I take it you've been to a few? (Not being snarky, genuinely asking)

Yea, but it was in Canada. I imagine the US ones are fairly more educated on how politics in the US work, but from what I've heard from friends and seen/read on the news it's fairly similar other than that obvious difference.

2) Someone more successful then me pays less taxes, that is not right as we should all be equals.

Just a note on this. They rarely pay less taxes, they just might have lower tax rates. The sticky thing about Warren Buffet's case with his secretary is fairly isolated. His secretary makes a lot of money compared to you or I most likely, but he makes an absurd amount of money. What ends up happening is you get someone in a high tax bracket who can afford a lot of write offs compared to someone in a high tax bracket that can't afford a lot of write offs. Warren Buffet still pays more taxes in a year than any of us will pay in our lifetimes (most likely unless you're super rich, in which case go you!).

A good illustration is that A lot of people have household incomes that are easily livable ($70,000+ household salaries make up 31% of the population) and all of these people are in the top 3 tax brackets. The top 1.5% makes over $250,000/year. Just keep in mind when you say, "Increasing taxes on the rich," doesn't always mean, "increase taxes on the absurdly rich," without changing the tax code and adding new tax brackets that include less than 1% of the population, which isn't exactly fair when they already have a base higher tax rate if they don't apply for all the loopholes the absurdly rich people do and already pay a proportionate amount of taxes to the amount of income they make.

To use the case of Warren Buffet again, because of various tax loopholes he pays approximately half of the taxes he would be paying based off of his starting tax rate. If we just close those loopholes, it will have the same affect as increasing taxes on the absurdly rich, won't hurt the people who make a lot of money but don't apply for these loopholes, and make the us tax code much nicer in the process. They could probably even lower tax rates across the board and still take in more income.

How great would it be if your tax return form only had your identifying information, your income, and the number of dependents you have with a nice table underneath that shows how much you owe? Of course I say this like I'm not taking advantage of the write offs I get, but I'd be just as happy to see them gone as I am to get a check every May. Obviously this is an oversimplification, but it could still be much cleaner than it is.

Oh nice, today we get a look at Fortune 500 companies that pay ZERO dollars in taxes:

http://www.ctj.org/c...dgersReport.pdf

On a combined $160,000,000,000 in profits for these companies.. our government paid THEM a refund of $10 BILLION, making taxation actually profitable for these companies.

How the hell do you keep billions of dollars from being taxed? Oh.. jeez it gets complicated - http://news.cnet.com/8301-30684_3-20020329-265.html

You and I just have very different views on the same events. There was an Occupy rally in my city just last week. That rally was about corporate greed and lack of jobs. Something every state in the nation faces. However, I disagree that wealth distribution is somehow the same as corporations getting billions of dollars of tax cuts which effectively cuts their tax rate in half. These tax loopholes need to go. For everyone. Bush and Obama tax cuts, just go away.

What happened to the campaign funding issues and the desire for legal repercussions for those responsible for the financial crisis that the occupy movement was founded on?

Oh nice, today we get a look at Fortune 500 companies that pay ZERO dollars in taxes:

http://www.ctj.org/c...dgersReport.pdf

On a combined $160,000,000,000 in profits for these companies.. our government paid THEM a refund of $10 BILLION, making taxation actually profitable for these companies.

How the hell do you keep billions of dollars from being taxed? Oh.. jeez it gets complicated - http://news.cnet.com...020329-265.html

I don't believe that the problems OWS are complaining about are a problem of capitalism. Our government effectively creates and supports monopolies. Politicians are sitting on the boards of these giant corporations and have a monetary interest in ensuring there are plenty of loopholes for the company to take advantage of all while the would be competition is saddled with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. We have a two party system where democrats and republicans simply trade power back and forth as you get pissed off at one side and turn to the other for support. It is a system designed to keep power consolidated in a relatively small group. OWS would probably be more on target if they were occupying DC instead.

The worst part of it is there are jobs to be had, but they are not and are no longer going to be unskilled. We are not just exporting our jobs, we are importing skilled workers from other countries because there are not enough qualified Americans to do the jobs. The US education system is broken and failing at preparing our children to compete in the future market and despite what many claim, it's not simply a matter of being underfunded. The teachers unions have a stranglehold on our education system and are putting the future of this country in jeopardy. There is another great target for the OWS crowd, but they seem more interested in calling attention to the symptoms than the underlying problems.

I just really wish people would stop attributing the wealth redistribution complaint to OWS. That's not what they are asking for. They are asking for jobs. They are asking for corporations to be corporations not the 4th branch of the government. They are asking "why are you sitting on trillions of dollars, but are not hiring?".

This is the biggest problems I have about the OWS complaints. These people need to realize that corporations do not owe them jobs. It's not their right to be employed at a large company just because the company is successful. The large companies did not force them to go tens of thousands of dollars into debt getting a useless degree. Lets be perfectly clear, corporations exist to make money and I don't believe that there is anything wrong with that as long as those corporations cannot simply buy monopolies via the government. I expect corporations to be greedy to an extent, but it's a problem when politicians who are supposed to be representing us are that greedy.