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
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 801
Occupy Wall StreetPage 33 of 53    (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, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53)
Well I think to be fair when President Carter signed into law the Community reinvestment act it was designed to eliminate "Redlining " in the low and poor neighborhoods from the lenders basically , the act yeah I get what President Carter was trying to do, its was the amendments to his original act in 1989( FIRREA) and 1991 to 1995 Amendments brought to Congress by President Clinton which was a Sore spot for President Carter and rumors have it that he was not thrilled with Clinton for doing that(but that is another topic) that started to ball rolling.

So Time wasn't exactly lying and I can see where he would believe the whole mess started with the C.R.A of 1977, IMO it was the actions of President Bush 1989 and President Clinton administration that accelerated the matter.

Which is why Ive never been a fan of government intervention in the first place, some of you wants to blame the corporations for the " greed" but what about the borrowers that rode on the river of greed? some of them gambled and lost, what next are you going to blame Vegas Casinos for some folks losing money too?

Responsibility starts with??
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 802
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 10:40:21 AM
From what I read about the FIRREA act, this was a case where the federal Government was actually doing what YOU like, and WITHDRAWING it's guidance and regulation of these transactions. The reason the GOP supported it, was BECAUSE it fed into their ideas that all regulation is "bad," and that all privatization is "good." The result of the elimination of regulation, was that the investors were easily fooled into thinking they were being sold blocks of loans that were backed by real wealth, when they were not.

And yes, I DO blame both the lenders AND the borrowers, and most people I've read or heard complaining about all this do so as well. What angers many who joined into both the Tea Party and the OWS thing, is that the LENDERS got a rescue package of free money from the then Republican-controlled Federal Government, while the borrowers were all left in the dust( and yes, the Dems also chipped in, and gave the rich guys even MORE bailout money).

I have no sympathy for those who knowingly put themselves in that position, but since MUCH more of the damage caused was to people such as myself (my employer had to downgrade my income and job-stability to cope with the general losses across the marketplace), and to small and large business owners, I DO have an ongoing strong DIS-like of the people who are STILL giving themselves bonuses for having done this to the rest of us. And many of THEM are living the fat, pampered life of Wall Street insider investors, hence we are finally back to the OWS movement.
 Doremi_Fasolatido
Joined: 2/14/2009
Msg: 803
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 10:56:07 AM
I can sympathize with the OWS folks in a few respects. Here is one that hit me personally..... I'm not assigning blame to anyone because there is plenty to go around. Hey, pick the whipping boy that suits your outlook.

In my neighborhood, back when I moved in to my present home -Jan 2003- loans were easily obtained and there were a good amount of homes for sale in the area. I sold my old home at a nice profit after occupying it for 12 yrs. previously. I was buying a smaller home and the price was equal to the home I sold. I'm always doing home improvements so I had hoped to see a rise in my new homes worth. Since 2003 to now my homes value has dropped by over 20% from it's value in 2003.

Mind you, I'm not pointing fingers but it's amorphous but costly property devaluations in the market that make me wonder. I mean, property on average here in Toledo has lost 20 to 25% of it's value. Makes you want to throw in the towel and quit maintaining your property. It's almost as if property is being de-valued just so entities with money can come in and buy everything up.

Buying opportunity? I guess it is if you're in that mode. But, when you look at who has all the cash it gets kind of scary.... Our constitution guarantees individual property rights for citizens.... And Corporations ? As stated on this extensive thread, there are many bad guys and policies to blame that it's hard to pick out a "shining star" of fault. Maybe the OWS has a point?
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 804
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 11:08:51 AM

From what I read about the FIRREA act, this was a case where the federal Government was actually doing what YOU like, and WITHDRAWING it's guidance and regulation of these transactions. The reason the GOP supported it, was BECAUSE it fed into their ideas that all regulation is "bad," and that all privatization is "good." The result of the elimination of regulation, was that the investors were easily fooled into thinking they were being sold blocks of loans that were backed by real wealth, when they were not
No Igor, Im not sure where you're getting your information from ?

FIRREA act is A federal law created to improve the situation after hundreds of U.S. Savings and Loan institutions failed. This act created the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC), a corporation ( which I don't see any one protesting over by the way) which provided funds to the savings and loan institutions that were failing, I don't see anyone protesting Resolution Funding Corporation (REFCORP).

FIRREA allowed bank holding companies to acquire thrifts(A savings and loan association)that became Insolvent, FIRREA act established new REGULATIONS not deregulation It did put stricter guidelines for real estate appraisals, and more importantly It also established new capital reserve requirements.

