occupy protesters like baseball

[Dawgma]

They love the game.. They have never been to a game.. If they had there way we'd be handing our tickets over to them. Don't ya just love Gimmie Protesters who love baseball?

I can see it now, Rioting over a loss inside Fenway!

 

I say we give them a state they can call there own and include the Pirates with it.

They'll fit right in. (just kidding about the Pirates).

[BigPapiEnFuego]

what is this

[a700hitter]

They love the game.. They have never been to a game.. If they had there way we'd be handing our tickets over to them. Don't ya just love Gimmie Protesters who love baseball?

I can see it now, Rioting over a loss inside Fenway!

 

I say we give them a state they can call there own and include the Pirates with it.

They'll fit right in. (just kidding about the Pirates).

That's because they'd have themselves convinced that fans with tickets somehow stole their tickets from the 99%. f***ing idiot losers!! My brother has an expression that fits them. They are so stupid that they don't know what smart is.

[Dawgma]

what is this

 

Its sort of like what your avatar looks like.

 

Hey, Lets give them Oakland.. Ay, savy'......

[mvp 78]

They love the game.. They have never been to a game.. If they had there way we'd be handing our tickets over to them. Don't ya just love Gimmie Protesters who love baseball?

I can see it now, Rioting over a loss inside Fenway!

 

I say we give them a state they can call there own and include the Pirates with it.

They'll fit right in. (just kidding about the Pirates).

 

The grammar and poor spelling says a lot about the anti-protest agenda.

[crazydiamond]

you, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar

[doctorron]

It never ceases to amaze me how workers defend the rights of the rich. We do the work and the rich live off the sweat of our brows. I haven't been to any protests but I'm damn sure not going to defend those rich that live off my labor. I guarantee you John Henry DOES NOT work as hard as me or those that buy his tickets.

[wyo-sox]

It's called an economy, yes people make a profit off of you, in turn they pay you a wage. If you are not satisfied with your wage- you are free to make yourself more valuable. The bottom line is you get paid for your knowledge, work ethic, and the amount of profit you can make someone.

 

In fact anyone who wants to vilify people that make profits always remember you are 100% free to start your own company where you don't make profits off your employees. Let me know how long you provide jobs for those employees.

[a700hitter]

It's called an economy, yes people make a profit off of you, in turn they pay you a wage. If you are not satisfied with your wage- you are free to make yourself more valuable. The bottom line is you get paid for your knowledge, work ethic, and the amount of profit you can make someone.

 

In fact anyone who wants to vilify people that make profits always remember you are 100% free to start your own company where you don't make profits off your employees. Let me know how long you provide jobs for those employees.

and those people making profits are getting tired of supporting an increasingly large population of losers.

 

I was at a business conference the other day and an economist was talking to us about the political dialogue in Washington. He was not a republican or a right winger. He had a very interesting observation about this country's crushing debt. he addressed the psychology of it on the population. He made the point that his father worked a long hard career, but it gave him a sense of accomplishment to save some money to be able to put a nice roof over his family's head and to help give his kids a better life with better opportunities than he had. He compared that to the empty feeling of tomorrow's working population who will be stripped of that sense of accomplishment of improving the lives of his family, because they will be working more and more to support an entitlement state for people that they don't know, leading to increasing resentment.

[mvp 78]

I feel so bad for the CEO's and their $100M golden parachutes. The rich are getting richer at an ever increasing rate. Everyone else is left behind. You don't have to be a loser to see that. You just have to be able to look past your nose. Crushing school loan debt. Overinflated housing costs. Soaring gas prices. Groceries are 15% more than last year. Too bad most people's income hasn't kept up with those costs. It's only natural that self-involved boomers wouldn't be able to see this.

 

If the federal goverment can't meet in the middle to cut programs AND raise taxes, we're probably f'd. They're to busy playing a stupid two party system game that doesn't work.

 

But this is a Red Sox board and maybe we should just keep it in that genre.

[a700hitter]

I feel so bad for the CEO's and their $100M golden parachutes. The rich are getting richer at an ever increasing rate. Everyone else is left behind. You don't have to be a loser to see that. You just have to be able to look past your nose. Crushing school loan debt. Overinflated housing costs. Soaring gas prices. Groceries are 15% more than last year. Too bad most people's income hasn't kept up with those costs. It's only natural that self-involved boomers wouldn't be able to see this.

 

If the federal goverment can't meet in the middle to cut programs AND raise taxes, we're probably f'd. They're to busy playing a stupid two party system game that doesn't work.

 

But this is a Red Sox board and maybe we should just keep it in that genre.

Blame the government for all of it. It's not the fault of the people making the money, which by the way, the government in their class warfare rhetoric classifies people making $250k/yr and above as rich. If you live in NY and husband and wife make $250k they can afford a 1 maybe 2 bedroom apartment, a car, and child care for the kids, because both have to work to live in NY. They don't have yachts or beach houses in the Hamptons. They are not rich. They work hard. They have little savings and they don't want to be told that enough money isn't coming out of their checks. The taxes that they want to raise are not on Warren Buffet or Bill Gates who are perfectly willing to pay them. They are talking about taxes on the couple that I just mentioned and on people with small businesses who invest their capital and spend 24/7 building small businesses that employ people in the communities. The government need to increase taxes on a broad base to have any meaningful increase in revenue. There aren't enough CEO's to make a difference in tax revenues.

