Occupy A Paycheck

by lewwaters

We have all been seeing in the news about Occupy Wall Street, Occupy Portland, and Occupy Denver; Occupy everything except a bar of soap for some. The common theme we hear is that there are no jobs, corporate greed is holding back on jobs, the rich are stingy and not “paying their fair share” in taxes. The claim is that 1% holds all of the wealth and that 99% apparently do not, leading one to believe that 99% of the country is broke, out of work and dying of hunger.

According to the National Taxpayers Union, the so called rich already pays a disproportionate amount of income taxes and we also know that 47% of lower wage earners pays no income taxes.

Beyond taxes, as I said above, corporations are accused of being greedy, not wanting to hire people while they hold massive amounts of profits, yadda, yadda, yadda. That too is not quite accurate as there are corporations ready, willing and all too able to hire up to one million workers and it is the government blocking the access to those jobs.

I have long advocated on this blog for government to issues drilling rights to our oil companies so they can recover our own natural resources that we still must have to meet our energy needs. The so called “green” alternative sources remain inefficient, expensive and unreliable, as Britain found out when during one of the worst cold snaps they have ever seen, their alternative sources, windmills, froze and produced no electricity to heat homes.

While the oil & natural gas companies represented by the American Petroleum Institute, some 470 in all, stand ready to increase hiring during this ongoing economic downturn, some of the very people out “occupying” whatever, complaining they can get a job, are some of the very people who oppose oil companies putting people back to work.

Mark Green, of the API tells us, “Current policy is preventing this industry from doing more to help the economy – through job creation, investment and contributions to the federal treasury. Not to mention improving our energy security.”

He also informs us that, “these companies already contribute $86 million a day to the federal government in taxes, royalty payments, rents and bonuses.”

ExxonMobil brings to our attention a recent Washington Post article questioning industry claims of job increases due to the estimates “include jobs that are created in supporting the work of the oil and gas industry – service station employees or steel suppliers who provide raw materials for industry projects are two examples.”

I think any honest person can agree with their conclusion of, “a job is a job – and our country needs every one of them.”

ExxonMobil’s Ken Cohen goes on to list several examples of jobs in support of the oil industry, thousands as a matter of fact. Even locally, we recently saw a $200 Million oil rig constructed right here in Vancouver, Washington. Imagine how many more jobs would be opened up if government eased their restrictions, moratoriums and banning of allowing the oil companies to do what they do best, recover our own resources.

A petition is even being circulated to the White House for approval of the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline to carry Alberta’s Shale Oil to the Texas Gulf, a project ready to create thousands of jobs.

Isn’t that the main reason we continue to hear are behind these nationwide Occupy anything but a bar of soap protests? No jobs from the “greedy” corporations?

And yes, I know that not everybody at these protests really want a job, but a good many people are frustrated as this Great Recession goes into another year with no end in sight.

What I don’t see are any of the Occupy anything but a bar of soap crowd protesting the White House or Congress, demanding they end the prohibitions and let oil companies achieve their capacity.

We continue to hear cries of “redistribute the wealth.” The best redistribution of wealth is from a decent paycheck. The oil companies are poised to begin hiring people, paying decent wages, increasing revenues to the treasury and supplying our energy needs, cutting off our need to buy foreign oil from enemies.

And yes, their wealth will increase.

But so will yours. A paycheck again in your pocket will increase your own wealth.

If you all must protest and really want to see an end to the Great Recession, it is time you changed direction and protested who is really keeping you locked out of work. Government!

Get government prohibitions out of the way and you too could soon be Occupying a Paycheck instead of an unemployment check.

26 Comments to “Occupy A Paycheck”

  1. The problem is Lew, that the Democrats depend on keeping blocks of people unemployed, hungry, and homeless. When people are prosperous they have no need for the Socialist “solutions” of the Democrat Party.

    Like

  2. Simple math tells you that if 2% of the population pay 60% of the taxes and half of the population pay none, we have an unsustainable distribution of wealth. You can argue all you want that the 2% deserve their aristocracy but how do you expect to keep the 98% in check? With guns? Do you really plan to board yourselves up in your houses and shoot out the windows at the masses?

    Why get hung up on the issue of redistribution of wealth? Conservatives have a long agenda that has nothing to do with supporting the aristocracy. Be part of the solution – that way you keep the Marxists down.

