Occupy Wall Street - Success

[pickled_heretic]

fail, here it is again
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[pickled_heretic]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[pickled_heretic]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

this sign makes me sad =/

[pickled_heretic]

General Electric, the nation’s largest corporation, had a very good year in 2010

The company reported worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, and said $5.1 billion of the total came from its operations in the United States.

Its American tax bill? None. In fact, G.E. claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/bu...XXOQXQAqGQJV6g

U WOULDNT UNDERSTAND THIS IS GOOD FOR UR ECONOMY I ATTENDED AN INFORMATIONAL SEMINAR THAT TOLD ME SO

[Aadill]

One thing that a lot of people do not understand, and this is a concept that came up when a conservative blogger made a post on our forums about the Tea Party of Richmond complaining about Occupy Richmond not paying the same fees that they did (the Tea Party signed for a non-profit business license and was actually labeled as The Tea Party of Richmond, Inc."):

What we discussed was the fact that when the Tea Party protest in this video amassed thousands of people (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4w8H...eature=related) they left. Protesting for a period of time and then leaving DOES NOT CREATE CHANGE. The Occupations themselves are middle fingers to the government who, in the case of Raleigh, require a protest permit good for only four hours. The government which you are protesting sets the time, place, and manner, for which you may speak out against them.

See why that is a problem? The Occupation has some logistical issues and has made some downright head-shaking mistakes (I'm a fucking backpacker for chrissakes, I'm appalled by some of the methods they are using to inhabit this space) but the point of the Occupation itself is to say, "WE ARE NOT GOING TO FOLLOW YOUR RULES BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT LISTENING."

So, yeah, the space that is being occupied tends to be publicly visible because it becomes a public square, an agora... a forum. It is there to promote discussion. The /facepalm I have is because of the lack of logistics, it's driving people away instead of bringing them in. Again, that's what the media focuses on, instead of the message. Just realize that, first.


Shiftin: Perhaps I should redefine. Expenditures are one thing but let's take a look at the most (in)famous example: Property tax loopholes. Private jets should not be tax deductible. Trademark trading should not allow you to evade property (and sales) taxes:

http://www.wral.com/news/state/nccap...gpost/9744635/

[Aadill]

that's actually two examples, shiftin, but you get the point.

[Aadill]

Furthermore i do agree there are a lot of EXPENDITURES that do need to be kept in place to promote certain behaviors. There are others, though, that are being put in place to ALLOW certain behaviors, hence the negative descriptor.

[Aadill]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/r...133707949.html

How Republicans are being taught to talk about Occupy Wall Street

Don't say that the government 'taxes the rich.' Instead, tell them that the government 'takes from the rich.'

[Shiftin]

I assume you mean depreciation on planes shouldn't be tax deductable like depreciation on any other asset, which I don't really understand. Can you explain why? What impact do you think that would really make on the budget?

[Aadill]

Originally Posted by Shiftin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I assume you mean depreciation on planes shouldn't be tax deductable like depreciation on any other asset, which I don't really understand. Can you explain why? What impact do you think that would really make on the budget?

Fair enough. I can concede on that point. It's more symbolic than anything as it's a classic Robin Hood. As far as the second point about evading or misusing the tax code: any thoughts?