Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Occupy Wall Street      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 larissan04
Joined: 8/11/2011
Msg: 301
Occupy Wall StreetPage 13 of 53    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41)
bladesmith~

"ust because, as you put it, no one is guaranteed anything doesn't mean it's ok for the rich to game the system and screw the rest of us."

and how is one man's prosperity screwing you? if you are broke, it's not the fault of your rich neighbor. I would contend that people are rich because they understand money, and know how to create wealth. they chose a good profession first of all, one that pays well and is in demand, and i would contend that they spend their money on assets, i.e., things that PAY them money, as opposed to spending their money on luxuries, or the trappings of wealth. did you know that the vast majority of rich people are first generation, self made millionaires? do you know that on average most of this familial wealth is gone by the 3rd generation? on a personal note, more then half of the rich people that i have ever known have declared bankruptcy at least once in their lifetimes. what this demonstrates here is that we do have social mobility.

but i would also contend that while we live in a country with some measure of a capitalist system, we do not train our children how to function within it. we do not teach our kids how to invest money, nor teach them the time value of money, i.e., that a dollar today is worth more than a dollar earned 3 years from now.

" The rich aren't guaranteed success when they gamble on Wall St, except they are. They gambled and lost ,and WE covered their losses."

of course the rich aren't guaranteed success. they just know how to handle money, and know how to make money. maybe you should work hard to learn something from them rather than complaining about the fact that they are rich - as if taking all their money away would make you any better off.

but the fact is...the money lost on wall street was lost by shareholders. they were lost by "everyman" with a 401k, or a money market account. trillions of dollars were lost by the average joe on main st.. i don't care if you have a 403b, you probably lost money. anyone who has money in a roth ira, or a regular ira lost money. this is a lot of people we are talking about, and this aint just the rich. if you are talking about the bank bailout, well the banks paid all of that back. all of it. and, btw, the tea party was viscerally against the bank bail outs, fyi.

"How is that fair? When they can use their money and influence to rig the system, then the system is corrupt, broken and needs be repaired."

fair? you sound like a teenager whining, "it's not fair!" come on, why would you expect the world to be fair? it isnt fair that some people are born with cystic fibrosis, either.

and just how is the system broken? what would you propose would fix it? taking away money from the rich? just how is the system rigged?

"THIS is how things get repaired in a representative Democracy. People stand up, and demand wrongs to be righted."

just what wrongs are you talking about? that the guy next to you at the stop light is driving a mercedes and you're driving a 1989 toyota corolla? the fact that you aren't rich? is that the wrong that you want righted? if so, then learn how to be rich. there is plenty of opportunity for you to be rich, too, if that's what you want.

and things get repaired in a representative republic by people coming together and forming their own organizations to work within the system - it's called reform - (btw -an individual can not fight an organization; it takes an organization to fight an organization).
people do not repair things in a representative republic by banging drums all hours of the day and night, pooping on a cop car, or by calling people with whom they disagree nazis and racists. if you want to fix the economy then put someone in the white house who a) isn't an ivy league lawyer, b) has no executive/administrative experience, and c) perhaps vote someone in who has a successful track record of running a business in the private sector, and has a back ground in economics.

just a suggestion.
 timetogo3223
Joined: 9/29/2011
Msg: 302
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/22/2011 6:53:59 PM

You would not, or could not believe, the common grounds that good people find with one another when faced with corporate takeovers of their communities. You have to have been through this to believe it. It will some day soon, come back to haunt ya. We will be there to help .


Dear Mr. Puppy, spare me your community organizer help. I'm a little surprised that you know my life experiences without my relating them to you.

What is it, Mr. Puppy, that is going to come back to haunt me?

My question to you, Mr. Puppy, is what have you done to question, stem or thwart the encroachment of government? What of the lies of government? What of the trillions of dollars in failures and unfulfilled "good intentions"? Liberals and progressives are never, ever held accountable for their actions. The thought is, they "cared" and that is enough. It is not enough. The country is broke and heading towards disaster due to the liberal/progressive/socialist philosophy.