    Like

  3. Nice point & Job Lew!

    Like

  4. Martin, is there a reason 2% should pay 60% and 50% pay none? Yes, that is unsustainable and part of our problem now.

    And, 98% are nothing to worry about because it is a bogus number and claim. If you go back, 50% of top wage earners, those earning as low as $33K a year, pay a little over 97% of income taxes. At best, that leaves the 47% who think they should not pay income tax, but are entitled to receive refunds.

    This “movement” is nowhere near as big as it is made out to be nor is it new. Remember those asking what happened back in the 60’s? Where did the passion for change back then go?

    I’ll tell you where it went. The majority wised up, started families (by choice or accident), got their hair cut and got a job to raise their families. Some became quite successful and left the left. Others were successful and falsely think their liberalism grew their wealth (in the case of liberal college professors, they are right).

    But, most saw the light and found out their dreams were fulfilled by working a regular job or starting their own business. This whole thing could easily be put to a rest in a week, without violence. Miami, Florida shut down a riot during the 1968 Republican convention easily the same way in 3 days.

    So no, I’m not worried about these malcontents. They’ll make noise, we’ll expose them and by and large people will wake up and leave them standing so 40 years from now, when they are old and gray they too can ask what happened.

    This has been going on since the mid 1800’s and has only succeeded in a few places, to the detriment of the workers.

    Like

  5. I dare say that most of America sees these “protesters” as a bunch of radical kooks raising hell over nothing and looking for an easy hand-out.

    The thing that foils the Marxists every time is that in America, everyone has the freedom and the opportunity to work hard and amass their own fortune without joining some band of anarchist kooks.

    Americans just don’t need the kooks and they know it, that’s all.

    Like

  6. Lew, please don’t fall into the ideological misconception that America can cure it’s financial problems by taxing the poor. That argument is ridiculous on its face: the rich are paying too much – tax the poor more. Then the argument goes that Government is spending too much money: as I keep saying, every dime Government “spends” is a loan to America and it ends up in SOMEBODY’S BANK ACCOUNT.

    The difference between now and the 1960s is fundamental: Free Trade; China; world demographics; raised expectations, and: degraded work ethic. Things are NOT going to go back like they were – we must play the cards that are in our hands now.

    Like

  7. I find it fascinating that OCW is against “corporations”. You mean, like the Sierra Club, and the ACLU, and PETA, and Planned Parenthood and People for the American Way? Those are all corporations.

    Of course not.

    OCW is against capitalism, not corporations. They’re just too politically savvy to say so.

    Like

  8. Martin, you don’t have to worry about taxing anybody if you make the government spend less.

    The problem with your “loan to America” theory is that the government controls the spending of that “loan” and thereby takes the money away from the private sector and spends it on a bunch of nonsense and “social engineering”.

    It is much better to have the people keep more of their own money and control the spending of that money themselves because it keeps government intrusions into the freedoms of citizens to a minimum.

    We need to cut the size and power of government drastically if this nation is to survive.

    Like

  9. Well I am just shocked to see that Marty Hash is still over here pushing his communist-marxist manifesto BS and playing mouthpiece for the fleabaggers here in The ‘Couv.

    No blood for the dog, eh Marty??…..

    Marty, my grass still needs cutting, and I have a ten dollar bill here for you if you can show me you are able to mow my lawn the way I want it done. I’ll even let you use my mower. All you have to do is demonstrate you are either capable or willing to do some honest work for a decent wage.

    Here’s a chance to earn your dinner Marty….

    Like

  10. Jack, I agree that private sector jobs always come first.

    However, it doesn’t make any difference what Government spends money on – it’s all going to end up in somebody’s bank account in the end, and like all loans, it should be paid back.

    There’s another discussion about how Government employees have no check due to politics, cronyism, and the lack of an adversarily relationship, but I’d be siding with you on that.

    Bob, take your meds.

    Like

  11. Martin ~ Nah, have Bob give you one of Le Courdeon Blue Meals?
    Watch out, he makes GREAT steaming, spine tingling food! then you both will have a bunch of time to chat about the state of political affairs. 🙂

    Like

  12. Having been one of the poor… a product of the welfare state, I have to disagree with you, Martin.

    I, in fact, say “tax the poor.” I don’t say tax them so the rich can pay less…. I say tax them because their duty to help pay for this country is not lessened or removed by reduced financial circumstance, any more then the duty to pay child support ever disappears merely because one is poor, or loses their job.

