Can someone explain "Occupy Wall Street"

Parent Cafe
81

<p>I would like to see some smaller population States implement Singapore’s system-</p>

<p>Singapore has a universal health care system where government ensures affordability, largely through compulsory savings and price controls, while the private sector provides most care. Overall spending on health care amounts to only 3% of annual GDP. Of that, 66% comes from private sources.[64] Singapore currently has the lowest infant mortality rate in the world (equaled only by Iceland) and among the highest life expectancies from birth, according to the World Health Organization.[76] Singapore has “one of the most successful health care systems in the world, in terms of both efficiency in financing and the results achieved in community health outcomes,” according to an analysis by global consulting firm Watson Wyatt.[77] Singapore’s system uses a combination of compulsory savings from payroll deductions (funded by both employers and workers) a nationalized catastrophic health insurance plan, and government subsidies, as well as “actively regulating the supply and prices of health care services in the country” to keep costs in check; the specific features have been described as potentially a “very difficult system to replicate in many other countries.” Many Singaporeans also have supplemental private health insurance (often provided by employers) for services not covered by the government’s programs.[77]</p>

<p>Singapore’s well-established health care system comprises a total of 13 private hospitals, 10 public (government) hospitals and several specialist clinics, each specializing in and catering to different patient needs, at varying costs.</p>

<p>Patients are free to choose the providers within the government or private health care delivery system and can walk in for a consultation at any private clinic or any government polyclinic. For emergency services, patients can go at any time to the 24-hour Accident & Emergency Departments located in the government hospitals.</p>

<p>Singapore’s medical facilities are among the finest in the world, with well qualified doctors and dentists, many trained overseas.</p>

<p>Singapore has medical savings account system known as Medisave.</p>

<p>Imagine our economy if health care only ate up 3% of GDP.</p>

82

<p>I think the kids, as naive as they may be in some ways, are protesting the callous way the US government and economy is treating its own people, I think they are protesting the greed that has seen CEO pay skyrocket and profits reach record levels while most people’s salaries have regressed, with the median salary now at 1996 levels. I think they are protesting politicians and the government telling us that, for example, cutting taxes creates jobs, when all it seems to have done is enriched the relative few at the expense of others. I think they are protesting the idea that all that matters is ‘shareholder value’. and where decisions made seem to be about rapidly pumping up a stock price so a CEO’s compensation is higher then it was the prior year…and there is a lot of truth to that. The 15% capital gains tax rate was supposed to encourage investment in capital formation, but even conservative economists are troubled that what it seems to have done is drive speculative, high risk investing that benefits the few and basically doesn’t create all that many jobs. </p>

<p>Funny part is, these kids and the tea party people, though diametrically opposed in many things, both are reacting I believe to the same issue, they both are looking at where we are and looking forward and saying ‘I don’t believe the future holds promise, what I see is the US becoming like far too many other countries, were the privileged few control much of everything and everyone one else is scrambling just to survive’. Basically, they have lost faith in the American Dream IMO, and are reacting to that. </p>

<p>And before someone wants to deride what I am saying, I work on wall st, have for a good number of years, so I am well aware that some of what these kids see of wall street, as with the simple minded view of many of the tea party movement, is naive and too simplistic, but I also see a lot of what both are angry about. One of the things that happened in the US after the second world war was the idea that everyone could have a least some small part of the dream, and now that seems to have been taken away and no one, business or government, seems to care…and that is sad, and also dangerous. Read up on what the 1930’s were really like, read Studs Terkel’s book on the depression, read Manchester’s “The Glory and the Dream” on its depression section, and about how dangerous it is when people stop having hope.</p>

83

<p>Well said, musicprnt, and all too true. I agree with the kids, BTW, the American Dream is, if not dead, then dying. Does anyone believe anymore that their kids will be better off than they were? </p>

<p>Of course, what ended the Great Depression was a devastating, world-changing war. I fear we’ve gotten so far down the road of deterioration that it will take something of that magnitude to turn us around.</p>

84

<p>so anyone making more than $200,000 is the “fat rich guy” who needs to pay his fair share. Right?</p>

85

<p>

</p>

<p>Smile, have we been reading the same thread? I think much of the Federal tax talk here has been about the super rich whose incomes are not salary based, but rather based on long term capital gains income, taxed at a far lower percentage than that of wage earners. In other words, those mythological “job creators,” who by and large, aren’t creating jobs.</p>

86

<p>Right! But also about the working poor and middle class who are struggling to buy food and health care. It’s not helping anyone to leave these people out in the cold.</p>

87

<p>^^ Not quite. It’s helping the very wealthy quite a lot. As they get richer, the rest of us get poorer. Class warfare, indeed – and the rich are winning in a rout.</p>