It is just so tiring to listen to the old progressive saw that all business in bad, all politicians of a liberal stripe are good, and that everybody should be paying their "fair" share, whatever that is. Give us all a break and give your activism a rest. Goes for all the self-appointed guardians of the good.
 LinuxD
Joined: 12/6/2008
Msg: 303
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/22/2011 11:38:15 PM
5.5 K would be half of my annual income. Wanna compare war stories? Yeah, I'm sure as hell entitled to it, that's the Social Security I paid into since I was 16. I didn't ask or plan to become disabled... how well do you think you could live on that amount? And keep in mind that there has been NO cost of living increase for the last 3 years, because according to Uncle Sugar, there hasn't been a rise in the cost of living. I'd like to know which dimension or planet those people live on.


you got your raise.. where does it come from? now.. you got a 3.6% increase.. that means overall..the ppl who make THE MOST now pay MORE to support YOU.. happy? SOCIALISM! it's working! did you EVER stop to think.. every time YOU Kari or anyone whines about I NEED a C.O.L. where the hell that comes from/ why should I work to support YOUR ass and my C.O.L goes down the tube to YOU? did your S.S. taxes go up to cover everyone else.. apply some math? I am NOT about helping those who CANNOT help themselves.. but come on sweet christ! like the 5.5K laptop? was that needed? or was she "entitled" to it? get your head on right.. and BTW.. horse burgers.. lets share the meat?
 RichenLosAngeles
Joined: 11/14/2010
Msg: 304
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 12:02:02 AM
Skooch- At some point you need to stop frothing at the mouth. They can't even get the DEMS to back Obama's "Jobs" bill, let alone anybody else.
And these people asking businesses to not hire workers? Skooch, give me a break,, a real business needs workers to make money. We don't hire people for the sake of statistics. Do you think I'm gonna run an understaffed company for a YEAR ?? Just to try to make Obama lose ? That's economic suicide. Why the H would I do that?
Meanwhile, Obama is doing his very best George Bush imitation, strutting around telling everyone about all the "bad guys" he blew away. Weird!
 RichenLosAngeles
Joined: 11/14/2010
Msg: 305
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 1:13:45 AM
Skooch, Of course demand drives employment. Duh,, When has it not?
But this fever for going after rich people, aka the wealthy, will get you nowhere. Don't you see that? It's merely a diversion, a distraction. A cheap sleight-of-hand trick performed by a poor showman, desperate to entertain you just long enough to be re-elected.
Then he will pull away the heavy curtain, and reveal an empty box, and SHAZAM , you've been fooled again.
 LinuxD
Joined: 12/6/2008
Msg: 306
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 2:36:32 AM
Do you really want to live in my world, in my dimension? It would be interesting to see how well you'd do.

Bring it.. beans and rice? sleeping on the floor of a shop because i had no other place to go? other than to work? how the hell do you think i got out of there? i worked my ass off.. you want to do this dance? do you? i can give you names places and phone numbers.. you REALLY want to? lets dance.. lead on..


Sure.. lets do it.. You think i am better off than you? i go without everyday.. with out things i WANT.. i have what I NEED.. I make things happen for me.. not cry poor mouth .. get on a work jacket,crutches,wheel chair.. whatever.. c'mon.. no one is a loser we ALL get medals for showing up.. oh wait.. it's something we can't see? I am ate up with RA.. i go to work every friggin day.. no i dont worry about shit.. i have a cat to feed.. electric,cable internet and a host of other bills.. NONE of my PC's or ANYTHING I own is worth 5.5K. Sorry about your husband i am sure he was a good man.. get out of the ditch.. wait.. that will only make the "elite" richer.. ok.. stay there then.. I'll send word..
 kari135
Joined: 9/1/2009
Msg: 307
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 6:31:14 AM

you got your raise.. where does it come from? now.. you got a 3.6% increase.. that means overall..the ppl who make THE MOST now pay MORE to support YOU.. happy? SOCIALISM! it's working! did you EVER stop to think.. every time YOU Kari or anyone whines about I NEED a C.O.L. where the hell that comes from/ why should I work to support YOUR ass and my C.O.L goes down the tube to YOU? did your S.S. taxes go up to cover everyone else.. apply some math? I am NOT about helping those who CANNOT help themselves.. but come on sweet christ! like the 5.5K laptop? was that needed? or was she "entitled" to it? get your head on right.. and BTW.. horse burgers.. lets share the meat?