    EVERYONE should pay… even if it is only 1 percent. Because for the 50% or so who take tax dollars instead of paying them, there is precisely zero concern by those paying no taxes because they’re low income about where any of those dollars go… as long as they get theirs… which they get by extorting money at the of a government gun from those of us actually paying taxes… unlike most of those morons in the “occupy” movement.

    So, yeah… EVERYONE, rich OR poor, should pay something.

    Just sayin’.

    Like

  13. Kelly, I agree with you – especially as you explained it.

    Like

  14. As someone who is working from the bottom up doing what people say cannot or will not do jobs like washing cars, tech support for the vets, clean office buildings, make beds in hotels or whatever job, I’ll do whatever it takes!

    And I hope that I’ll have a chance at a decent college education, even though I’m over the average college age of a younger generation that is going now.

    If it takes three, four jobs or living next to a sex offender off Markle Avenue where the trains blow all day & night in an apartment in Downtown Vancouver in probably the lowest income area of all of Clark County is.

    I’ll pay my fair share, even if it means having to work more. All I ask of others who are abled bodied, to do the same thing I had to do more than three or four years ago. Get up, get off the couch, turn off the television or get off the computer and start looking for work. Even if its the lowliest mcDonalds job possible, even if you are on social security, medicare, food stamps or some other social welfare program, stand up!

    Its going to take ALL of us to get our nation out of this debt for probably a generation or two. The sooner we start, the sooner the economic overlords will not have any more power.

    And yes, for a good time, I WAS On the government assistance due to a serious medical condition that almost repeatedly killed me… Now I am not, because I refuse to give in to this hell. I’ll die on a street corner before I ever allow my disease do what I have seen it do to others.

    Like

  15. Taxes in America should be pretty simple. Since every American is created equal, then no American should have to pay a greater percentage of his or her income in taxes upon that income.

    We’re all equal members of this nation and the burden of financing this country should be borne equally. Anything else is nothing but pure Socialist “engineering”.

    It’s just that simple, and it would definitely put an end to a lot of government nonsense.

    Like

  16. “Created equal” means: in the eyes of the law, all men are equal, not that everyone should share equally – that’s Marxism. We’re unequal in almost every way – including who pays the highest percentage of taxes.

    Society is a contract between the masses and the aristocracy – the masses won’t revolt if the aristocracy don’t exploit their privileged position.

    Like

  17. I’m sorry Martin, one American is no more “equal”than any other American, has no more rights than any other American, and should not be liable for a greater percentage of the bill than any other American.

    Also Martin, America isn’t supposed to have any “aristocracy”. That’s how far this nation has gotten away from it’s founding principles.

    Like

  18. Jack, the definition of an aristocracy is: 1% of the population controling 60% (or more) of the wealth, and propagating their wealth at death. I agree that America was established without an aristocracy but we have allowed one to develop. That’s what I (and other LIberals) are fighting against.

    What’s happening here has and always will happen. HIstory is full of accumulation-revolt-accumulation-revolt. Let’s fix the problem before the revolt. You can still be a strong Conservative yet think having an aristocracy is bad.

    Like

  19. But you see Martin, this is America. Any American has the freedom to be a part of your definition of “aristocracy”. That’s the beauty of America.

    In America, you have many choices. You can either sit on your ass and whine about what everyone else has, or you can go forth and make your own fortune.

    Only people who are criminally too lazy to make their own fortune would think about depriving someone else of their fortune.

    What you’re actually talking about is greed and envy, not “aristocracy”.

    Liberals “fight” to take fortune away from those who have worked hard for it just to give it away to those who aren’t willing to work for it.

    A “Liberal world” is where everyone would live at the lowest common denominator. Coincidentally, a Socialist world is pretty much the lowest common denominator, except that Socialists also have “aristocracies”. So you not only live like a grunt, but you have a lot less and there are still “rich people”.

    What makes America strong is that hard work is rewarded with fortune. Something you can’t say about a Socialist or a Liberal “world”.

    Do you know why these “Occupiers” are such a tiny minority? Because most Americans are out trying to reap the fortunes of their hard work. Most Americans aren’t laying around whining about what everyone else has. They’re too busy working and living. And Americans are too busy having a lot more than people in any other country have.

    So you may see that sort of “revolt” in other countries, but you won’t see it here. Any American can “strike it rich”, and most Americans know that.

    The biggest enemy Americans have is our own government and the Liberals that want to destroy the American way of life. In that I see an inevitable revolt against the government and the Liberals.

