wealthy people.

    Back in the 50s the top income tax rate was 90% and we had real inheritance taxes. You know what? We still had rich people.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  39. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 5:36 pm

    The purpose of 5:19’s straw man is obviously to change the subject from a reasonable discussion of the problems inherent in wealth and political power concentration to accusations of confiscation of wealth. That’s a favorite tactic of frightwing pundits but it doesn’t work when you can’t hang up on the caller without giving them a chance to respond.

  40. November 2, 2011 at 5:37 pm

    Anon your point by using the forbes 400 instead of the real 1% (over 3 million people) is so that you could obfuscate the truth.

    Who are you anyway that old cut and paster Hannaford? He is as dull and unoriginal as High Finance.

    have a peacefu day,
    Bill

  41. Anonymous
    November 2, 2011 at 5:49 pm

    How wealthy do you have to be to be in the top 1% and be disliked here? Net worth would be—–what? Yearly income?

  42. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 5:53 pm

    It isn’t about liking or disliking rich people, 5:49. It’s about an economic / tax system that works effectively to “insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty” for our nation.

  43. November 2, 2011 at 5:58 pm

    I like rich people. We need rich people so we can tax them. Eliminating them would be a big mistake.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  44. November 2, 2011 at 6:03 pm

    The CBO data shown in Table 1 also show that between 1979 and 2007:

    ■The average after-tax income of the top 1 percent of the population nearly quadrupled, from $347,000 to over $1.3 million. As noted, this represented an increase of $973,100, or 281 percent, per household.
    ■By contrast, the average after-tax income of the middle fifth of the population rose from $44,100 in 1979 to $55,300 in 2007 — a relatively modest gain of $11,200 or 25 percent.
    ■The average after-tax income of the poorest fifth of the population rose from $15,300 to $17,700, an increase of $2,400 or 16 percent.

  45. Anonymous
    November 2, 2011 at 6:03 pm

    Mitch and Highboldtadge: Both missing my point. The problem is when people compare their conditions to others, and want to improve their conditions by taking from others. That is the negative form of expression of envy. See: OWS and its progeny.

    Indeed, the bottom 50% pay no income taxes (but do pay 15% payroll taxes when they can find work). My empathy is with the un- and under-employed, but my solution to that problem is different than what you propose. The outcome you seek looks like Greece. We cannot continually spend other peoples’ money and obtain some utopian ideal. It is unsustainable.

    Sorry about the math above if it did not make my point. Such is the reality of blogging some times. I guess the issue is really this: how does the fact that someone else (the 1%) has a higher net worth than most make the life condition of the 99% somehow worse? Are most of those 99% really unable to lift themselves out of their comparatively inferior condition? Is social justice only defined as all of us being and having the same? The problem results from what things we choose to do about how we feel when we compare ourselves to others living in perceptibly better conditions. In Oakland it is a silly strike. To what end? Really.

    I understand fully your point about the high costs of medical care, limited income, etc. We should find means to assure economic justice for the most needy., and those unable to provide for themselves. What I can’t buy into is the notion that the 1% have siphoned off anything. If we can get the economy performing again we can lift more of the 99% up, certainly we can improve on that 15% un- or under-employed number, and lives will improve. We are told that there are a couple of trillion dollars on the side lines uninvested; we should be talking about providing incentives to getting that money back into the economy, employing people.

  46. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 6:09 pm

    Where do you think their 275% increase in wealth came from as the earnings of the working class declined, Anonymous? Do they have their own money printers? What percentage of wealth can be concentrated in a few hundred hands without negative consequences to the economy?

  47. Anonymous
    November 2, 2011 at 6:14 pm

    PJ: I don’t know. Probably varied. I don’t think so. Probably illegal to print your own money. I don’t know. Your solution?

  48. November 2, 2011 at 6:18 pm

    anon says:

    “Are most of those 99% really unable to lift themselves out of their comparatively inferior condition?”

    Well by that logic one might inquire why the rich need to pass on big inheritances to their progeny? Is their spawn too stupid or lazy to lift themselves out of the same condition as everyone else?

    have a peaceful day
    Bill

  49. Mitch
    November 2, 2011 at 6:25 pm

    Anonymous 6:03 wrote:

    “We should find means to assure economic justice for the most needy., and those unable to provide for themselves. What I can’t buy into is the notion that the 1% have siphoned off anything.”

    Mind-boggling, Anonymous. Where have you been?

    The entire financial sector has been one gigantic fraud for the past two or three decades, nothing but a machine to keep reward and deny risk, pushing it off onto the general public. There are fraudsters like Madoff who represent the cherry on top of the sundae, but the entire sundae is a concoction of fraud in its deregulated design.