Excuse me? When did I get a 3.6% raise? The amount that's deposited in my bank account every month hasn't changed for the last 3 years. I paid into social security from the time I was 14. I also got about 300.00 from social security between then and when I was 19, because my father had died. Damned if I didn't have to pay taxes on that income for quite awhile.

I hope there is an increase, because I for one am going to need it:

The per person Medicare insurance premium will increase from the present monthly fee of $96.40 to:
2012 - $104.20
2013 - $120.20
2014 - $247.00
These provisions; incorporated in the Obamacare legislation, are purposely being delayed so as not to 'confuse' the general public in the 2012 re-election campaigns.


Not only are they deducting for Medicare, but those of us who get it are required to get supplemental insurance, which we also have to pay for. Medicare and the required supplemental insurance aren't worth the paper they mail the announcements out on. I hope to high heaven I never get sick, because there's no way I could cover the co-pay. A single office visit to provide me with a local physician cost over 400.00 for 20 minutes of conversation. Nor was the clinic interested in getting my records from any other clinic or doctor, even though they are free. A quarter of the bills I pay each month are payments made to various doctors and clinics for a variety of tests over the past 10 years, just so I could find out - as required by the states I've lived in - that I'm healthy. Whoopie.

Every single job I've ever had where I got a paycheck, I also got a substantial cost of living increase, along with an annual raise, every year.

I've lived in campers, unfinished cabins, places that either had no running water or water only during the summer. I lived and raised my kids in a cabin that was a mile from the nearest road, and in winter I cut and chopped wood for heat. For a lot of years I worked 2 and 3 jobs, 80 to 100+ hours/week at jobs I hated for the health insurance to cover my kids. Yeah, I've paid my share into social security. I've spent a lot of years eating beans and rice, and growing what I could to supplement that. I've spent summers in 100+ degree heat with no air conditioning so I wouldn't have to pay the electric bill. If there's a way to stretch a dollar, I've found it.

I have more physical problems than simply going slowly blind, and no one in their right mind would hire me to do anything at all. For quite a few years I was told that I have RA as well, but according to that assortment of tests I'm still paying for, I don't - no one has any idea what it is. Fortunately, very fortunately, whatever is wrong is structural, not a treatable or untreatable illness, although I'm also anticipating having to have at least one knee replacement, it's so badly damaged it wasn't fixable and is unstable. I don't let it affect me any more than absolutely necessary.

And one of these days, if you're lucky, you'll be my age. We'll see how you feel about all this when that time comes.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 308
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 8:53:48 AM

"When they can use their money and influence to rig the system, then the system is corrupt, broken and needs be repaired."

...and just how is the system broken?

That was answered by the very statement previously quoted in that post.


what would you propose would fix it?

Revoke the personhood status of corporations (and unions, too), campaign finance reform, and work on fair trade laws.

The problem is that these won't happen in any effective way.

just how is the system rigged?

Since the Santa Clara vs. Southern Pacific Railroad case in 1886, corporations have had the status of legal persons. They have all the rights of citizens, but, conveniently, not many of the disadvantages. Unlike actual people, they are not limited to $2500 in campaign contributions. Evidently, that would be a violation of free speech, but only for corporations. Unlike actual people, they cannot be arrested or jailed. They can only be sued or fined.
 larissan04
Joined: 8/11/2011
Msg: 309
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 11:58:35 AM
flyguy~

have you ever noticed that the vast majority of corporations donate money to BOTH parties.

none of this proves that the system is rigged. citizens have the ability to effect change in the political system. look at movements like the tea party. whether you agree with the tea party or not, you have a popular movement that had an impact on the mid term elections. another example, do some research on moveon.org, and see how this organization started. it started by a couple a concerned citizens sending out a mass email, and it grew from there. now moveon.org is a powerful political organization that has had a big impact on the political process. they receive donations from corporations, and various foundations that help fund their causes. as a matter of fact, you can donate to them, too.

