Who are the 1%?

reply to post by projectvxn


You're wrong about that. A small business just doesn't gross that much. If it does, it's likely close to taking the next step of a chain operation.

I gurantee 99% of you won't go peacefully and you will fight it with every fiber of your being....unless.
Unless your present situation gives you the gift of desperation to change. Very much like with a chronicAlcoholic that is finally done, Cooked, beaten into submission, and ready to try a new way of life. 99% is still comfortable being this way for now.

Of course it can change over night....The God you claim is real and unreal is bigger than what you say or think.


First, all the main characters (i.e. the Enterprise crew) behave virtuously. They appear to be guided by an inner moral compass. They’re brave, honest, honorable, just, and self-sacrificing. They don’t rely on religion for their values, and there doesn’t seem to be a pervasive belief in a higher power. Their values are very humanistic in nature and are an integral part of their high-trust society. Every character has its moral failings now and then, but they quickly self-correct.

Purpose

Each character is clear about his/her purpose in life. Each one works within the area of overlap between passion, expertise, need, and purpose. They don’t work for money but rather for personal fulfillment. There is some type of economy referenced in the background, but it’s virtually irrelevant because the accumulation of material possessions isn’t highly valued or respected. Social status isn’t determined by wealth but rather by achievement and merit.

There’s an overall purpose of exploration, which all characters help to fulfill. They’re constantly working on goals that derive from that purpose, and they often have tight deadlines.

Technology handles all the gruntwork, which gives characters the freedom to pursue their purpose without worrying so much about meeting their basic needs. People work because they want to, not because they have to. The characters have the freedom to be lazy and do nothing in this world if they wanted to, but they choose to contribute.

Competence

The Star Trek characters are extremely competent, well-educated, and highly skilled. Each has developed themselves in a variety of areas, but they each have an area of expertise at which they’re particularly well-suited. Each seems a near perfect fit for their particular duties. They’ve developed their strengths and worked to minimize their weaknesses.

Characters achieve their social standing primarily based on their level of competence (which contributes to their rank). There’s no sexism or racism, but nor is there anything like affirmative action. Merit is what matters most. The cream rises to the top.

The society is structured such that achievement is expected. Stick an overachiever in this universe (Wesley Crusher), and he receives encouragement and support instead of resistance, red tape, and bureaucracy


Self-Discipline

The characters have high self-discipline and are emotionally mature. They own themselves. Abundant food and entertainment are available via the replicators, but no one overindulges. You wouldn’t see a character on the show having trouble with oversleeping, unless of course an alien influence is the cause (i.e. “Schisms”).

The characters are even disciplined in their thoughts to the degree that they can feel comfortable around telepathic/empathic beings that can read their minds. Their public and private personas are congruent. They have little to hide.

Maturity

The characters are mature and responsible. They do their jobs without complaint. They assume 100% responsibility for their lives and don’t blame others for their situations. They’re passionate about what they do, but it’s a quiet, mature passion, not an unfocused juvenile passion.

Hard Work

The characters are productive hard workers. They don’t push themselves to the breaking point, but they’re far from lazy. They use technological resources to get things done efficiently, but they direct those resources towards hands-on action rather than overintellectualizing to avoid work.

Mutual Respect

When doing their jobs, the characters interact within a formal structure, but off duty they’re on a first-name basis. At all times they treat each other with mutual respect. If one character begins to self-destruct, the others step in to help restore balance and integrity — they look out for each other. Trust and trustworthiness are high. This is basically the opposite of how the characters in a soap opera would behave.

Principle-Centeredness

The characters place the highest trust in their own individual principles. They respect the laws and customs of other societies as well as those of their own, but in cases of conflict, they will violate laws to uphold their own principles, even when serious personal consequences are likely. They do not follow laws or orders blindly — they think for themselves and do what they believe is best. They will even follow their principles to the grave if necessary.

C&P violation (see if you can pass the smallest of test)

Originally posted by negativenihil
reply to post by projectvxn

 

Great, that still doesn't get her a much needed day off. Nor does it help my local comic book shop keep the creditors at bay. Really, I promise you - no matter what figures you can come up with, these people in my area are not 1%ers.

