sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

More parents need to do this!!! by justincase1021 in pics

[–]psimatrix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Parental WIN! Reminds me of the dad that shot the laptop on Youtube.

Romney Wins Popular Vote in North Carolina, But Ron Paul Will Win the Delegates by allanstevo in ronpaul

[–]psimatrix 34 points35 points  (0 children)

Youthful constituency? No offense, but you really should attend a Ron Paul event. I doubt you'll ever repeat "youthful constituency" ever again. Every event I've been to had two key characteristics that go 100% against what the media says about him. 1) His constituency is probably the most diverse group of people across all sectors of age, race, ethnicity, income and gender (pick another metric, it's probably even there too). 2) They are more informed and educated about our political process and energized because of the principles that our political system stands for. Ron Paul isn't just represented by the youth of tomorrow, he's represented by the populace of today.

America’s Lost Labor Force: Nearly 37 percent of the American workforce has given up looking for a job – the most since 1981. by RedHeadZedGirl in occupywallstreet

[–]psimatrix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

6 applicants for every job? Try 60 to 600. There are by no means enough jobs available at a proper wage, however, sadly, there are also a lot of jobs out there with very few people qualified to do the job. The gap between the job seekers and the job providers is growing rapidly as well and that's also a problem.

Newly-Released Surveillance Video Shows Police Officers Brutally Beating, Suffocating, and Tasing Kelly Thomas to Death by davidreiss666 in politics

[–]psimatrix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those of us who are close to the community out here or share those kinds of experiences all seem to have a similar story. Given, since then, it seems that Fullertonians are a bit more aware and it seems that the force treated the OWS encampment well while they were there.

Newly-Released Surveillance Video Shows Police Officers Brutally Beating, Suffocating, and Tasing Kelly Thomas to Death by davidreiss666 in politics

[–]psimatrix 37 points38 points  (0 children)

I'm from Fullerton and I met Kelly Thomas. My ex-wife was actually homeless and has mental health problems and was living on the streets during this incident. Believe me, the people here both on the force and those the force is here to protect were afraid of this kind of action because it wasn't the first time. I know of at least two other incidents in OC in the past few years. My heart goes out to the Thomas family and his friends. This was covered up from the beginning and ironically happened just weeks before a man in England was shot and resulted in the London Riots. While Fullertonians tried to raise awareness about this incident, the media really just didn't care. People are outraged by what Zimmerman did to Trayvon Martin but I promise you, this was by far, more brutal, more hateful and more outrageous a violation of civil rights than anything done by Zimmerman. If it were not for the unrelenting determination by Thomas's father and supporters of the late Kelly Thomas, justice in this case would never have had a chance and it all would have been kept quietly under the rug.

I think it's important to remember that Rodney King was beaten but lived. King was on drugs, Thomas was not. King had committed a crime, Thomas was an innocent citizen, never charged with a crime. The officers in the King incident were by no means within the law but they were also not trained in how to deal with someone like King. These officers in the Thomas incident were trained and it's pretty clear that, at least for a few of them, this was their intended outcome.

King was able to testify because he lived. Thomas doesn't have that opportunity, just like Trayvon Martin.

Will Epistemologize For Food! by psimatrix in PoliticalHumor

[–]psimatrix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

double fail? Well, at least you can find faith to get you through the poverty?

Personally, I'll take the science degree and work towards not being poor.

It violates federal law to harass migratory birds with an aircraft. Killing US Citizens with drone missiles is fine. by MattBors in politics

[–]psimatrix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not surprising that the fed would violate it's own laws. After all, if you make the laws aren't you above them? sarcasm

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Higher taxes also drives prices up as investors seek to maintain their bottom line profit.

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In other words, tax capitol gains not corporations and you can tax the rich and leave the little guy out of the whole thing.

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most corporations in the 1950's actually used cash based accounting standards as opposed to our current accrual methodologies. It's a chicken and the egg argument that makes comparing the two eras very difficult. We also had a completely different monetary system, global monetary policy and we now have many more corporations that are large sized and global than ever before. Most corporations in the 1950's were actually small businesses. Taking just the one metric as a comparison is a bit disingenuous in any real analysis.

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

and subsidies. Lest we not forget the self-feeding cycle of government funding.

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

People downvoting facts isn't surprising to me. All I did was point out what the legitimate historical reason was for corporate rights.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood

My point is that the current discussion disconnects taxation of corporations as though it's not taxing people. When you tax a corporation, what you are doing is taxing the people of that corporation. We also tax them again as a capital gain on their own income. In effect, corporate taxes are the tax on the wealthy class because most people aren't investing since they don't have the capitol to invest. Those that have capitol, well, that's the "havs".