every individual has the ability to band together with other citizens, seek grants and donations from other individuals or entities, and form organizations that work towards pushing whatever issue they so desire. no one is preventing you or anyone else from doing this, so the suggestion that the system is rigged is not demonstrated by anything that you have said. no one is stopping you from getting involved.

furthermore, since you have an issue with corporations donating money to political parties do you also object to unions, or foundations such as the ford foundation, the trial lawyers association, the tides foundation, the bill and melinda gates foundation also doing the same thing? or is it that you object only to those that are on the other side of an issue?

the over riding principle at work here is this:

an individual can not fight an organization; it takes an organization to fight an organization. and political donations are considered a form of free speech.
 larissan04
Joined: 8/11/2011
Msg: 310
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 12:08:56 PM
skoochie~

"Tea Party Nation has officially made it clear they intend to further ruin the economy by asking businesses to not hire new employees. What a bunch of crotch vents these people are!"

the tea party can spew whatever they want and it isn't going to persuade a business man to do anything that is not in the best interest of his company. business people dont think like this. they will hire people when it is in their best interest to do so, and they will hold off on hiring people when it is in their best interest to do so. if you keep in mind that people can always be expected to act in their own best interest then you will have a strong predictor of human behavior.

who cares what the tea party said here?

" They're giddy with the unemployment rate being high. They lose all credibility now when any of them complain about it being high, because they want it high. They have no credibility in talking about job creation, because they're goal is to have ZERO jobs created. Only despicable people would make such a request."

their goal is for the government to stop spending money. if business people are going john galt, then they are doing so because they feel it's in their own best interest to do so. no one owes anybody a job. and i can guarantee you that if a business owner desperately needs a sales person he's going to hire one, regardless of such rhetoric.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 311
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 12:47:07 PM

have you ever noticed that the vast majority of corporations donate money to BOTH parties.

Absolutely. This fact supports my point, which you seem to disagree with vehemently: when both parties are bought off, the system is broken, and there is scant choice for the rank and file worker. See: oligarchy.

citizens have the ability to effect change in the political system. look at movements like the tea party. whether you agree with the tea party or not, you have a popular movement that had an impact on the mid term elections. another example, do some research on moveon.org, and see how this organization started. it started by a couple a concerned citizens sending out a mass email, and it grew from there. now moveon.org is a powerful political organization that has had a big impact on the political process. they receive donations from corporations, and various foundations that help fund their causes. as a matter of fact, you can donate to them, too.

I'll take a page from your book: none of this proves that the system is NOT broken. (That was easy)

Of course, corporations still find a way to get movements to look after their best interests. See: astroturf movements.

Perhaps it all just means that the system being rigged isn't blatantly obvious, and/or it isn't COMPLETELY rigged.

since you have an issue with corporations donating money to political parties do you also object to unions... also doing the same thing?

You must have missed this part of my post: "Revoke the personhood status of corporations (and unions, too),"

an individual can not fight an organization...

So much for the triumph of "rugged individualism," eh?
 larissan04
Joined: 8/11/2011
Msg: 312
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 12:56:53 PM
flyguy~

"I'll take a page from your book: none of this proves that the system is NOT broken. (That was easy)"

um, argumentation 101... you made the claim, then you need to prove that claim. coming back with a prove-the-negative b.s. simply demonstrates that you can't support your claim.
if every single person is free to donate, promote, and fund what ever causes, groups, or politicians that they want, then how is the system rigged? you have just as much right as any corporation to donate to whomever you choose. no one is stopping you. no one is stopping you from joining in the occupy wall street movement, and playing a drum all day long either. thus, your claim that both parties are "bought off" is really simply an obvious abdication of your own responsibility to get involved in the political process. you want to change something? do something about it. go get involved.

the rugged individualism pertains to the micro versus the macro - but that doesn't mean that one can effectively get somthing done without some agreement or assistance from others. and yes, if all people embraced the idea that they are at cause in their own lives, and were solely responsible for their own condition in life then yeah, the world would be a much better place, wouldn't it? the self motivated and the self sufficient are rarely victims or door mats.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 313
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 1:27:32 PM

um, argumentation 101... you made the claim, then you need to prove that claim. coming back with a prove-the-negative b.s. simply demonstrates that you can't support your claim.