Ya see folks...The only response now is:

"It's not THOSE 1%ers, it's the OTHER 1%ers"

If it wasn't so sad it would be comical.

A business owner holds onto a typical 2 to 500 thousand dollar asset. Whatever they make in profit is typically much lower, on that I agree. But many of these business owners have money in retirement accounts, money in CDs, IRA, and other investments that also solidifies their membership in the evil 1%.

An Asset, by the way, is WEALTH.

Originally posted by projectvxn
Ya see folks...The only response now is:

"It's not THOSE 1%ers, it's the OTHER 1%ers"

If it wasn't so sad it would be comical.

Yes, because that's *exactly* what i said, isn't it? Well done, bravo, and here I was thinking you were one of the reasonable ones here today.

If you really cannot tell the difference in wealth between the real 1%ers, and well every small business owner, then there's really no helping you. You've been duped.

A business owner holds onto a typical 2 to 500 thousand dollar asset. Whatever they make in profit is typically much lower, on that I agree. But many of these business owners have money in retirement accounts, money in CDs, IRA, and other investments that also solidifies their membership in the evil 1%.

Let's compare: money.cnn.com...

www.ft.com...

aflcio.com...

*facepalm* Why didn't i see this sooner?! It's exactly the same!

By your line of logic, we should be railing on the 10% or something...

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

In order to be in the top .001 you have to make roughly 5million 500 thousand dollars....Doesn't sound like power and glory to me.

We're talking about a percentage of people so small, and yet OWS wants us to be more socialistic so that they can sit on their butts and reap the benefits of those who are productive.

Those people aren't sitting on their butts, they are out there using their first amendment rights
to protest a screwed up system in banking and governance. Your disparagement of those people
is text book propaganda, so that you can wipe them and their message out in one fell swoop.

They want us to punish the small business.

You're making stuff up

They have no idea, and these numbers prove it, what is it and who it is they think is the enemy.

You mean the banks didn't just rip off America and put the entire global economy in the
the toilet? I suppose it is the lazy kids getting sprayed with pepper spray who are behind it all ...

The 1% is a rhetorical tool, which speaks of a global system which is designed to transfer the majority
of wealth and political power into the hands of a smaller group of people, the centralization
of power, a thing Republicans claim they dislike.

reply to post by negativenihil


That IS what you said.

Apparently your idea of 1% of the population makes billions a year. When, in fact, much of the REAL one percent of the population doesn't even come close to that.

In terms of wealth, the numbers are very similar in terms of assets.

Originally posted by projectvxn

Originally posted by negativenihil
reply to post by projectvxn

 

Great, that still doesn't get her a much needed day off. Nor does it help my local comic book shop keep the creditors at bay. Really, I promise you - no matter what figures you can come up with, these people in my area are not 1%ers.

Ya see folks...The only response now is:

"It's not THOSE 1%ers, it's the OTHER 1%ers"

If it wasn't so sad it would be comical.

A business owner holds onto a typical 2 to 500 thousand dollar asset. Whatever they make in profit is typically much lower, on that I agree. But many of these business owners have money in retirement accounts, money in CDs, IRA, and other investments that also solidifies their membership in the evil 1%.

An Asset, by the way, is WEALTH.

edit on 11-10-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

See you, I think you guys figure that the wealthy are entitled to create anything they can fund and I think,
we the people are allowed to challenge an autocratic system which is designed to robbed the regular
folks and enrich a select few. I don't the funding fathers disregarded monarchy to put in place
oligarchy that you guys say we have to accept.

reply to post by mastahunta


Well...

1. I'm not a republican.

2. I've typed time and time again what my solutions are to solving banking practices that are predatory in nature.

3. I've more than expressed how government MUST BE CONSTRAINED from attaining too much power outside of their Constitutional mandate so that they aren't allowed to give banks or anyone else too much power.

All you ever do is this:

"You disagree with 99%" "You refuse assimilation". "You are a bank shill and therefore an enemy."

And then you accuse me and others who disagree with OWS' misguided notions of how wealth is spread and gained of being narrow minded and propagandists.

