I can't wait until someone finally tells me what everyone "deserves" to make. Are you putting out the spreadsheet soon detailing what everyone deserves to have as income? I'm dying to see where I get slotted.kalm wrote:Let's assume DD makes $500K a year. Do you think the guys on Wall Street who got $20 million bonuses are 40 times smarter, 40 times better educated, work 40 times as hard, are 40 times as deserving of their income as DD? Now factor in the public subsidizing of their bonuses.
Ok, how about productive? Can income inflation at the high end hurt the middle class or the entire economy?GannonFan wrote:I can't wait until someone finally tells me what everyone "deserves" to make. Are you putting out the spreadsheet soon detailing what everyone deserves to have as income? I'm dying to see where I get slotted.kalm wrote:Let's assume DD makes $500K a year. Do you think the guys on Wall Street who got $20 million bonuses are 40 times smarter, 40 times better educated, work 40 times as hard, are 40 times as deserving of their income as DD? Now factor in the public subsidizing of their bonuses.
Sophomore global studies major Brandon Fahrion hunches under a shelter outside of Plemmons Student Union Wednesday afternoon. Fahrion says he will not eat, drink or move from his spot until "the demands from the Occupy Wall Street movement have been heard." Photo by Adam Jennings | The Appalachian.
I suppose there might be scenarios in which it could. But I don't think that it has. Maybe if there was some association between upper end incomes getting higher and middle class incomes getting lower we might at least think about looking for reasons why that happened. But there isn't. Over time, middle class incomes have continued to rise in inflation adjusted terms. Middle class incomes have probably declined in those terms in recent years; but upper end incomes probably have too.Can income inflation at the high end hurt the middle class or the entire economy?
He's in for a LONG wait, since they haven't even published a list of "demands" yet.Skjellyfetti wrote:haha. look at this guy...
Sophomore global studies major Brandon Fahrion hunches under a shelter outside of Plemmons Student Union Wednesday afternoon. Fahrion says he will not eat, drink or move from his spot until "the demands from the Occupy Wall Street movement have been heard." Photo by Adam Jennings | The Appalachian.
I don't know - why do you think it does?kalm wrote:Ok, how about productive? Can income inflation at the high end hurt the middle class or the entire economy?GannonFan wrote:
I can't wait until someone finally tells me what everyone "deserves" to make. Are you putting out the spreadsheet soon detailing what everyone deserves to have as income? I'm dying to see where I get slotted.
Money going towards speculation instead of investing in infrastructure, education, and innovation.GannonFan wrote:I don't know - why do you think it does?kalm wrote:
Ok, how about productive? Can income inflation at the high end hurt the middle class or the entire economy?
The housing bubble wouldn't have caused a world wide economic crisis if derivatives had been regulated. But of course a number of people benefited from and are still benefiting from that government housing intervention.JohnStOnge wrote:What gets me is how these people give government policies to promote egalitarianism a pass. I heard one leftist economist type say on TV the other day that it wasn't the government encouraging and even pressuring banks to give home loans to people who were high risk that was the problem because the problem was people taking those high risk mortgages and bundling them into derivatives.
It seems to me like the derivatives wouldn't have been a problem if government hadn't created a situation where a bunch of high risk mortgages were involved. And government did create that situation. Would NEVER have happened if government hadn't been involved in trying to see to it that people who really weren't in position to buy the houses they bought could buy them.
The housing crisis wouldn't have caused a worldwide economic crisis if owners of the 60% of foreclosures that were VOLUNTARY had any form of moral compass and actually had PAID their bills like they were able.kalm wrote:The housing bubble wouldn't have caused a world wide economic crisis if derivatives had been regulated. But of course a number of people benefited from and are still benefiting from that government housing intervention.JohnStOnge wrote:What gets me is how these people give government policies to promote egalitarianism a pass. I heard one leftist economist type say on TV the other day that it wasn't the government encouraging and even pressuring banks to give home loans to people who were high risk that was the problem because the problem was people taking those high risk mortgages and bundling them into derivatives.
It seems to me like the derivatives wouldn't have been a problem if government hadn't created a situation where a bunch of high risk mortgages were involved. And government did create that situation. Would NEVER have happened if government hadn't been involved in trying to see to it that people who really weren't in position to buy the houses they bought could buy them.
Sonsabitches.AZGrizFan wrote:The housing crisis wouldn't have caused a worldwide economic crisis if owners of the 60% of foreclosures that were VOLUNTARY had any form of moral compass and actually had PAID their bills like they were able.kalm wrote:
The housing bubble wouldn't have caused a world wide economic crisis if derivatives had been regulated. But of course a number of people benefited from and are still benefiting from that government housing intervention.
Ummm hello. They don't call them dirty hippies for nothing.grizzaholic wrote:Quick question.
Who pays to clean up after all of these fuckers? The court house lawn here will have to be completely re-sodded after those assholes are done with their little protest.
Well, you did infer that we are looking at an "Arab Spring" and therefore a violent and complete overthrow of government, so to be fair, we still have a little ways to go before we get there.bluehenbillk wrote:I told you guys less than 2 weeks ago this would get more violent - I don't think we've seen anything yet.
I don't think I HAVE seen anything yet. What did I miss?bluehenbillk wrote:I told you guys less than 2 weeks ago this would get more violent - I don't think we've seen anything yet.
Christ, what a fucking tool.andy7171 wrote:tHIS GUY IS NUTS!
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/16/v ... rust-fund/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Hmmm...those look remarkably similar to water bottles behind him.AZGrizFan wrote:He's in for a LONG wait, since they haven't even published a list of "demands" yet.Skjellyfetti wrote:haha. look at this guy...
kalm wrote: So you don't think the system can be less rigged?
Yes, the system can be less rigged. How? By working within the system to enact change. Vague enough answer? We can debate all that later, but I don't think pitching what amounts to a big collective temper tantrum on the streets of New York because you just don't think life is fair is not the most effective way to do it. Can we do that whole argument later when I have more time?
Do you not think public protests led to positive change in the past?
Honestly, I don't have time right now to debate the merits of civil disobedience (I am typing this in between procedures). Obviously, it has it's place and has served well in the past, but this isn't the same crowd. These folks for the most part that I have seen are pathetic, disjointed, clueless, and just piss poor protoplasm. They don't really know what they want, they just want to bitch and moan about it. "my life isn't turning out the way my parents said it would!" "I'm exceptional dammit, and I deserve better! Give it to me now!" "I am a total fuck up at life. I pissed away my youth and now I am being discarded as the useless piece of shit I am by society, and I want the government to do something about it!"
I think you might be confusing the productivity of the current protesters with the legitimacy of the gripe.
I don't necessarily totally disregard the validity of some of the issues/problems being bitched about, I just don't have any respect for the bitchers.
I appreciate your response as always DD. BTW, I drove past "Occupy Spokane" yesterday, and a simple eyeball test of the protesters alone makes me want to reconsider some of my positions on this.death dealer wrote:kalm wrote: So you don't think the system can be less rigged?
Yes, the system can be less rigged. How? By working within the system to enact change. Vague enough answer? We can debate all that later, but I don't think pitching what amounts to a big collective temper tantrum on the streets of New York because you just don't think life is fair is not the most effective way to do it. Can we do that whole argument later when I have more time?
Do you not think public protests led to positive change in the past?
Honestly, I don't have time right now to debate the merits of civil disobedience (I am typing this in between procedures). Obviously, it has it's place and has served well in the past, but this isn't the same crowd. These folks for the most part that I have seen are pathetic, disjointed, clueless, and just piss poor protoplasm. They don't really know what they want, they just want to bitch and moan about it. "my life isn't turning out the way my parents said it would!" "I'm exceptional dammit, and I deserve better! Give it to me now!" "I am a total fuck up at life. I pissed away my youth and now I am being discarded as the useless piece of shit I am by society, and I want the government to do something about it!"
I think you might be confusing the productivity of the current protesters with the legitimacy of the gripe.
I don't necessarily totally disregard the validity of some of the issues/problems being bitched about, I just don't have any respect for the bitchers.
So let me set the record straight. I reject all attempts to label me. I have something ranging from serious disdain to outright hate for the lame ass attempts by the establishment to label and pigeonhole people.Grizalltheway wrote: No, but I don't think DD would describe himself as exclusively liberal or conservative.