You are correct about the burden of proof, but my point is that people can easily dismiss all the evidence in the world outright, and they often do.

if every single person is free to donate, promote, and fund what ever causes, groups, or politicians that they want, then how is the system rigged?

One's the little Dutch boy, and one is the dam. Guess which has the upper hand?

thus, your claim that both parties are "bought off" is really simply an obvious abdication of your own responsibility to get involved in the political process.

Remember, you mentioned both parties first... and no need to get personal. *cough* argumentation 101 *cough*
 SweetLilGTP
Joined: 10/22/2010
Msg: 314
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 2:29:23 PM
and how is one man's prosperity screwing you? if you are broke, it's not the fault of your rich neighbor.


It sure is so; if he went to where you stored your game, or gold, or metals, etc...and took it. Said in another way; if he went to your pension....and emptied it to play some biggame poker with it.


of course the rich aren't guaranteed success. they just know how to handle money, and know how to make money


And yet THESE rich, in question.....lost it. (And lots of it) [with hardly any of the loss theirs]

ou may say it was aworlwide "phonemenon", but noone could deny that Wall Street LEADS, or at VERY least, makes a MAJOR influence on the worldwide economy. ;)

and things get repaired in a representative republic by people coming together and forming their own organizations to work within the system - it's called reform - (btw -an individual can not fight an organization; it takes an organization to fight an organization).people do not repair things in a representative republic by banging drums all hours of the day and night, pooping on a cop car, or by calling people with whom they disagree nazis and racists. if you want to fix the economy then put someone in the white house who a) isn't an ivy league lawyer, b) has no executive/administrative experience, and c) perhaps vote someone in who has a successful track record of running a business in the private sector, and has a back ground in economics.




Organize folks; she's a smart smart gal


Nor was the clinic interested in getting my records from any other clinic or doctor, even though they are free.


Ouch; In a pay for use system, that completely makes sense....though not in a good way.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 315
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 3:53:10 PM
You are way out of line, "show me please." None of your latest post has anything to do with factuality, as far as I can see, just with venting your own unsupported prejudices.

There is NO evidence that either Obama, or the people who voted for him, are even remotely close to being communists, and you appear to be intelligent enough to know this. One of the biggest reasons why RATIONAL conservatives are having a hard time helping turn things around here, is that the IRRATIONAL people are making us appear to be insane, with foolish, unsubstantiated nonsense like that. Stop playing into the hands of the left by lying and/or exaggerating about them.

You are on the verge of being actionabley insulting to other posters with your name calling, and that will get you suspended, no matter WHO'S side you are on.
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 316
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 3:59:59 PM

sorry for you there, commie er comrade SCREWME~

its not MY tea party, and im not ashamed. use semantics anyway you like. im a capitalist, and you are a communist, an obama voter. i wish people like you would move to europe instead of mucking it up and destroying the american dream we have or had here. at any rate, thanks for doing all you can to destroy my beloved country, a country that was once worth dying for. this may be the last time the freedom experiment is ever tried by mankind, and its a pity if its destroyed the way you and your fellow idiots are setting out to do.

There was a report about a year ago that various right wing groups were organizing to disrupt discussions on the internet. Like the ones here. POF is fairly tightly moderated, so a lot of them were tossed out. Usually to reappear with pictureless profiles and start posting as soon as they can. You can see them posting at Daily Beast and other sites pretty easily. The really persistent ones are actually paid to do it. That's their jobs.

The idea is to throw out ridiculous statements and get the discussion turned from the actual topic to just a bickering back and forth. Apparently the right doesn't want any substantive discussion of issues and the internet, left unchecked, would actually foster discussion. So responses to outrageous comments serve the interest of the poster who made the remark. Anything to derail real conversation.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 317
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 4:11:22 PM
I found this relevant and interesting movement:

But OWS and its supporters would be wise to take notice of a separate but allied movement that predates them but is also growing: "Move to Amend" which specifically addresses one of OWS's main concerns, "Corporate Personhood."