    The change from a country where CEOs make 40x the average worker’s pay to 300x the average worker’s pay is a huge siphoning off. Unless you believe that the average CEO has suddenly become 8x as productive relative to the average worker as they were in 1980, there is no legitimate reason for this change.

    There has been a huge change in tax policy dropping inheritance taxes and taxes on the wealthiest. What is this if not a siphoning off?

    Our jobs have been shipped overseas, so that labor has no negotiating position. The already-wealthy, who are in a position to invest in corporations that exploit foreign workers, are able to make more money both abroad, by exploiting people for whom $1/hour represents an economic improvement, and here, by exploiting people who can no longer get jobs at the wages that used to be thought fair (because they are now directly competing with the $1/hr crowd overseas).

    An economy has a certain productive capacity. It can be used for guns or bread or cake. As the United States has changed from a relatively egalitarian nation to one with huge income disparities, an economy that used to focus on bread for many has been inevitably diverted into producing cake for the few. That’s siphoning off, and you don’t need a PhD to understand it.

    We’ve had thirty to forty years of an economy where a rising tide lifted all yachts and drowned the rest of us. We’re tired of it.

    We agree about one thing, Anonymous. It’s not the 1%.

    In reality, it’s the .01% (the top ten-thousandth). But that makes a lousy bumper sticker.

  50. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 6:30 pm

    Upward mobility in this country has fallen far behind due to declining wages as the price of a college education has skyrocketed, faster than even the cost of medical care, at a time when they are told their only chance of success is a college degree but there aren’t jobs that enable them to pay off their loans once they graduate.

    I’ve already given my solution, Anonymous. A political funding system that doesn’t allow for bribery disguised as huge contributions and a tax system that effectively blocks vast wealth accumulation. One that funds a first world social safety net and real equal opportunity, i.e. excellent and affordable higher education, living wages, health care and comfortable retirement.

  51. Mitch
    November 2, 2011 at 6:33 pm

    Sounds awfully “European,” PJ. I heard that doesn’t work.

  52. Plain Jane
    November 2, 2011 at 6:52 pm

    I forgot, Mitch.

    Why don’t we step away from blaming percentages of people and focus on policies that are problematic. Not every person in the top 0.01 to 1% believes they will stop being rich if their income taxes are raised a few percent. Obviously confiscating rich people’s wealth isn’t a going to happen, nor should it. But setting tax rates and regulations to discourage the greed and hoarding that has had such a devastating impact on our economy, national unity and sense of what we stand for as a society doesn’t fit any definition of wealth confiscation. Confiscation is what happens when reasonable people are ignored for too long, the pendulum swings so far that it breaks and becomes a guillotine. Reasonable people don’t want that regardless of their income but desperate people aren’t usually very reasonable.

  53. November 2, 2011 at 6:55 pm

    It is obvious that it is the poor and the middle whose wealth has been confiscated in the last few decades.

    The capitalist system redistributes wealth to the wealthy.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  54. jr
    November 2, 2011 at 7:06 pm

    In the early 80s Martin Canoy and Derek Sherer wrote Economic Democracy partly to address the inequities of Reagonomics. As I recall, their thesis was to make economic policy more egalitarian, but I have forgotten their strategies toward economic democracy. I plan to dust off this book and re-read it. Perhaps others can weigh in on this book and its value 30 plus years later.

  55. November 2, 2011 at 8:33 pm

    Here’s a little parable for you so you can better understand the concept of a “flat tax” like that corporate fascist Mitt Romney or the Christofascists like Rick Perry want to impose on us.

    Let’s assume that the top 1% in income average $1.3 million a year in income. That’s the 2007 figure it is close enough. Now we decide to tax the 1% an average of $1.000,000 a year, roughtly 77%. This is not even as high as it was in the 50s so we know it is not a “confiscatory” rate because we still have rich people.

    Now we decide we are just going to collect it as a flat tax. Because a flat tax is “fair” correct?

    So that means that 99% of the 1% will end up with a bit more than $300,000 while 1% of the 1% will end up with…….the rest of it.

    I will do the math for you Fox viewers. The total tax bill for the 1% will be $1,000,000 x 3,300.000 = $3,300,000,000,000. Three point three TRILLION dollars a year if we tax the 1% @ 77%. Can that be true? Yes I checked it twice. WOW we could pay off the WHOLE NATIONAL DEBT in FIVE YEARS if we tax the 1% @ 77%!

    Now here’s the fun part, remember that the 99% of the 1% will be paying thier flat tax of a million a year and netting after taxes $300,000. That’s 3.2 million millonaires paying their fair share! Now the super rich, the 1% of the 1% will also be paying their fair share – $1,000,000 same as everybody else. It’s the flattness that makes it “fair” you see!.

