February 22

Occupy Seattle brings its ideas to Northeast

Uncategorized

14  comments

Occupy Seattle isn’t just downtown anymore. Lake City resident Mary Paterson is organizing a series of community meetings in Northeast Seattle to help get the word out about the Occupy movement. From the flier:

Come learn about the Occupy Movement’s work on economic justice, environmental justice, getting money out of politics, and more. Share your views.

The meetings are at:

  • Saturday, Feb. 25, from 3-5 p.m., at the Northeast Branch Library, at 6801 35th Ave. N.E.
  • Saturday, March 3, from 3-5 p.m., at the Lake City Library, at 12501 28th Ave. N.E.
  • Saturday, April 7, from 3-5 p.m., Lake City Library

About the author 

master

You may also like

Sephora coming to Ballard Blocks 2

Sephora coming to Ballard Blocks 2

Self-Defense Class

Self-Defense Class

Fall Budget // Accountability Partners on SPD’s Crowd Control Policies // Internet for All // COVID Rental Assistance // Community News You Can Use

Fall Budget // Accountability Partners on SPD’s Crowd Control Policies // Internet for All // COVID Rental Assistance // Community News You Can Use

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. The Occupy Movement is still active? They probably still don’t have a universal agenda yet. There was a time in this country when sit-ins were somewhat effective but that’s no longer the case.

    If you’d like to DO something bring positive change instead of camping out like bums, picket the Northgate Petco store. They have been reported several times since they opened up. As for me, I’ll be reporting that big business to the right agency rather than going “camping.” You bet your bippy!

  2. Sue – Here are a couple simple yes or not questions for you.

    -Do you think that 5 out of 100 people should be forced to pay more for the same set of services than the other 95 people?

    -You agree that people who make more and are in a higher tax bracket pay a higher rate of tax in our current tax system? (hint you have to answer yes, because it’s a fact)

    Here is the full quote you are referring to. Cut and pasted directly from the article:

    “During 2009, the bottom 95 percent (AGI under $154,643) paid 41.3 percent of the total collected, a larger share than the 36.7 percent paid by the top 1 percent (AGI over $343,947).”

    You can honestly say you don’t see an issue with 95% of the population only paying in 41.3% of the total tax revenue collected and 1% paying over 36.7% of the total tax revenue collected?

    Do you understand that discrepancy? That means if the total tax revenue was 1 million dollars and it was paid by 100 people, 95 of those people together paid in about $413,000, and 1 person paid in $367,000 for the same set of services that are equally available to all. That is not fair, no matter how you try to spin it. That would be like all Maple Leaf residents having equal access to the new reservoir park when it opens, but you have to pay more to use it because you happen to make more than your neighbor. Even though your neighbor goes the park everyday with three dogs and you go once a week on Saturday.

    People choose their careers. If someone chooses to be a librarian because they love it, then more power to them. The problem is that they have to realize they won’t make much money. It’s the reality. So why should someone who choose to be a dentists and make a lot more, be forced to pay so much more for the same set of services? Each person made a choice and one person is penalized more because their passion drove them to a more lucrative career. We already have this system in place, the argument is whether or not the dentists should be paying even more than they already are. Any justification for that is based on feelings and subjective variables driven through personal opinions. That won’t work.

    Either way it sounds like we will forever agree to disagree. I will happily buy you a cup of coffee at Cloud City if you ever want to discuss things in more detail.

  3. The link you sent says the top 1% did NOT pay a higher rate than the bottom 95% in 2008, which seems to be the most current anaysis. Again, occupy has always said the 1%, not the 5%. And yes, I do think that folks who make buckets of money should pay more in taxes than folks that are struggling. With great wealth comes great responsibility.

  4. I am sorry Sue, but your not looking at the big picture. The sentence you quoted represents a major flaw in our system. You really think that 1% of the earners SHOULD be paying a larger amount of the total income tax collected than 95% of the population?? Please tell me how that is fair. Using that math, you are arguing that out of 100 people, its fair for 5 people to pay more than the other 95 people for the same set of services?

    Also, understand that a larger percentage of the total income tax collected is different than the individual percentage rate that people pay based on their earnings. Wealthier people pay a higher percentage rate currently, so the argument is how much higher people think their rate should be. Someone making 250K a year pays a higher RATE, than someone making 65K a year. That is a mathematical fact about our current system.

    Now, I totally agree with closing loopholes for both personal and corporate taxes. That is a no brainer, but that is different than trying to raise the already higher tax rate that wealthy people pay.

