Thread: Thousands to occupy Wall Street in protest

^On second thought, we don't need your name. Just an image of your ss statement with your income since you were 14.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

People like Hampsha, who is obviously out there with the lunatic fringe paranoids...heh, there'll be 'Political Re-education Camps' in his future!

They will fashion them on the FEMA concentration camps.

Originally Posted by misskit

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

People like Hampsha, who is obviously out there with the lunatic fringe paranoids...heh, there'll be 'Political Re-education Camps' in his future!

They will fashion them on the FEMA concentration camps.

That's right! Excellent idea.

They can even use those idle FEMA trailors. Set 'em up out there in the swamps with the good 'ol boys like you see on that Swamp People - History or Discovery Channel show. Learn 'em up some good patriotic values they will!

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

The point is your credit score is out there anyway for all to see if they want to pay that nominal fee to get it. And, there are loads of folks who publish minute details of their lives on Face Book so employment history and income detail are not inconcevable as well.

I'm saying that SS sells their records on your work history and income. Credit score is a different thing. My problem with the credit score is that it can be incorrect and near impossible to fix.

My credit record says I bought a car in Nevada at a time I had been living outside the states for years and didn't pay for it. You think I can get it fixed? NO! But that is beside the point.

Go ahead and post your SS statement if you don't find it an affront to your privacy for people to know that information.

Originally Posted by misskit

Go ahead and post your SS statement if you don't find it an affront to your privacy for people to know that information.

Are you joking?

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

You are so 'out there' already, why be concerned about this SS issue, eh?

Absolutely not joking. Why are you concerned with privacy?

Boon paying tax...

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by Agent_Smith

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Heh...I got a clue even if y'all don't!

No, you're deflecting again. Why not give a straight up answer to the issue here instead of just making fun of some of the participants?

Do you think it is right that the mega-rich can dodge taxes when they're flush but extort the government for our money when they fuck up? Yes or no?

You must have missed Post #1061 in this thread did you? Well, here it is again:

More Fun Facts On Taxes

In tax year 2009, the top 1 percent of filers — those “millionaires and billionaires” with adjusted gross annual incomes of more $343,927 whom the Occupy Wall Street rabble is demonizing — paid nearly 37 percent of federal income taxes. * The top 10 percent with incomes over $112,124 (say, a New York City cop and a teacher filing jointly) paid more than 70 percent of income taxes.
* The top 50 percent (starting with princely incomes over $32,396) paid — wait for it — nearly 98 percent of all federal taxes.

But "the rich" don't pay their "fair share".

Source

Additionally...

In 2009, the top 1 percent of taxpayers—1,379,822 of them—paid more than the bottom 90% combined. Geographically, this is equivalent to a city the size of San Antonio, TX paying more in income taxes than every person living west of the Mississippi. Likewise, the top 0.1 percent—138,000 taxpayers—paid a greater share than the bottom 75%. In other words, a city the size of Dayton, OH would have paid more than a country the size of Germany.

Source

Good to know that some wealthy people are (allegedly) paying taxes. My concern is more with corporations (which are, perversely, considered people) that buy politicians who will enact tax loopholes so that they pay little to no taxes, but will cry to Uncle Sam for a bailout when they shit all over the economy by gambling other folk's money away on "derivatives" and other financial chicanery. This is the 1% I'm talking about. Do you think that's ok? Do you think corporations should be considered as having the same rights as individuals?

Originally Posted by Agent_Smith

But "the rich" don't pay their "fair share".

No, they don't. As mega wealthy Warren Buffet has pointed out, his secretary loses a higher percentage of her income to federal tax than does he.

If the truly wealthy were to pay the same percentage of their income in tax as the Middle class (which is perfectly fair, many would say still unfair on the middle class), this would have a marked effect on the USA's federal deficit woes.

And most major US corporation pay relatively little or no tax, some even get tax refunds.

Utilities charge prices, known as rates, set by political appointees who regulate the industry. Embedded in those rates are generous sums to cover corporate income and all other taxes. Pacific Gas & Electric, the northern California utility, was awarded $431 million to pay 2007 corporate income taxes, a final decision by the California Public Utilities Commission shows. Similar amounts were approved, or are in the process of final approval, for each subsequent year.

But in the three years from 2008 through 2010, PG&E’s corporate parent did not pay roughly $1.7 billion in federal income taxes on $4.8 billion of profits, the expected sum based on the federal 35 percent corporate income tax rate. Instead, PG&E collected more than $1 billion in refunds, thanks in good part to a 2008 increase in accelerated depreciation, which lets companies defer taxes into the future, the study showed.

Brian Hertzog, PG&E’s Washington director of corporate relations, said that the rules that let the company defer paying taxes into the future mean it can use that money immediately to help pay for new plant and equipment. He said this costs much less than borrowing in the markets and thus benefits customers.