    Like

  20. Another thing Martin, I have several friends that have millions. I like them and they’re not “evil people”. I don’t covet their fortunes, I just want to make my own fortunes.

    I have every opportunity that every other American has to make my fortunes, and if I don’t make my fortunes I have nobody to blame but myself. Just like every other American.

    I am happy for somebody when they have made their fortunes, and I am just as happy for myself when I have made my fortunes.

    It’s really quite simple.

    Like

  21. Also Martin, we can take some “lessons” from basic human nature:

    1. If you start handing out checks, there will be no end to the people with their hands out.

    2. If there are no rewards for hard work, no one will work hard.

    3. If there are no rewards for taking risks, no one will take risks.

    Let’s see how this plays out because the answers are obvious:

    1. Most people will take as many free hand-outs as you will give them. Doubt that? Start handing out $100 bills and see.

    2. Let’s suppose that every job in America gave the exact same wage. How many people do you think would work hard for that same wage?

    3. Why would anyone risk investing in businesses if they gained nothing in return?

    Of course, those are the logical “end conlusions”. But let’s only apply them “slightly”:

    1. You hand out checks to as many people as you can. Will those people then work for anything?

    2. You limit the incomes that some people can make. So how much work do you think that those people will do for that limited income?

    3. You cap the rewards for taking risks. So how much risk will people take for the capped rewards?

    It’s easy to see that as Socialism is applied, the end result is a proportionate reduction in human productivity. If Liberalism is a watered-down form of Socialism, then Liberalism will take the same path to the eventual “end conclusions”.

    It’s just human nature.

    Like

  22. Jack, though there is truth in what you’re saying, history shows us what happens if we’re not practical. I believe in liberty (and its monetary manifestation, Capitalism) but I’m also pragmatic enough to know that if I eat an ice cream cone in front of a Rottweiler, I’m going to lose my hand.

    Capitalism is a Ferrari that if it gets out of tune, the engine explodes.

    I have plenty of experience fighting vague Marxist envy.

    Like

  23. I don’t see much of a record in American history that shows the American people getting angry at the “rich”, Martin. That’s because Americans have the freedom to become one of the “rich” if they so choose.

    “Getting angry at the rich” is just a current tactic that the Left is trying to use to enslave this nation.

    And please notice that it isn’t working, either.

    Like

  24. Martin, another definition of Aristocracy is, “is a form of government in which a few elite citizens rule. It was conceived of as rule by the best qualified citizens, and contrasted with monarchy. In later times, aristocracy was seen as rule by a privileged few (the aristocratic class).”

    If you look around us, we see a “ruling class” in Vancouver & Clark County doing just that, ignoring our voices and ramming light rail down our throats along with BRT on Fourth Plain.

    On the national level, we also saw that as Democrats rammed through Obamacare, against the wishes of the public and likewise with the repeal of DA/DT, ignoring the voices of the Combat Arms Troops and citizens.

    We also saw it as Cap & Trade was almost pushed off on us as well as the efforts of the Democrats to regain a one party rule and Obama’s actions to circumvent congress, some fringe congresscritters actually encouraging him to do so.

    Aristocracy is exactly what we have been fighting for some time now, imposed upon us by today’s socialist Democrats and RINO’s.

    Of note, no one complains about the wealth of the Kennedy’s, the Kerry’s, Pelosi, Reid and so many liberal Hollywood liberals or even George Soros, just the Koch Brothers or any other wealthy person who is conservative or supports conservative causes.

    Today, all of the malcontents in these Occupy anything but a bar of soap gatherings has the equal opportunity to go and create the wealth others have, just as you did. In fact, oddly enough, it is now known that some 49% of the occupiers think the Bank Bailouts were necessary! http://reason.com/blog/2011/10/18/poll-49-of-occupy-wall-street?mid=5091

    If we were actually a full aristocracy, none of us would have the opportunity to go out and create new wealth, the aristocrats would see to that, just as many steps taken by today’s socialist Democrats lead us towards just that.

    Like

  25. Lew, by your definition of “elite” (power), I agree that many of them think they KNOW BETTER than the rest of us – and I accept your examples. “Aristocrats” (money) are just as dangerous.

    I don’t care what party or ideology an “elite” or “aristocrat” belongs too – they’re bad.

    (I would like to think there is a term for people who have wisdom?)

    Like

  26. “A Leader”, Martin.

    Like

%d bloggers like this: