Pro-tax Occupation Protests Held Across U.S. (O.W.S. Thread) - Page 27 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-15-2011, 08:27 PM   #391
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,645
Local Time: 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland
Oh no, we'd be talking state legislators. A national convention as per Article 5. Federal legislators are way too massively dependent on campaign contributions to do the job.
Ok, but what kind of numbers would you need? I guess it's hard for me to imagine that because our state legislators here have almost no power or influence.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2011, 08:34 PM   #392
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 10:27 AM
Non violent and they use pictures of tanks? Shutting down the subway, that's really not a productive idea.

I think it's time for them to go, they made their point and winter is coming. Time to channel it into something else-I just don't see how marching to or in DC will do anything either. Nothing will.
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2011, 08:50 PM   #393
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 10:27 AM
Leave it to the Left-Wing idealogues here in FYM to fall into lockstep support of OWS no matter what they do, amiright INDY?

__________________
maycocksean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2011, 11:37 PM   #394
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,335
Local Time: 10:27 AM
Can't wait for my commute Thursday
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2011, 12:44 AM   #395
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 04:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Ok, but what kind of numbers would you need? I guess it's hard for me to imagine that because our state legislators here have almost no power or influence.
Not sure I understand the question, so I'll just briefly summarize how the process works.

When two-thirds (i.e. 34) of the state legislatures submit applications to Congress calling for a constitutional convention to formulate an amendment on some specified particular subject, Congress is required by Article V of the US Constitution to comply. Delegates to the convention from each state are elected by the citizens of that state; they vote on the final text they create just as Congress does. The proposed amendment must then be ratified by three-fourths (38) of the state legislatures (just as amendments proposed by Congress must be).

At the state level, this means your state legislature would first have to pass a resolution that they're going to apply to Congress for an Article V convention on the subject of _______.

Historically, what's always happened when the number of state legislatures applying for an Article V convention (on the same subject) grows to the point where it looks like that two-thirds requirement will actually be met, Congress has succumbed to fear at anyone but them proposing amendments, bit the bullet, and gone ahead and proposed it themselves. The 17th, 21st, 22nd, and 25th Amendments were all passed this way. Without that nudge from the states, I just don't see this happening. Look how hard it was just to get McCain-Feingold, which was hardly radical reform, passed, and the Supreme Court torpedoed it anyway.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2011, 06:58 AM   #396
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,645
Local Time: 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Not sure I understand the question, so I'll just briefly summarize how the process works.

When two-thirds (i.e. 34) of the state legislatures submit applications to Congress calling for a constitutional convention to formulate an amendment on some specified particular subject, Congress is required by Article V of the US Constitution to comply. Delegates to the convention from each state are elected by the citizens of that state; they vote on the final text they create just as Congress does. The proposed amendment must then be ratified by three-fourths (38) of the state legislatures (just as amendments proposed by Congress must be).

At the state level, this means your state legislature would first have to pass a resolution that they're going to apply to Congress for an Article V convention on the subject of _______.

Historically, what's always happened when the number of state legislatures applying for an Article V convention (on the same subject) grows to the point where it looks like that two-thirds requirement will actually be met, Congress has succumbed to fear at anyone but them proposing amendments, bit the bullet, and gone ahead and proposed it themselves. The 17th, 21st, 22nd, and 25th Amendments were all passed this way. Without that nudge from the states, I just don't see this happening. Look how hard it was just to get McCain-Feingold, which was hardly radical reform, passed, and the Supreme Court torpedoed it anyway.
Ok, now I understand what you're saying... I'm trying to put away my cynicism for awhile and try to imagine this working.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2011, 04:30 PM   #397
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 11:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Now if only some of the rest of us would take the incentive to get off our whiny asses and campaign for a constitutional amendment that would actually end the cozy relationship between Washington and Wall Street. Otherwise it's never going to happen...to wait for a political hero to fix it is to misunderstand the system.
You're basically asking Congress to draft legislation (major campaign finance reform) that does away with the very reason many run for political office in the US (power, influence, the ability to give breaks to buddies in the private sector while robbing the public blind).

Asking politicians to pass transformative campaign finance reform is like asking your kid to go to his room, throw the change in his piggy bank into the drain, and then spank himself until he starts to cry.
__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2011, 05:28 PM   #398
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 04:27 PM
I already responded to that misreading.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2011, 05:53 PM   #399
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 09:27 AM
This way works too... name names.



Throw Them ALL Out - HUMAN EVENTS

60 Minutes confronted many of the politicians named in this book last Sunday about using inside information to play the stock market or cash in on land deals.

Did you know congressmen are exempt from laws that make profiteering off nonpublic information illegal? Neither did I.

Now here's where the Tea Party and OWS can agree and Republicans and Democrats can work together. In fact, they already are:

Sens. Brown, Gillibrand Introduce ‘STOCK Act’ to Ban Insider Trading in Congress - Big Government
Quote:
Sens. Scott Brown, R-Mass., and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., today are introducing the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act of 2011, which would prohibit members or employees of Congress, as well as executive branch employees, from using nonpublic information obtained through their public service for investing or any attempt at personal financial gain.