Read more: http://www.newstimes.com/opinion/article/Dear-Occupy-Wall-Street-Move-to-Amend-the-2230414.php#ixzz1beIEbkNj


Interesting-- I didn't write or knowingly copy that "read more" link, although I was going to supply it anyway. What will those web programmers think of next?
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 318
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street-Horrific first hand account.
Posted: 10/23/2011 5:44:41 PM
My gods...these people are...people
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/keith-boykin/occupy-wall-street-media_b_1019707.html
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 319
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 6:06:18 PM
The Occupy Wall Street movement might actually get some issues into the national discussion. The very conservative media has avoided them, but might be forced to actually cover some of the issues the protesters are raising. Most of the coverage has avoided the actual motivations, but as the movement grows this will be harder and harder to avoid.

It was interesting that I saw someone here slag Kalle Lassen as an anti-semite. I've met the guy. He's a very successful advertising guy who saw that what he was doing was part of the problem. So he's spent his own money for decades to try to get his message out. It resonates all over, but gets no coverage in the media.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 320
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 6:34:25 PM
We have to look at the motives, who profits, who might be more honest in these debates. And WHO is driving and manipulating the debates.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK6RGV2PldY&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Things don't go better with Koch...particularly if you are/were employed by the sleezebuckets.
 BalderDog2
Joined: 1/6/2011
Msg: 321
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 9:17:15 PM
when you mention the koch family, shouldnt you mention soros and compare them?


Compare them? That's easy.

When the Kock Brothers contribute to anything, their ultimate objective is to help only themselves. They have made lots of money, but have done nothing of value with it.

When Soros contributes to something, his ultimate objective is to help others. Of course he wanted to make lots of money too; but he's done a lot of good with that money.

Soros' story is very interesting. You should read up on it--it'd do you some good. The Koch Brothers story is rather dull and typical of those born into wealth; but you should read that, too. Then do some comparing.
 BalderDog2
Joined: 1/6/2011
Msg: 322
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/23/2011 9:34:22 PM

When are the liberals going to wake up to the fact that BIG GOVT is far more dangerous than Big Biz?????

Seeing the offspring of spoiled socialists crying for yet more handouts is hardly worth a yawn. There is nothing new there.........


If I click on your posting history, I can easily read the posts you have made on this thread. The three that are still visible in your history are pretty much the same as this latest one. Are you even bothering to read the thread?

Why not contribute an original opinion rather than repeating what you hear every night on Fox News.
 Bladesmith81801
Joined: 10/30/2010
Msg: 323
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/24/2011 5:17:12 AM
Here's a helpful tip: if you are a political pundit and you still don't know what Occupy Wall Street stands for, you are an idiot. If you purport to make your living analyzing the political landscape, or from parsing the effectiveness of various political messages, or if you write columns explaining what the American people want based on your deep, intimate knowledge of what the American people want, but you still, after a month, cannot quite grasp what these uncouth people in the streets are going on about, then you are categorically bad at your job. If you find yourself tuttering and tsking over how the protestors are merely a group of fringe figures, and you do not notice or care to notice the polls expressing wide support for the message, you are a fraud.

It really is that simple, at this point. No supposed "pundit" should be able to say with a straight face that they cannot possibly understand what message the protestors have. Here, I will give it to you in a mere few words: the Occupy Wall Street movement is a protest against rampant income inequality, against corporate excesses, and against a government rigged to protect and worsen both.


It is a protest specifically against the members of the financial sector, who were bailed out at taxpayer expense after wrecking the economy with self-perpetuated fraudulent schemes against one another, and who have learned not one damn thing from the experience, but instead have continued on their merry, privileged way. They assert themselves to be masters of the universe, and pay themselves accordingly, and whether the world they supposedly run hums like clockwork or burns to the ground makes no particular difference to them.

It is a protest against the perceived entitlement of the wealthy, for whom any slight economic injury (say, from taxes) is seen as an apocalyptic event, and for whose sake austerity must be imposed on every other group, from schoolchildren to the elderly, from the poor, the sick and the comfortably middle-class alike.