88

<p>It isn’t class warfare if you are letting people keep more of their own money. It is class warfare if you forcibly take money from one targeted group of people, in order to redistribute it to those you deem worthy (particularly if you stir up animosity in order to accomplish this goal).</p>

<p>The best way to help the poor and middle class is by taking the crosshairs off of the job creators and innovators. We need new companies and new ideas. We don’t need class warfare.</p>

<p>

It would be disastrous for capitol gains taxes to go up. Fewer people would invest, and take risks, if the gain was less. That would mean there is less money available for people who are not yet Warren Buffett to start a company. This is why uber rich folks, the guys who are making WAY beyond the ridiculous $250K “rich people” myth, are OK with increasing capitol gains taxes. They already got theirs. </p>

<p>Buffett’s enormous pie is corporate - big, established companies. He is not worried about getting financing. Joe or Jane American, trying to get their first tiny slice of the American Dream - they are the people who benefit from having lower capitol gains taxes. They need to be able to get funding to get new companies off the ground (new companies which, by the way, create new jobs).</p>

89

<p>^^ What we need is demand. Corporate profits are up. Businesses are hoarding cash. And they aren’t creating jobs. Why? Because the consumer class is feeling insecure and pessimistic, and isn’t buying goods and services. All of our policies should be aimed at shoring up the middle class, not coddling the wealthy.</p>

<p>And in fact, history bears this out. Economic growth and broad prosperity are strongly correlated with higher marginal tax rates. Look it up. Taxes on the wealthy are historically low now, and how is that helping any one but the wealthy? Ten years ago, we were told that they needed their taxes cut so that they’d create jobs. Where are all those jobs?</p>

<p>And BTW, marginal tax rates on wealthy individuals are beside the point. Those people don’t create jobs, except for low-paid household workers. Companies create jobs. And companies are already stockpiling cash in record amounts. Why aren’t they using some of that cash to build factories, hire workers, improve pay and benefits? And why do they need even more cash in the form of a tax cut?</p>

90

<p>You can raise the taxes, but it won’t create middle class jobs.</p>

<p>The erosion of middle class jobs can be attributed to the global nature of the contemporary economy. As long as it is possible to outsource jobs to the lowest cost labour market and then sell those products in the US, with no extra tarrif or tax added, then corporations are going to do so.</p>

<p>Taxing capital gains or income won’t change that, and THAT is what has caused the loss of middle class jobs and income. So, if the goal is to get jobs in the US, then we are talking about the “wrong” taxes. A tax on labour exporters would probably hit the same people you are so angry with, though, and more effectively, for your purposes.</p>

91

<p>

False. There are still limitless ways to make money by creating new products, expanding existing businesses, etc. Coming up with new ways to do things is what entrepreneurs do in their sleep. I talk to business owners constantly, and I know why they are not investing. These businesses are sitting on money because they know that the edge of a tax cliff is coming, and also because they have NO FAITH OR CONFIDENCE that they have a handle on the “game” (which is randomly and recklessly changing these days, with more and more ridiculous ideas coming up almost daily). Businesses take risks, and when they don’t know what the heck they are risking, they sit on their hands. </p>

<p>[Review</a> & Outlook: The 2013 Tax Cliff - WSJ.com](<a href=“http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904353504576567460396287134.html]Review”>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904353504576567460396287134.html)</p>

<p>This about it logically, LasMa. Businesses want to make money. If redistributing wealth, and creating that artificial short-term demand that you advocate would create the market that they need, why wouldn’t they be for it? You won’t find many business owners buying into your theory. They are not stupid. They know what they need to be successful. What they ask for is for government to get off of their backs. </p>

<p>You also forget that consumers are also sitting on money. All those people who are being called “rich” arbitrarily by whoever aims to tax them (the $250k and up crowd, or whatever it is this week). They are not spending because they also anticipate higher taxes.</p>

<p>You cannot create a market artificially, because there are not enough “rich people” to fund this faux demand. Even if you were able to fund something once, how would it change things when people know that the flow of money cannot be maintained? Your theory makes no sense.</p>

92

<p>If you save any money any where or invest in anything anywhere other than a tax free account, you too will pay a capital gain tax some day.
many of us will be using this money in retirement when we no longer have a income.
It is not just the super rich that pay capital gains.
If that is what you are after then the tax should start above 1 billion $. raise the rate on those who means test over 1 billion $.</p>

