Is The Occupy Wall Street Movement an Answer to The Tea Party Movement?

[Red Arrow]

At the same time the median income was $ 26,000.  And going down in real terms.

Actually the 50% mark was about $32K not adjusted for inflation (Table 7 near bottom right) but neither was the $410K.

I can remember when $26K was not too bad a salary.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Actually the 50% mark was about $32K not adjusted for inflation (Table 7 near bottom right) but neither was the $410K.

I can remember when $26K was not too bad a salary.

1981 was when 26k wasn't too bad.

Census bureau gives the 26k number for 2006.  Slightly different calculation - per household member.  Either way, 26 to 31 is pretty mediocre income.  (Both are a lot more than I made in 2006, though - Salvation Army is great place, but doesn't pay too well!  And 2005.)

http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032007/hhinc/new02_001.htm

[Red Arrow]

1981 was when 26k wasn't too bad.

I was working as an engineer by then.

Census bureau gives the 26k number for 2006.  Slightly different calculation - per household member.  Either way, 26 to 31 is pretty mediocre income.  (Both are a lot more than I made in 2006, though - Salvation Army is great place, but doesn't pay too well!  And 2005.)

I'll agree, I'd have a difficult time paying for my toys on that income.  That's one of the reasons I got an education that would likely lead directly to a decent paying job.   52 weeks & 40 hr/week = 2080 hrs.  $26K/2080 = $12.50/hr, well above minimum wage.  The effective rate is actually higher if the worker gets any vacation or holidays.  Benefits like health care will probably be minimal but may still exist at those levels.

[patric]

If there's no negative consequences for escalating into violence, you can guarantee that's what will happen:

"We did exactly what the police said to do not to get pepper sprayed and they still did it," another Facebook post said. Nine were sprayed, a post claimed.
"I understand following orders. I was in Iraq for nine months," he said. "The pepper spray and violence I don't understand. It wasn't necessary."

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=298&articleid=20111102_298_0_Tulsap195784


Tulsa Police issued this statement Tuesday evening about the possibility that protesters could be arrested, "We have been in productive conversations with the protesters in regards to their park protest. We are determined to, number one, weigh the right to protest, number two, the rights of all citizens to lawfully use City parks and facilities, and number three, the need to uphold city laws and ordinances. We must consider the totality of all these issues, and only then will we take appropriate action when it is necessary.
http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story/Occupy-Tulsa-protesters-Well-stand-our-ground/mmFac7SP60-pc4NxtKNljg.cspx

One, civil rights are not optional, they are a guarantee.  There is nothing to "weigh" as far as respecting them or not.
Two, how many other people were needing to use the park at 2am?
Three, city laws and ordinances are there to serve the people, not the other way around.

[Conan71]

There are larger implications for the economy as a whole. It's got nothing to do with giving a smile that the guy next to me is driving a Porsche. The decreasing income share of the people lower on the totem pole erodes the overall market for goods and services, thus retarding growth.

Let me put it this way:  If you worked for straight commission in sales, would you think it fair for the company to cut your commission rate if you were the most successful salesman in the company because you happened to get the best accounts because the company is run by your dad's long time golfing buddy, just to keep it fair to those who didn't get the leg up you did?

Or, to be more accurate, what if you actually worked six jobs part time for a bunch of different golfing buddies, and it was your job to decide how much your golfing buddies make. Oh, and don't forget, your golfing buddies also get to set your pay, too. Thanks to ever-weakening shareholder power, this is essentially how executive compensation works at most large firms now.

It's interesting to me that you think it's OK that 1% of society has taken literally all of the gains since 1980. I guess I should be glad that the rest of us aren't (in the main) seeing our share literally shrink. I'm just not convinced that it is only the 1% that are creating value.

Answering questions with questions.  Thanks for playing. 

Try again with out regurgitating Krugman's flatulence.  I'm pretty sure your job is dependent on 1%'ers continued success as well.

Taking a different tack here: What if a significant percentage of those in the 1% got sick and tired of the wealth envy and class warfare talk and simply move all their money and assets overseas to friendlier environments and refuse to invest one dime into American jobs or businesses.  Then what?  Our economy cannot function without these people and most likely those vilifying the wealthiest, (at least those with jobs), probably owe the existence of their job to someone in the 1% either directly or indirectly.

[Conan71]

If there's no negative consequences for escalating into violence, you can guarantee that's what will happen:

"We did exactly what the police said to do not to get pepper sprayed and they still did it," another Facebook post said. Nine were sprayed, a post claimed.
"I understand following orders. I was in Iraq for nine months," he said. "The pepper spray and violence I don't understand. It wasn't necessary."