It is a protest against a government that seems to exist solely to meet the needs of wealthy and corporate benefactors, a government that cannot competently even execute routine functions anymore, but which is instead dedicated single-mindedly to the premise of cutting taxes on the rich and balancing the books on the poor.

It is not a protest against TARP; it is a protest against the failure of TARP to achieve even a stick of reform in exchange for the body blow dealt to the rest of us. It is not a protest against political parties, but against a system that has been so corrupted that the needs of the one percent are considered of greater merit than that of the entire rest of the population.

It is not "against corporations." That is so wrong as to be stupid. It is against the excesses of corporations, most specifically corporate corruption and a whole passel of things that ought to be called corruption, if we were being the slightest bit honest about it. Reasonable environmental protections for communities should outweigh shareholder demands to make a tenth of a cent more profit on any given quarter. Corporations that raid the pension funds of their workers should be considered criminal enterprises, not "creative thinkers."

It is not "against the rich." It is against the rich being catered to at the expense of every other citizen, and against wealth through parasitic behavior that does not a damn thing for the larger world, save make it worse, and especially against wealth protected by implicit guarantee on the backs of the rest of us, when precious few of the rest of us can claim similar government attention. It is about the unemployment crisis going unmet, being absolutely ignored, in fact, so dedicated government is to instead pursuing whatever policy would best serve an excruciatingly narrow band of financial elites.

It is pro-worker, in that it is a reaction against workers being treated as increasingly disposable, abusable commodities by the companies that employ them. It is neither pro-tax or anti-tax; it is against the disparity of treatment between rich and poor, when it comes time to pay those taxes. It demands a voice in government, and a voice in the punditry that struggles so painfully to grasp what the little people are going on about. It is afraid of future financial disaster, and even more afraid that another disaster will be met with yet another surrender to whichever elite crooks might cause it, pampered souls who gambled the fate of entire economies with the sure knowledge that they could simply charge the losses to the rest of us, if the worst was to happen.

Above all, perhaps, it is an objection to the notion that corporations do not just have rights and privileges equal to people, but in fact have rights superior to the rights of people, rights which are appended on in the name of free enterprise and seen by lawmakers and courts alike as being far more obvious and inviolate than those of you or me. It is this treatment—this premise that corporations are super-people that are entitled to more government access, immunity to normal laws, the "right" of profit even if it injures someone else, the "right" to author their own regulations or to dispatch those they find too onerous—that is the most objectionable. Corporations have been declared to have the unlimited right to meddle in elections, unencumbered, as a matter of free speech, but the same right of free speech finds a phalanx of limits set on it early on, when it comes to camping out in a public park or marching on a public street.


The message is very straightforward. It is not difficult to understand. If it is difficult to understand, or if it seems like socialism or communism to you, or if these pleas for basic fairness in the way governments treat their citizens sound radical to your ears, then the fault is yours and yours alone. Those demands were not outrageous in previous decades, so demands to return to similar policies can hardly be considered radical now. If you have your head so very far up a rich man's ass that you think "not a penny more charged to the rich because that would be socialism" is a reasonable statement, but "repair financial regulations whose dismantling helped lead to economic collapse" is in fact the more crazy of the two statements, then there is no hope for you. Perhaps you are merely an oligarch.

So a declaration: no more dawdling columns explaining that you cannot possibly understand what the Occupy Wall Street protestors are upset about. No more sniveling that they have no concrete grievances, or can propose no concrete solutions, when people around you can easily tick off a list of both. No more throwing around words like radical, so dull from overuse as to be rendered mere parody, or burping out intellectually incompetent uses of the word Marxist merely because your worldview is has been so ideologically narrowed in the last decade that you consider anything that might bring a speck of good to anyone to be a communist-inspired plot.

The penalty for breaching any of these is to be exposed as an ignorant, hollow fool. You cannot claim to have your pulse on the mood of the public if you cannot figure out the very simple, very consistent message sent by a now-nationwide group of that public. The founding name itself, Occupy Wall Street, should give you a damn fine idea right off the bat as to the target and goals of those involved. The movement has higher public approval ratings than the tea party. It continues to spawn related efforts worldwide. If you feel ideologically bound to ignore it, fine, but claiming you do not understand it only brands you as a mind too easily taxed to be of much use in the public sphere.