  5. @Bob from your link
    “in 2008, the top 1 percent no longer pays a larger percentage of total income tax than the bottom 95 percent”.
    This is what Occupy is talking about, the 1%.

  6. Oh Joe! The only showcase of ignorance is your post.

    Helping to raise awareness by costing society more money by having to the manage the filthy camp sites is not raising awareness. Sorry, but some hipster with their ipod, iphone, and Facebook accounts whining about corporate profits while using their products is not raising awareness. It’s hypocrisy. Some kid choosing to go to a four year college and major in general studies knowing it produces very little high paying job options and then protesting for their student loans to be forgiven is not awareness. It’s entitled brats not wanting to face the facts for their own choices.

    The real problem is not politicians putting corporate interests first, its politicians putting their interest first. Their focus changes which ever direction the support wind blows. They use rallying calls of tax the rich and providing more and more handouts as nothing more than bribing the public with their own money in hopes of election support. That is the obvious agenda that you are failing to recognize.

    Also, consumers control demand because they are the demand. Corporations supply that demand. Its econ 1o1, you still with me? The problem is that consumers become lazy and unwilling to make the hard decisions necessary to get corporations to change their ways. A clear example is whether or not people are willing to pay a higher price at the local ACE instead of Home Depot. It depends if people are willing to spend more to buy products from local stores instead of Walmart. If people really don’t want cheap crap made in China and really stopped buying it, the companies that sell that crap would change their ways or go out of business. But consumers are too lazy and don’t want to put forth the effort so instead they whine about it like little brats and demand the government does it for them. It’s not different than the person whining about overdraft fees and credit card interest. Don’t like them, then don’t overdraft your account or spend money on your credit card you can’t pay off. It’s simple, but people don’t want to be accountable for their own success.

    Please go take a look at Greece and see what happens when people votes themselves handouts by using politicians who are too afraid to tell the whining kids they can’t have a new toy.

    The argument about the wealthy having to pay much more because of the benefit is complete BS political talk. I have heard that false claim many times before. I bet you think the wealthy business owners should pay more because his/her company uses the roads to move product and blah blah blah. Well, if you want to stretch one direction than you must use that same logic to stretch the other way and realize that the benefit his/her companies provides is far greater. You must credit the wealthy business owner with every single tax dollar generated through the income tax, payroll tax, and sales tax that the company produces by paying employees and selling products. The reality is that a tiered tax structure that we have is fine. The higher earns pay a higher percentage already. This claim that taxing the rich more is the answer to all problems is a fallacy driven from people being upset that others have more. The wealthy already pay more. The top 5% pay over 58% of the federal income tax. Fact. No way around it. The answer is more intelligent spending of the revenue already collected, not increasing revenue. But of course politicians won’t admit that because its the same as them admitting that they have failed to responsibly manage the money. So they always ask for more and rally the sheep with cry’s of tax the rich. It’s pathetic.

  7. Thank you Joe! I wonder if this is the gal I always see protesting at Bank of America. I always give her a honk of support when I see her. I have had so many problems with BoA and have moved all my money to BECU. Much happier there.

  8. @MapleLeafBob, could your agenda be any more ignorant and obvious?

    The occupy movement isn’t anti business. The movement is helping to raise awareness about what happens when our elected officials put corporate interests ahead of citizens interests.

    When corporates are given huge tax breaks while exporting jobs, polluting our land, and asking for bailouts when they fail (as wall street did at the end of the Bush era).

    It really is only fair that the wealthiest pay the most in taxes, since it is the wealthiest that have benefited most from the stable economy that our stable government provides.

    If you don’t like protest, I guess you wouldn’t have liked the Boston Tea party folks either, or the revolutionary war, and you’d prefer that we still be subjects of England?

  9. What’s fair to you and fair to another person is subjective. What is mathematically fair is called an equal percentage. That being said, I don’t condone a flat rate, but trying to assume that taxing the high earners more in the answer to all money problems is pretty blinded.

    You fail to state that 5% provide over 50% of the federal income tax revenue and the bottom 30% pay nothing in terms of federal income tax. Is that fair? Math uses facts, not feelings.

    Federal politicians using the tax the rich cry to get votes are simply bribing a portion of the society for votes using the tax from another portions of society.

  10. Huh! Occupy? You mean that movement of slackers who complain about businesses and then use the products they create to distribute their disjointed and crybaby message? Hmmmm I thought that was dead. Considering the 99% is really the people working and paying taxes while the 1% of slackers (which includes the Occupy people) sit around and complain.

    Adam Carolla describes the Occupy movement very well in this you tube clip:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJEbWMS_IHE

{"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}

Subscribe to our newsletter now!