 

There have always been rich people and their always will be under any form of government. If you seized all the assets of every millionaire and a million ain't much these days, you wouldn't make even a slight dent in the national debt, so going after the rich isn't going to solve a thing. It's a diversion by politicians who point the peoples anger at the rich and then they hit them up for campaign contributions.

 

Overinflated housing costs is the fault of who... CEO's? or government and Federal Reserve policies that kept interest rates low and mandated loans so that every American could share in the American dream whether they could afford it or not. The government is still pumping money into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to artificially inflate the housing market. They are artificially keeping interest rates low when they should be rising from the unprecedented increase in the money supply. The low interest rate are putting tremendous pressure on all financial institutions which will continue to fail if the artificially low rates continue.

 

Crushing School debt? Whose fault is that ... the CEo's ... the rich? Why doesn't anyone protest the universities for their ridiculously expensive tuition and the ridiculous rate of inflation in school tuition when the rest of the economy is flat. What about the people who mindlessly send their kid's to colleges and incur the crushing debt for their kids to get a worthless education and worthless degree in something like History. I love history, but you ain't gonna get a job with a history degree. I spent about $120 k putting my Daughter through Northeastern Univ and that was with a $10 k per year scholarship. She had a game plan. She went into an under served field-- Chemical Engineering. She had multiple job offers when she graduated in May. Northeastern also has an excellent coop program for kids to get work experience while going to school. I refused to send her to NYU -- a better school, because she only applied to their general studies program and she was going to graduate with a worthless degree in liberal art or something. I wasn't going to pay $200 k for that. Parents incur enormous debt to send their kids to school with no game plan no strategy. I'm sorry, but that is just stupid. Would you go to a real estate broker and give him $250 k for a house without knowing anything about the house? Wouldn't you want to know where it is, how big it is, is it soundly constructed and on and on? Does anyone look at the rate of employment by new graduates of colleges as part of the process? No they don't, and the fact that they are not prepared for any profession or job when they graduate ain't my problem. It is their problem and so is their school debt.

 

Every family has people who can' make it or who have trouble getting started. I callously call them losers. People sometimes need a cold slap of reality. In my parents and grandparents generation, huge debt wasn't incurred for the kids and those people who needed help getting through life were taken care of by their families, because they are not everyone else's problem.

[Elktonnick]

I feel so bad for the CEO's and their $100M golden parachutes. The rich are getting richer at an ever increasing rate. Everyone else is left behind. You don't have to be a loser to see that. You just have to be able to look past your nose. Crushing school loan debt. Overinflated housing costs. Soaring gas prices. Groceries are 15% more than last year. Too bad most people's income hasn't kept up with those costs. It's only natural that self-involved boomers wouldn't be able to see this.

 

If the federal goverment can't meet in the middle to cut programs AND raise taxes, we're probably f'd. They're to busy playing a stupid two party system game that doesn't work.

 

But this is a Red Sox board and maybe we should just keep it in that genre.

 

I have lived all over the world in rich countries and poor ones, in socialistic countries and capitalistic ones, in democracies and dictatorships. Visit any U.S embassy abroad. This country still has the most peolple applying for an immigrant visa than any other. Don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out why. It's opportunity and freedom. The two party system may suck but no one since the ancient Greeks has found anything better.

[Palodios]

Blame the government for all of it. It's not the fault of the people making the money' date=' which by the way, the government in their class warfare rhetoric classifies people making $250k/yr and above as rich. If you live in NY and husband and wife make $250k they can afford a 1 maybe 2 bedroom apartment, a car, and child care for the kids, because both have to work to live in NY. They don't have yachts or beach houses in the Hamptons. They are not rich. They work hard. They have little savings and they don't want to be told that enough money isn't coming out of their checks. .[/quote']

 

Then they should move out of New York, or commute a little bit. 150k would be more than enough for a family to live in any of the best areas Boston, and 75K would be enough in most midwest cities. Plus, tax brackets are applied in increments, so people on the edge of a tax bracket won't get screwed over. That is how they are designed. With deductions, this family will likely be mostly unaffected by the highest tier of the tax bracket.

[Elktonnick]

Then they should move out of New York' date=' or commute a little bit. 150k would be more than enough for a family to live in any of the best areas Boston, and 75K would be enough in most midwest cities. Plus, tax brackets are applied in increments, so people on the edge of a tax bracket won't get screwed over. That is how they are designed. With deductions, this family will likely be mostly unaffected by the highest tier of the tax bracket.[/quote']

 

Rural america is less expensive because there is less economic opportunity hence less jobs. That they way it works in a free market economy. If everyone move to somewhere else what do you think would happen? ..... Detroit

[a700hitter]

Then they should move out of New York' date=' or commute a little bit. 150k would be more than enough for a family to live in any of the best areas Boston, and 75K would be enough in most midwest cities. Plus, tax brackets are applied in increments, so people on the edge of a tax bracket won't get screwed over. That is how they are designed. With deductions, this family will likely be mostly unaffected by the highest tier of the tax bracket.[/quote']The point is that they are not rich people. They are working hard to put a roof over their head, save for their kids education, and their retirement. Moving to the suburbs would result in paying very high real estate taxes because of bloated school budgets and an additional $3 k a years for a train ticket. Everything else costs the same. Instead of having a 1,000 sq ft apartment, they will have a three bedroom house on a 70 x 100 lot-- not exactly evil rich robber barons.

 

You don't need to tell me how tax rates and brackets work. After getting my JD I got an LL.M in taxation from NYU. I am familiar with how it works.

[yeszir]

Nope, not happening, sorry.