If you understand the grievances of the Occupy movement, feel free to either engage or rebut those complaints. If you do not understand them, then go away, for you are too lazy, too self absorbed, or too ignorant to do the job.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/23/1028206/-Occupy-Wall-Street-is-not-difficult-to%C2%A0understand?via=blog_1
 Bladesmith81801
Joined: 10/30/2010
Msg: 324
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/24/2011 5:19:42 AM
Yes, Big Govt IS dangerous, when it serves the wants and needs of only the very rich and corporations. When it serves the people, however, and stands to protect it's citizens, it is not.

When the rich and the govt join hands to exclude the middle and lower classes, but demand we protect them and backstop their gambling and thieving with our lives and our money, then something has gone horribly wrong with this country.
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 325
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 10/24/2011 5:59:32 AM
From today's NY Times:

Big business has clearly decided that the economic crisis is too important to waste. While Washington debates how to create jobs and cut the budget deficit, major corporations — read major campaign contributors — are pushing Congress for an enormous tax cut on corporate profits. Lawmakers seem all too eager to grant their wish.

Specifically, multinational corporations — including Cisco, Pfizer and Qualcomm — want a temporary “tax holiday” that would allow them to bring foreign-held earnings back to the United States at a vastly reduced tax rate.

A bill in the House would tax repatriated earnings at 5.25 percent, a fraction of the usual rate of 35 percent; a bill in the Senate would cut the rate to 8.75 percent, or 5.25 percent for companies that added jobs.

The corporations say a tax holiday would help to create jobs, mainly by giving them money to hire and expand. But the National Bureau of Economic Research, the Congressional Research Service, and private researchers concluded that the last tax holiday, enacted in 2004, largely failed to spur investment or job growth. Companies spent most of the repatriated $300 billion on dividends and stock buybacks, enriching executives and shareholders.

These days, corporations are flush with $2 trillion in cash that is not being used for hiring. As long as the economy is weak and consumers aren’t spending, tax cuts will add to the cash pile, not create jobs. A tax holiday also would add to the deficit, in part because companies rush to bring money home, rather than repatriating the earnings over time at the usual rate. According to Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation, another tax holiday at 5.25 percent would increase the deficit by nearly $80 billion over 10 years; a rate of 10.5 percent would cost $42 billion.

A report by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations leaves no doubt that tax holidays encourage tax avoidance — as companies use accounting maneuvers to shift profits offshore and then wait for the next tax holiday before bringing the money back.

The Senate panel said 7 of 19 companies that participated in the first tax holiday repatriated between 90 percent and 100 percent of their profits from offshore tax havens, like Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, Panama and Ireland. The subcommittee also found that corporations that repatriated large sums under the first holiday have since built up their offshore funds at a greater rate than before.

Yet, in the warped politics of Washington, a second tax holiday is a distinct possibility. Senator Charles Schumer, a Democrat of New York, and other Democratic senators have floated the idea that a tax holiday could be used to establish an infrastructure bank. They are focused on the short-run revenue gain from a tax holiday and playing down the substantial revenue loss over time. Mr. Schumer says he would not support a rate as low as 5.25 percent, but even a higher rate would be a big revenue loser.

Similarly, the bipartisan deficit reduction supercommittee, reportedly hamstrung in its quest for trillion-dollar budget cuts, might also try to use the short-run revenue gain from a tax holiday to mask the depth of spending cuts. Or Congressional Republicans may demand passage of a tax holiday in exchange for extending federal unemployment benefits, which expire at the end of the year.

The White House has rightly opposed another “one-time” tax holiday, but politics are pulling in the other direction. Unless President Obama leads the fight, this wrongheaded policy is too likely to become the law of the land. The evidence is there. A corporate tax holiday won’t create more jobs. What it will do is raise the deficit.

Whether you think a tax holiday is a good idea or not, it's pretty clear why the Occupy movement is growing. The fact that Corporate America can get Congress to dance to its tune means that it has way too much influence.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Occupy Wall Street