You're the one making things up. About me and everyone who disagrees with you.

reply to post by projectvxn


Did you ever think that where ever you got that information from could be *gasps* lying to you to hide the problem!?!?!?!!

Originally posted by Evolutionsend
reply to post by projectvxn

 

Did you ever think that where ever you got that information from could be *gasps* lying to you to hide the problem!?!?!?!!

Oh I see.

So an argument based on raw data is no longer acceptable?

We can't delve into the numbers because we may ruin your idea of how the economy works?

"If you disagree you're a propagandist". "If you come up with facts to back up an argument then the facts are wrong."

You are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by mastahunta

 

Well...

1. I'm not a republican.

2. I've typed time and time again what my solutions are to solving banking practices that are predatory in nature.

3. I've more than expressed how government MUST BE CONSTRAINED from attaining too much power outside of their Constitutional mandate so that they aren't allowed to give banks or anyone else too much power.

All you ever do is this:

"You disagree with 99%" "You refuse assimilation". "You are a bank shill and therefore an enemy."

And then you accuse me and others who disagree with OWS' misguided notions of how wealth is spread and gained of being narrow minded and propagandists.

You're the one making things up. About me and everyone who disagrees with you.

reply to post by projectvxn


In my opinion the data doesn't take into account your gross revenue, it seems that your explanation is based on assets alone. Assets are not the problem, gross revenue or income is.

Originally posted by Evolutionsend
reply to post by projectvxn

 

In my opinion the data doesn't take into account your gross revenue, it seems that your explanation is based on assets alone. Assets are not the problem, gross revenue or income is.

Actually the premise of the OP and the link to Factcheck.org makes it quite clear that it is about the top 1% of income earners.

reply to post by projectvxn


As long as "Factcheck".org says so, it must be correct.

Originally posted by Evolutionsend
reply to post by projectvxn

 

As long as "Factcheck".org says so, it must be correct.

Factcheck.org is a non-partisan organization that is committed to research and trusted across party and economic lines.

Their data is also from the CBO, the CBO gets their data from the BLS and independent entities like the US Chamber of Commerce of which nearly half of it's members are small to midsize businesses.

reply to post by projectvxn


I sense some problems with your data, but I'm not going to take the time to go over it with a fine toothed comb, not worth the effort. Maybe Phage will drop in and do it.

reply to post by Evolutionsend


You sense problems with my data because you don't agree with the results.

As I said, you're entitled to your opinion but not your own facts. If you're not going to put the effort into researching your side of the argument then don't be surprised when no one takes what you say seriously.

reply to post by projectvxn


Facts are only as good as the person interpreting them, and how complete they actually are. Having known many small business owners, I'd say the data is BS. Grossing 300,000 is a lot of money, and I'm tired of trying to explain that to you.

Originally posted by Evolutionsend
reply to post by projectvxn

 

Facts are only as good as the person interpreting them, and how complete they actually are. Having known many small business owners, I'd say the data is BS. Grossing 300,000 is a lot of money, and I'm tired of trying to explain that to you.

You must have missed this point:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I also noted that asset holders fall into the same category. Most people who do have assets valued at 300,000 dollars ARE in the top1%. That includes small business owners. People with retirement accounts exceeding 300,000 dollars are also in that category(who, by the way, are MIDDLE CLASS RETIREES). But you go ahead and ignore these facts too.

reply to post by projectvxn


Actually, your data could be interpreted to mean that the fact that middle class people with $300,000 of assets are in the upper 1% shows that the most wealthy people in this country have an unbalanced amount of money, which sounds close to the truth. If many wealthy party's at the top had a lot of money, it would shove those with $300,000 lower on the scale, but the scale of people with less than $300,000 goes all the way up to 98% of America. Your data, depending on interpretation, does show that America's economy is top heavy, but the assets are even more off than we thought.

If it sounds confusing, think of it in terms of a graph. Beyond the upper 1% the graph must go upward very quickly, or there just isn't enough money in the economy to go around, which probably isn't the case.

Some better information would be to take the total of money in that 1%, and compare it to the rest of the money in the economy, the 99%. Depending on the results of the new data and comparison, we may need to revise the 99% vs the 1% statement.