Hertzog has a point. When customers pay their monthly bills they loan money to PG&E at zero interest, which is a lot cheaper than borrowing in the markets. But that is neither capitalism nor market economics.

The market chooses to invest and sets a price for credit. The regulatory and tax systems force captive customers to make interest-free loans to utilities, denying the customers the use of their money for other purposes, including paying down their own debt, which may be at much higher interest rates than the savings from using that money to finance utility projects.

Forcing captive customers to extend interest-free credit to utilities strikes me as a subtle form of legalized theft.


You

^ More evidence that the entire system is a sham.

Back on topic - which is raving lunatics gone wild.

Occupy Portland: News Crew Attacked By Protester, “You Nazi F*cking Americans”…

Oh yeah, just like the Tea Party.


These people are seriously deranged


Occupy Attacks!: Occupy Portland Attacks KGW News Crew! - YouTube


"We are the 99% and we don't want you in our society!" The attacker uses profanity and insists to a Native American member of the News team that he (the protestor) is the actual native American. While the angry protestor insists he does not want violence, he continues his tirade and a lengthy provocation. Some shoving ensues. He eventually has to be taken away by the Portland Police. At the end the KGW reporter gives a short interview. In 8 years of working in Detroit the reporter has not seen anything this bad. The individual attacker has attacked the reporter before.


Real nice, eh?

Originally Posted by sabang

Originally Posted by Agent_Smith

But "the rich" don't pay their "fair share".

No, they don't. As mega wealthy Warren Buffet has pointed out, his secretary loses a higher percentage of her income to federal tax than does he.

If the truly wealthy were to pay the same percentage of their income in tax as the Middle class (which is perfectly fair, many would say still unfair on the middle class), this would have a marked effect on the USA's federal deficit woes.

Warren Buffett is a first-class hypocrite.

How come his Bershire Hathaway has stalled on payments of income tax owed for like a real long time now, eh?

Originally Posted by misskit

^On second thought, we don't need your name. Just an image of your ss statement with your income since you were 14.

Let's determine the nature of your intrusive request, shall we?

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Let's determine the nature of your intrusive request, shall we?

Basic bullshit detection.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

While the angry protestor insists he does not want violence, he continues his tirade and a lengthy provocation.

The protester was definitely cranked up out of his mind.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

In 8 years of working in Detroit the reporter has not seen anything this bad.

Damn. He must have been working the obituaries page until now.

Originally Posted by Neo

In 2010, Verizon reported an annual profit of nearly $12 billion. The statutory federal corporate income tax rate is 35 percent, so theoretically, Verizon should have owed the IRS around $4.2 billlion.

this is actually not true. Under US GAAP, a reporting standard, classification of revenues and expenses can be quite different from regulatory fillings such as IRS or SEC. What is reported for SEC or the public is a version of the accounting statements, not necessarily the regulatory fillings. There is a lot of tax breaks and tax incentives in regulatory fillings and certain costs you can deduct but are not permitted under US GAAP standards. So at the end it can be very misleading. You need to look at Tax Payable in the Balance Sheet, not the regulatory rate and reported Net Income.

Originally Posted by Neo

As the authors acidly note, “Most Americans can rightfully complain, ‘I pay more federal income taxes than General Electric, Boeing, DuPont, Wells Fargo, Verizon, etc., etc., all put together.’ That’s an unacceptable situation.”

probably not true, again Tax Payable to IRS fillings will take into account previous year losses or other regulatory provisions not necessarily addressed by US GAAP or IFRS.

^ your post alone is validation for tax reform.

^I was thinking he should go work on Wall Street.

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ your post alone is validation for tax reform.

there is some effort to converge standards but the IRS has "political" rules it can't avoid

the US GAAP standard are closer to economic reality, the IRS is a fiscal tool so certain fiscal provisions are to be taken into account, and that's where tax optimization comes into play

under US GAAP, you don't optimize your tax, au contraire, you want to maximize your profit, no matter the reported tax liabilities. It serves a different purpose and has been the source of scandals since some companies manipulate their expenses and therefore profits. The overall tax liabilities reporting issue is a topic in itself. It's the sum of tax payable and deferred taxes. It's a virtual amount that can sometimes never reverse for some companies.

Only two countries in the world have regulatory reporting that must be the same as their "public" reporting, Germany and Japan.

the reporter has not seen anything this bad.

but...

The individual attacker has attacked the reporter before.

Makes about as much sense as Boon Mee.

^

That statement alone could get you thrown in jail over in issues.

“Most Americans can rightfully complain, ‘I pay more federal income taxes than General Electric, Boeing, DuPont, Wells Fargo, Verizon, etc., etc., all put together.’ That’s an unacceptable situation.”

Boon Mee is not 'most Americans' ...