    When the tax bite doesn’t even itch, well that’s fair enough for anyone. So the 1% won’t mind if we put a “flat tax” on them. Right?

    Is there anyone who doesn’t understand this now?

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  56. Anonymous
    November 2, 2011 at 9:24 pm

    Monsanto took scientific advancements in genetics made at public universities to create terminator seeds…a crime against nature and mankind in the name of private profit, untaxed in offshore accounts.

    Meanwhile, the Reich-Wingers can’t help themselves from attacking public welfare for the poor even though the average welfare payment in the U.S. is about $200 per month.

  57. High Finance
    November 2, 2011 at 10:20 pm

    Jesus, do any of you know how to google ?

    Mitch, Bill, PJ and a few others are like thieves, consumed with envy of the successful looking desperately for excuses to use the tax system to steal from people.

    The top 1% average $380,354 a year. Their average effective tax rate is 23.27%. They make about 20% of all income and pay 38% of all income taxes paid.

    http://www.financialsamurai.com/2011/04/12/how-much-money-do-the-top-income-earners-make-percent/

  58. High Finance
    November 2, 2011 at 10:26 pm

    Furthermore, the earlier poster did not “slip a decimal point”. He was almost right on the button.

    While the top 1% make a total of $1.685 trillion dollars, they already pay over $392 billion dollars in taxes. This only leaves a net amount available to the thieves among you of not quite $1.3 trillion dollars.

    So if you stole 100% of their total income you wouldn’t even have enough to balance Obama’s deficit.

  59. November 2, 2011 at 10:27 pm

    Thanks for that link to the “Financial Samurai,” HiFi. You sure do know how to Google.

    The latest headline on that site is Are The Top 1% Getting Screwed The Most?

    Hahaha!

  60. High Finance
    November 2, 2011 at 11:20 pm

    Facts tend to blow your arguments out of the water Josh.

  61. Anonymous
    November 3, 2011 at 12:17 am

    The only thing “rich” about America’s traitors is when some rural right-wing hillbilly calling himself “High Finance” thinks he’s a beneficiary of corruption rivaling the Gilded Age.

    The income of the top 1% is far more than what’s reported to the IRS thanks to a global economy still in its infancy, and the offshore shell games that few understand.

    At least one heroic American knew what was happening on U.S. soil.

    When the director of the U.S. Commodities Futures Trading Commission warned Congress of the worldwide economic threat from unregulated U.S. trading in 1999, Congress cut C.F.T.C. funding and the director resigned. (pbs.org “The Warning”).

  62. Plain Jane
    November 3, 2011 at 4:36 am

    And again I am reminded of what a waste of time it is to try to have an honest, rational discussion with HiFi about anything. No matter how many facts or explanations as to motivations he is provided, he just reverts back to accusing people of class envy and theft. He’s honesty and intellectually bankrupt, a typical frightwinger.

  63. Mitch
    November 3, 2011 at 7:19 am

    “Mitch, Bill, PJ and a few others are like thieves, consumed with envy of the successful looking desperately for excuses to use the tax system to steal from people.”

    I’ve got to confess, Hi Fi has a point. I woke up this morning consumed with envy, like I do almost every morning. And once the coffee kicked in, if I’m honest with myself, there was a fair amount of desperation as I started searching for excuses to use the tax system to steal from my betters.

    Fortunately, after my third bong hit, my slacker instincts take over, and I just chill for a while before heading over to the Plaza to panhandle. Come say Hi sometime, Hi Fi!

  64. Plain Jane
    November 3, 2011 at 7:33 am

    Stay off my corner, Mitch!

  65. Bloom Burg
    November 3, 2011 at 7:34 am

    Whoever “High Finance” is, s(he) is obviously a sewer pipe that runs straight from Sean Hannity’s ass direct to the Humboldt Herald.
    Shit we could even name it the Hannity interceptor.

    It almost makes me wonder if Dave Tyson hasn’t hired someone to sit in City Hall and blog all day.

    And who says Tyson hasn’t spent money on Eureka’s infrastructure?

  66. Mitch
    November 3, 2011 at 7:40 am

    Damn Robert Moffitt has harshed my mellow! Effin liberal professors!

    (11-02) 21:02 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) —

    The ranks of America’s poorest poor have climbed to a record high — 1 in 15 people — spread widely across metropolitan areas as the housing bust pushed many inner-city poor into suburbs and other outlying places and shriveled jobs and income.

    New census data paint a stark portrait of the nation’s haves and have-nots at a time when unemployment remains persistently high. It comes a week before the government releases first-ever economic data that will show more Hispanics, elderly and working-age poor have fallen into poverty.