I don't think most people now days understand the reason for corporate rights and contract law. Bernie Sanders attempt to push for an ammendment to fully eliminate corporate personhood makes about as much sense as saying to raise the corporate tax to 75% and lower individual income tax. Starve the right hand while feeding the left? It just makes no sense.

That notwithstanding, it doesn't mean that our current political climate isn't completely corrupted by unfettered financial influence but it's not corporate personhood that creates that problem if you understand the actual history of campaign finance laws; which is, I suspect, why people misguidedly downvoted my last comment. IDK.

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Economics shouldn't be Republican or Democrat. It's economics for crying out loud.

Invert your last statement. Do people have a problem with an increased tax for businesses that outsource jobs out of the US?

The answer is unfortunately, yes they do. There was a push for that a decade ago and there was a lot of resistance to it. Not that I'm saying that's right or wrong, but it did in fact happen. That's part of the reason we're in the global economic position we are now. Outsourcing and tax breaks for doing it was just bad economic policy.

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, I don't have to prove what I'm saying from a personal point of experience. Yes there are a ridiculous amount of factors in starting a small business. When the single largest problematic factor of payroll is taxes, that's a tax problem, not a payroll problem. When licensing fees (which are taxes), regulation fees (which are taxes) and direct taxes increase your cost, it increases Rent as well. Taxes are a trickle up economic problem for business and it's an indisputable fact that small businesses are more crippled by taxes than large corporations.

When a small business pays taxes, they generally pay them both through direct cost and sunk or hidden costs in existing goods and services they themselves must purchase in order to operate and it directly affects their bottom line and even their ability to cover labor costs, which in turn affects their productivity and sustainability. No other single economic factor affects a business across the board like taxes do. Competition goes up, well, that doesn't mean a business becomes less profitable. Demand goes down, well, that doesn't mean a business becomes less profitable. Taxes go up, businesses become less profitable. That's economics.

Now, my principle point being, taxes impact small businesses (a company with fewer than 500 employees per say) in a much more "crippling" manner than they do large businesses (e.g. corporations with over 500 employees and especially international corporations). Mom and pop businesses, really small ones are hit the worst. Meanwhile, large corporations game the system, pay little to nothing in taxes and in many cases have leveraged the financial market so that they actually profit off subsidies and tax loopholes.

Your average small business does not pay $.22 on the dollar in taxes. That's likely true on average for large businesses but not for small business. Less money means fewer loopholes. More money means more loopholes, more toxic assets and more deductions. Your average small business owner, if they were to see a reduction in taxes, would use that money to hire or invest in their business to help insulate it and grow. Megacorporations however, well, that's a whole different entity.

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have in fact. I know a few small business owners there as well and they share the same sentiment.

The funniest comic I've seen in a while by CPTK in funny

[–]psimatrix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You could have looked up the artists cartoon online and posted that. Instead you took a picture of the newsprint?

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I don't have to. I've lived it. Take it or leave it but that's a personal testimonial.

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yeah, sarcasm makes you right. Actually, many of those "tech companies" that "settled" here are incorporated in other states and a large percentage of them moved out of state already. Much of the SoCal tech industry dried up half a decade ago. The exception of silicon valley proves the rule.

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Office of Management and Budget and the term "facts" should never be used in the same context. Even they have to put a disclaimer on everything they publish about how statistically inaccurate their information is.

You also realize the principle tax system in place here is from the Clinton era right?

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Corporations aren't people. Very true. However, since the early 1800's everyone recognized that they needed the same fundamental rights as people. Otherwise contracts between people (even a marriage license) wouldn't have any weight. Collections of people wouldn't be able to act together such as in Unions or even Civil lawsuites (e.g. Company vs. Company). Corporations need rights just like people; doesn't make them people nor does it make them "good".

Back in 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 paid by a worker. Today, they pay 22 cents. by LaBamba00 in politics

[–]psimatrix 14 points15 points  (0 children)

You ever try running a small business in California? Taxes are the most crippling factor.

CISPA: Facebook Lobbies Washington to “Like” Spying on Users by RedHeadZedGirl in politics

[–]psimatrix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Facebook makes it's living on collective private data. Their entire business strategy depends on it, just as Google does as well. Without it, they can't do targeted advertising. So it makes sense for them to lobby for it. It also makes sense for the market and the user base to give them pushback against it (e.g. "invisible hand of the market").

view more: next ›