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=298&articleid=20111102_298_0_Tulsap195784


Tulsa Police issued this statement Tuesday evening about the possibility that protesters could be arrested, "We have been in productive conversations with the protesters in regards to their park protest. We are determined to, number one, weigh the right to protest, number two, the rights of all citizens to lawfully use City parks and facilities, and number three, the need to uphold city laws and ordinances. We must consider the totality of all these issues, and only then will we take appropriate action when it is necessary.
http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story/Occupy-Tulsa-protesters-Well-stand-our-ground/mmFac7SP60-pc4NxtKNljg.cspx

One, civil rights are not optional, they are a guarantee.  There is nothing to "weigh" as far as respecting them or not.
Two, how many other people were needing to use the park at 2am?
Three, city laws and ordinances are there to serve the people, not the other way around.

What exactly is the point of civil disobedience for the sake of civil disobedience?  That's all this sounded like to me.  It ends up requiring a confrontation with police who would much rather not be involved in situations like that.

On the other hand though, there is a demonstration out in south Tulsa this weekend to encourage people to pull their money from banking behemoths and place it in local institutions.  I can't argue with that logic at all.  That's worth bringing attention to, though I believe most consumers can figure that out without others protesting.

[we vs us]

Answering questions with questions.  Thanks for playing. 

Try again with out regurgitating Krugman's flatulence.  I'm pretty sure your job is dependent on 1%'ers continued success as well.

Taking a different tack here: What if a significant percentage of those in the 1% got sick and tired of the wealth envy and class warfare talk and simply move all their money and assets overseas to friendlier environments and refuse to invest one dime into American jobs or businesses.  Then what?  Our economy cannot function without these people and most likely those vilifying the wealthiest, (at least those with jobs), probably owe the existence of their job to someone in the 1% either directly or indirectly.

Where would they go?  What mythical place has better security, better infrastructure, and a more stable market than we do?  Russia?  China?  The EU?  (ha!)  The Middle East?  South America?  Further, how would a 1%er extricate their investments from the American economy?  Whether it's money in a managed fund, or T-bills (still the most reliable security in the world), or stock in a global company, there is literally no way that a 1%er can pull their money entirely out of the US economy.  We're too large and  we're too connected.

This is also just alarmism, pure and simple.  Our 1% ubermenschen survived and thrived in the US when their marginal tax rate was fully triple what it is now.  I'd say looking at the top rates going back to Eisenhower our tax history shows a huge tolerance on the top levels for increased taxes -- and in fact, our system relied on that happening.  It's not hard to draw a pretty straight causal line between the deficit and the much lower effective rates at the top of the scale.

[Conan71]

Where would they go?  What mythical place has better security, better infrastructure, and a more stable market than we do?  Russia?  China?  The EU?  (ha!)  The Middle East?  South America?  Further, how would a 1%er extricate their investments from the American economy?  Whether it's money in a managed fund, or T-bills (still the most reliable security in the world), or stock in a global company, there is literally no way that a 1%er can pull their money entirely out of the US economy.  We're too large and  we're too connected.

This is also just alarmism, pure and simple.  Our 1% ubermenschen survived and thrived in the US when their marginal tax rate was fully triple what it is now.  I'd say looking at the top rates going back to Eisenhower our tax history shows a huge tolerance on the top levels for increased taxes -- and in fact, our system relied on that happening.  It's not hard to draw a pretty straight causal line between the deficit and the much lower effective rates at the top of the scale.

It's not a matter of tax rates wevus, it's a matter of being completely under attack from those less fortunate.  Certainly someone could move all their money off-shore.  Start investing in building plants in China, or do nothing but place it all in accounts in Switzerland, The Caymans, or The Bahamas or BVI for that matter.

[we vs us]

It's not a matter of tax rates wevus, it's a matter of being completely under attack from those less fortunate.  Certainly someone could move all their money off-shore.  Start investing in building plants in China, or do nothing but place it all in accounts in Switzerland, The Caymans, or The Bahamas or BVI for that matter.

If they wanted to do that, I'm sure that it's possible -- anything is, I suppose, with enough effort and money behind it.  But what you're suggesting is essentially a bunch of people tossing out the practicality of keeping capital in the most stable, secure economy in the world (our current difficulties notwithstanding) in favor of pursuing what amounts to a giant fiscal pout.  To me that's inherently contradictory; a group of people who are supposedly the smartest and most pragmatic investors in the world, suddenly losing their collective smile and pulling out of the best investment in the world.

If we were rolling guillotines through the streets and executing the sons of the plutocracy in front of cheering throngs, that'd be one thing; but getting all atwitter over letting the taxes on the top 1% readjust back to the second lightest level in modern history  (Clinton era) is nothing but needless freaking out. 

I also really have no idea why the 1% of the country would feel freaked out at this point.  The OWS peeps are relatively orderly, nonviolent, and have inflicted minimal damage to property (compare with riots in Greece, Spain, etc).  They have some popular traction but not much politically.   What's more, the 1% have major influence on all levels of the political system and hence the law enforcement arms of cities across the country.  In short:  there will be no guillotines. 

[patric]

What exactly is the point of civil disobedience for the sake of civil disobedience?  That's all this sounded like to me.  It ends up requiring a confrontation with police who would much rather not be involved in situations like that.