    In all, the numbers underscore the breadth and scope by which the downturn has reached further into mainstream America.

    “There now really is no unaffected group, except maybe the very top income earners,” said Robert Moffitt, a professor of economics at Johns Hopkins University. “Recessions are supposed to be temporary, and when it’s over, everything returns to where it was before. But the worry now is that the downturn — which will end eventually — will have long-lasting effects on families who lose jobs, become worse off and can’t recover.”

    Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/11/02/national/w210227D42.DTL#ixzz1ceYl6zhh

    PS: PJ, it’s public space. I’ll grab whatever damn corner has the lowest light, so I can scare the passersby into giving me their change.

  67. Plain Jane
    November 3, 2011 at 7:54 am

    Fine, then I’ll move to an alley and mug them when they go by.

  68. Scab
    November 3, 2011 at 9:07 am

    It’s the Heraldo Bolshevist take over of the socialist party? PJ Lenin and Mitch Trotsky? It’s safe to say that practically all the various shades and grades of radical agitator whether they call themselves Socialist or by some other name have every one them adopted Karl Marx’x doctrine of economic interpretation of history and the class struggle. The difference between them are almost wholly as to how the revolution is to be accomplished.

    In Amerika we use the ballot not revolution.

  69. November 3, 2011 at 9:11 am

    In Amerika we use hacked electronic voting machines silly. You are behind the times.

    Have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  70. Mitch
    November 3, 2011 at 9:19 am

    Comrade Scab,

    Trotsky is honor, but I think of myself more as Shmuel. Why PJ get to be Comrade Lenin?

  71. Plain Jane
    November 3, 2011 at 9:43 am

    Must be my bald head, Mitch.

  72. nerf
    November 3, 2011 at 9:51 am

    You baby boomers need to wake up to the fact that you’ve been brainwashed your whole lives into this either/or way of thinking about government. If you’re not a ______ you must be a ______. Govern with common sense TODAY. Pull the blinders off and see something NEW.

  73. Anonymous
    November 3, 2011 at 10:05 am

    KTVU in Oakland showed protesters trying to stop vandals from breaking things and tagging businesses and then cleaning up after the vandals. Bet that gets ignored by everyone except maybe MSNBC.

  74. Anonymous
    November 3, 2011 at 10:05 am

    The Left & Liberals can never have a discussion without getting pissed off & start calling names…..You know I am right so don’t start in on how ignorant I am.

  75. Anonymous
    November 3, 2011 at 10:20 am

    The Right & Conservatives can never have a discussion without getting pissed off & start calling names…..You know I am right so don’t start in on how ignorant I am.

  76. tra
    November 3, 2011 at 10:39 am

    Two very different scenes in Oakland…

    Yesterday afternoon: Thousands peacefully shut down the Port of Oakland.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/us/occupy-oakland-protesters-set-sights-on-closing-port.html?_r=1

    Late last night / early this morning: Hundreds barricade streets, break windows, set fires, clash with police.

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/11/03/BANI1LQ2HO.DTL&ao=all

  77. Not surprised
    November 3, 2011 at 11:14 am

    Passive protest hasn’t worked for over 50 years, people are waking up to that fact as well as anything.

  78. High Finance
    November 3, 2011 at 11:54 am

    Pot, Kettle, Black PJ.

    Mitch I would love to meet up with you but I will be busy today. This morning I have to evict a widow and her kids and then go loot my bank. Afterwards I need to transfer of today’s riches to my offshore accounts. My 63 year old secretary who has been with me for 25 years wants a raise from her current $8 per hour so I will fire her this afternoon & hire an illegal alien who will work for $4 per hour.

    Maybe tomorrow ?

  79. Mitch
    November 3, 2011 at 11:58 am

    Sorry, Hi Fi. I’d love to meet you, but I don’t want to be overcome by envy. Good luck with the widow; be sure to wear two pairs of pants in case the kids try biting.

  80. tra
    November 3, 2011 at 12:10 pm

    Hi Fi’s comment is pretty funny…until you realize that all of the things he describes are indeed taking place, somewhere in this country, at this very moment.

  81. The Big Picture
    November 3, 2011 at 1:02 pm

    “High Hillbilly” thinks he’s a benefactor of the worst corruption since the Gilded Age”.

    Hilarious, thanks Anonymous 12:17!

    Even today, few understand how and why America’s top financiers Funded the leadership of the Russian revolution of 1918. Financing weapon’s manufacturers on both sides of conflicts maintains poverty in other nations and is tiny step away from manufacturing it at home.

    If the U.S. declared war against the 25 nations we bombed since WWII, many of Wall Street’s top financiers would be in jail for supplying the “enemy”.

    An unparalleled corruption…but, very profitable…for awhile.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s