93

<p>the reason companies are on the side lines is because they are not sure that we are not going to experience another 2008. Once the fears of another 2008 are no longer prevalent, the money will come back.
the country must not spend more than it makes. taxes do not need to go up. spending needs to increase at a much reduced rate. no body is cutting spending, only reducing the amount of increase per year.
some programs need to be cut entirely.
However, the spending cuts are only reducing the amount that we increase spending which is not cutting spending at all.
**most people are being snookered by the language. **</p>

94

<p>smile, we are talking about capital gains for people who makes a lot of money. That would not touch vast majority of retirement money where people take out a little bit at a time each year. And I think retirement withdraw is taxed as income not capital gains so I think you are a little bit confused.</p>

95

<p>I like poetgirl’s 6-point program (post #40). I’d take it a little farther.</p>

<p>End the Debt
First, sell Hawaii to China or Japan. They already own half the best real estate there anyway. We won’t need the military bases anymore (see below). Apply the proceeds to the national debt. Before we leave, don’t forget to retrieve Obama’s Original Birth Certificate; put it under glass in a front room of the National Archives, then …</p>

<p>Erect a high tariff wall against foreign imports (the Buddy Roemer program, on steroids). Default on any remaining foreign debt. Let the Chinese keep our worthless IOUs. We’ll keep their cheap TVs and flip flops. Before they wear out, go back to making our own.</p>

<p>End the Wars<br>
Bring all the troops home. Put them to work fixing boarded-up houses, making cheap TVs and flip flops, or building new universities for all the straight-A College Confidential kids who can’t get into (or can’t afford) their first-choice tippy-top colleges. Leave other countries alone and they’ll leave us alone. Right? (Yes, because by this time the Chinese will have to flood these other markets with cheap TVs and flip flops, so it’ll be China they hate not America).</p>

<p>End illegal drug trafficking
First, legalize pot and other recreational drugs. Then flood domestic drug markets with tainted cocaine and heroin, forcing users to seek medical attention for non-fatal but embarrassing effects (a blue rash, really bad itching and laughing, uncontrollable farting). Make hard-core narcotic trafficking (along with incorrigible use, and other major crimes) offenses punishable by exile to Pacific island plantations set up to produce one product from conscript labor: cheap sugarcane ethanol for American automobiles. If necessary, invade Mexico. Politely depopulate and destroy their border cities. Seed the land for 100 miles in with an impenetrably dense and thorny living fence. Make the Mexican border look like Sleeping Beauty’s castle, after the spell. While we’re at it, genetically engineer the living fence to attract and trap stink bugs … but keep a little tunnel open for a small, controlled stream of guest workers sufficient to keep all the Chipotles running. </p>

<p>Basically, bring it all back home, then put up giant yellow smiley face signs around all our national borders. Make all our own stuff; clean house; tell the rest of the world to have a nice day.</p>

<p>And yes, raise taxes. Return to a steeply progressive system with no credits, exemptions or deductions above a low-income threshold. The net effect will allow CEOs to continue earning more but not 1000x more than their employees. Fully nationalize health insurance (not medical care) and higher education financing (not operations). Make health & education financing free of charge through simple, single-payer plans for all Americans<a href=“courtesy%20of%20the%20war-drugs-stinkbug-and-debt-elimination%20dividend”>/u</a>.</p>

96

<p>

</p>

<p>Those jobs are all overseas! And they are working to strip wages and benefits from the few jobs which remain here, and if that isn’t class warfare, I don’t know what is.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yep, what she said!</p>

97

<p>and as long as consumers are willing to spend money on goods that can be produced more cheaply overseas because labor costs are too high here, nothing will change.</p>

98

<p>^ Not true. Action doesn’t have to start with consumers’ shopping habits. We have a government to help, or so we thought.</p>

99

<p>oh really? So government should increase costs of goods so consumers in the US can go more into debt than they already are or they should just buy less goods?</p>

100

<p>Interesting discussion.
I just finished reading “Aftershock” by Robert Reich.
VERY interesting and informative, filled with statistics to back up his theories.
I highly recommend it for those interested in this discussion, no matter your political beliefs.
There is one graph which shows the comparison in incomes over the last 90 years.
A significant point made in that graph is that the top 1% of wage-earners are now making over 20% of the U.S. income. It has not been that way since the late 1920’s. We keep hearing that the rich are getting richer (with more and more control on our political system), and the statistics reinforce this concept. We are not talking about many professionals that might be making 200k. While they may be in the top 10%, I am guessing they do not fall in the top 1%. </p>

<p>I don’t necessarily agree with all the author’s suggestions to change the balance, but there are many good ones. We are all in this together, and we need to have an intelligent discourse, instead of relying on the more extreme factors. To have a discussion, we must first become aware of the situation by educating ourselves, and I do believe this book helps do so.</p>