It might be analogous to "compliance checks" of bars or restaurants to make sure they are following the law.  There's nothing really compelling the initiative other than to ascertain whether or not the law is being consistently followed.

[Conan71]

If they wanted to do that, I'm sure that it's possible -- anything is, I suppose, with enough effort and money behind it.  But what you're suggesting is essentially a bunch of people tossing out the practicality of keeping capital in the most stable, secure economy in the world (our current difficulties notwithstanding) in favor of pursuing what amounts to a giant fiscal pout.  To me that's inherently contradictory; a group of people who are supposedly the smartest and most pragmatic investors in the world, suddenly losing their collective smile and pulling out of the best investment in the world.

If we were rolling guillotines through the streets and executing the sons of the plutocracy in front of cheering throngs, that'd be one thing; but getting all atwitter over letting the taxes on the top 1% readjust back to the second lightest level in modern history  (Clinton era) is nothing but needless freaking out. 

I also really have no idea why the 1% of the country would feel freaked out at this point.  The OWS peeps are relatively orderly, nonviolent, and have inflicted minimal damage to property (compare with riots in Greece, Spain, etc).  They have some popular traction but not much politically.   What's more, the 1% have major influence on all levels of the political system and hence the law enforcement arms of cities across the country.  In short:  there will be no guillotines. 

In case you haven't noticed it's not just the OWS showing hostility.  Our President does it at every chance when he speaks so eloquently about the upper 1% not doing their share and having made enough already.  As well that is parroted throughout the liberal masses.  With the current political climate in this country being dominated by the extreme right and extreme left, I can't blame anyone for going ex-pat.

[nathanm]

Answering questions with questions.  Thanks for playing. 

Try again with out regurgitating Krugman's flatulence.  I'm pretty sure your job is dependent on 1%'ers continued success as well.

Taking a different tack here: What if a significant percentage of those in the 1% got sick and tired of the wealth envy and class warfare talk and simply move all their money and assets overseas to friendlier environments and refuse to invest one dime into American jobs or businesses.  Then what?  Our economy cannot function without these people and most likely those vilifying the wealthiest, (at least those with jobs), probably owe the existence of their job to someone in the 1% either directly or indirectly.

No, most of us are employed by either small business, the owners of which are, in the main, not 1%ers or enormous public companies, who again are not owned mainly by 1%ers, thanks to our 401(k)s and IRAs. Unfortunately, our ownership is mediated through some 1%ers, so we get no say in corporate governance despite the trillions we collectively hold in equities.

Most of my clients aren't 1%ers either, for what it's worth. Most of their clients aren't either. Some are, but I like those guys. They're fun and they don't spend millions a year on campaign contributions, just the few thousand that even I can match.

As much as you like to try to twist my words, I've got no problem with there being a "top 1%." My problem is that people like yourself are too busy fellating them to realize how some of them are bucking you. You act like they're the only ones who should get a say in society. You act like it's perfectly natural that they should be the ones with their hands on nearly all the levers of power. That's not what our country is supposed to be. Again, not a problem with the fact that there is and will always be a 1%, mainly just that some of them are taking over politics, leaving us with no say. Also, they're shooting themselves in the foot by decimating their customer base and essentially fomenting revolution.

You might consider reading Bruce Bartlett's most recent book. The guy is even a Republican. Not only a Republican, but a Reagan Republican.

[Red Arrow]

They're fun and they don't spend millions a year on campaign contributions, just the few thousand that even I can match.

You are doing better than I am.  I would be willing to help you feel better about making so much money by accepting your strings-free contribution toward buying and installing an IFR capable GPS (Garmin 430 w/WAAS) in my plane.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Our 1% ubermenschen survived and thrived in the US when their marginal tax rate was fully triple what it is now.  I'd say looking at the top rates going back to Eisenhower our tax history shows a huge tolerance on the top levels for increased taxes -- and in fact, our system relied on that happening.  It's not hard to draw a pretty straight causal line between the deficit and the much lower effective rates at the top of the scale.

They are just throwing another BS moment into the pile!

There has been tremendous propaganda and hype surrounding the myth of the "good ole days" of Reagan for many years now.  We had pretty good economic growth (about 3rd or 4th best overall), so after the big early '80s crash, it turned around. 

What the RWRE want covered up and hidden and forgotten as much as possible is that ALL of that went on when the marginal tax rate in this country was over 50%!  It was over 50% for more than 3/4 of Reagan's term.

But hey, how can the 1%ers possibly make it today on tax rates of less than 1/3 of that...gotta be grounds to leave the country and take all their marbles with them...

[nathanm]

You are doing better than I am.  I would be willing to help you feel better about making so much money by accepting your strings-free contribution toward buying and installing an IFR capable GPS (Garmin 430 w/WAAS) in my plane.

More like my expenses are low, so if I make campaign contributions a priority, I can sacrifice elsewhere and still eat. However, if you would be so kind as to take some of those free reading glasses, I will have to sacrifice less.