Democratic Reps. Louise Slaughter of New York and Tim Walz of Minnesota introduced legislation in the House to stop this practice — but the bill, which has been introduced before, has never had more than 14 congressional sponsors. Now, however, there is more interest in the bill after a “60 Minutes” report shedding new light on congressional “insider trading.”

“Members of Congress should live under the same laws as everyone else,” Brown said in a statement today. “If they trade on inside knowledge to line their own pockets, they should be punished. Serving the public is a privilege and honor, not an opportunity for personal gain.”

The legislation would also require members of Congress and employees to report the purchase, sale or exchange of any stock, bond, or commodities future transaction in excess of $1,000 within 90 days.
So let's be vigilant and see what "forces" in Washington D.C. kill, stall or weaken this legislation.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2011, 06:27 PM   #400
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,645
Local Time: 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Did you know congressmen are exempt from laws that make profiteering off nonpublic information illegal? Neither did I.
I heard Rush and Laura Ingram reporting on this this week, which I thought was interesting because I heard about it 2 years ago on NPR

Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post

So let's be vigilant and see what "forces" in Washington D.C. kill, stall or weaken this legislation.
This shall be interesting to watch
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2011, 09:15 PM   #401
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Winterfell
Posts: 3,825
Local Time: 11:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
if I was a 'card carrying' liberal or progressive, I would be embarrassed by these occupiers.

if I was a 'card carrying' conservative or republican, I would be embarrassed by these tea partiers.












and an oldie but goodie

__________________
Steved1998 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2011, 09:21 PM   #402
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Winterfell
Posts: 3,825
Local Time: 11:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Serious question--does anyone know why the (self-professed) 'anarchist' contingent seems so much larger in the Pacific Northwest than elsewhere? Is it an outgrowth of the radical arm of the environmental movement or something?
I saw a PBS special that made the claim that alot of the anarchists were made up of or started out as radical environmentalists who were involved with the ELF and those groups.
__________________
Steved1998 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 07:07 AM   #403
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,335
Local Time: 10:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steved1998

if I was a 'card carrying' conservative or republican, I would be embarrassed by these tea partiers.

and an oldie but goodie
You're both right.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 07:12 AM   #404
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,335
Local Time: 10:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland
Serious question--does anyone know why the (self-professed) 'anarchist' contingent seems so much larger in the Pacific Northwest than elsewhere? Is it an outgrowth of the radical arm of the environmental movement or something?
Starbucks.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 09:04 AM   #405
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 10:27 AM
Millionaires ask Congress to raise their taxes - Nov. 16, 2011

WASHINGTON (CNNMoney) -- A group of two dozen millionaires stormed Capitol Hill on Wednesday, demanding lawmakers raise their taxes.

"We want to pay more taxes," said California millionaire Doug Edwards, a former marketing director for Google (GOOG, Fortune 500). "If you're fortunate, and you make more than a million dollars a year, you ought to pay more taxes."

The millionaires want Congress to allow the tax cuts passed during the George W. Bush administration to expire. Some want higher taxes generally.

They planned to push lawmakers to reject any deal that the so-called super committee delivers that doesn't raise taxes on millionaires. The 12-lawmaker panel has until next Wednesday to agree on $1.2 trillion in savings over the next 10 years or risk automatic spending cuts.

"If the super committee bill doesn't raise our taxes, we will ask our fellow citizens to consider killing the bill," said Eric Schoenberg of Franklin Lakes, N.J., an adjunct professor of marketing at Columbia Business School.

They planned to take their message to members of the super committee, Tea Party Republicans including Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas and Rep. Tom Price of Georgia, and even anti-tax champion Grover Norquist.

The group was formed a year ago to push for expiration of the Bush tax cuts, and includes several current and former Google employees. Some of the better-known millionaires in the group include economist Nouriel Roubini, and a few celebrities, such as "The Sopranos" star Edie Falco and filmmaker Abigail Disney, who didn't make the trip to Washington.

Five different members declined to say what their annual income is, only acknowledging that they could be called millionaires.

Massachusetts millionaire Farhad Ebrahimi, a 33-year-old philanthropist who inherited his money from his software entrepreneur father, said he also supports the so-called "Buffett rule" that would require millionaires to pay a higher percentage of their income in federal taxes than those who make less than a million a year. The rule is named for the measure's chief supporter, Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA, Fortune 500) chairman Warren Buffett.

But he said the first thing on the group's bucket list is convincing Congress to allow Bush tax cuts to expire for the wealthy.

"What we're all here today representing is to request the Bush tax cuts be allowed to expire -- that's simply the bare minimum," said Ebrahimi, who has also participated in protests in the Occupy Boston movement.

California venture capitalist Garrett Gruener, founder of Ask.com, told left-leaning House members on the Progressive Caucus said he doesn't buy the argument that hiking the tax rates for the wealthy and forcing them to pay more in taxes would stymie business growth.

"Not once have any of my personal investment decisions been a function of marginal tax rates," Gruener said. "We just don't think about it."

First Published: November 16, 2011: 3:53 PM ET
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com