FIRREA required the agencies to issue Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) ratings publicly they have a four tiered rating system and do written performance evaluations using actual data and fact and because of this these rules it increased pressure on banks to make mortgage home loans to inner-city , poor and low income neighborhood, which is what I believe Timetogo was referring to earlier.

For the record I support no one, although people like yourself would classify me as " right wing" I don't support the Tea Party, the Republicans, Democrats, or any political association, even in my own country I don't support the liberals, The Tories,and definitely not the NDP or Green Party, they are all the same to me empty promises and lot of talk ( mostly bull shit), only in it for them selves, Im a capitalist first and fore most I believe in free markets, its a shame we don't have any, I believe people have rights, It doesn't bother me that the protesters on Wall street are protesting but most do not understand what it is they are protesting about?

They are angry and they are getting it up the ass but they are blaming the wrong people ,and to classify this a movement ? I don't think so, yeah you brought attention to wall street but so what? Wall street is still standing , and will continue to stand as long as they are 25% of the S &P, you can vote for who ever you want the problem is politics is a business and like traditional business they exist to serve whom?

Responsibility starts where?

 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 805
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 11:35:02 AM
Home for, I'm sorry, I covered this pages ago, but maybe you weren't here.

One thing our country is great at is selling things. Now many times we sell things that are truly great. Things that drive our economy, make business possible, make our family life easier.

Other times not so much. If you stay up late, you'll see exercise equipment that will give you rock hard abs in 2 weeks(usually winds up under the bed in 10 days gathering dust), or those lots you can build on for no money down and $50 a month, miles from the nearest town in the dessert or located in the middle of a swamp in florida. How about the guys pictured in hawaii driving the lamborghini telling you about making money in real estate for "no money down, no matter what your credit score is".

Your pla who made 40K and got a 200K mortgage was probably sold the old saw, "take this no-doc mortgage or balloon payment mortgage, the way prices are going up, you just make the payments for 18 months and flip the house, make 100K and buy a different one"

It's done everyday, how many homes do you walk into and see a JFK commenerative plate hung on the wall, "limited edition" sold for $29.95 +shipping? The plate cost less than $2 to make and was limited to the number they could sell, maybe 30 or 40 million. But aunt sally said "that will be valuable some day", yeah right!

"it depends on your mindset on who is to fault"

OK, good point, but let's tear this apart a little shall we. Was it those who advertised a "cream puff" house that was sold cheap already? Was it the real estate broker you met with, who said "well that ones gone, BUT if we look a few (10-20-30,000) higher than your price range, I think we have something for you". Or when she got them excited about the house said "I personally know a mortgage broker who can get you a loan that will work with his firm 'we cheatem and how' I will call him"

How many of these people showed up at closings WITHOUT a lawyer, or worse a lawyer that was recommended by the real estate agent, mortgage broker?

I think you will find common sense is something in short supply. He11 we're arguing on here daily about who the freak pays for coffee, and you want common sense?

A good lawyer costs about a grand, to truly protect you, debate clauses that may harm you and get them eliminated from the note. You think your getting that froma guy charging you $300 and is a friend of the broker? The longest document most of these people sign is their driver license application, auto purchase agreement(which they don't read) and a credit card application. You now expect them to sit with 7 people in the room watching their every move to sit and decifer a 14 page mortgage note?

He11 most of them didn't see the note until they sat at the closing table.

What class did you take to learn about mortgages? Certainly none in high school(besides you were too busy staring at sally's azz, to hear a word being spoken. In college? I doubt it was covered in class, just in a chapter, 1 of 3 you had to read that night.

The answer is "FEES", fees are the key to the whole mess. The RE broker gets a fee for the sale, the mortgage broker gets a fee for a signed note, The lawyer gets a fee for the closing, the bak gets a fee for collecting the payment and selling the mortgage to the bundler(larger bank), the bundler gets a fee for selling it to the investment bank, the investment bank gets a fee for chopping it into CDO's and then selling it to pension plans, and investors looking for a return on thir investment.

People take for granted a very complicated process, because of slick advertising from Countrywide and a slew of lenders. I mean it's gotta be easy right, or it wouldn't be on TV? Right? Hahahahaha!
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 806
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 11:52:45 AM
OH gawd!!! Let's clean up some of this mess. Someof you are missing pieces of the government reasoning.

First to my noisy buddy time, what happened to your "skin in the game" gambit? You know own a piece of the "dirt"? Your just muddying the water to stir sh1t!

Next please drop the name Salomon bros. gone since 2003, merged into smith barney and ultimately bought by citibank.

Finally the reason for the government urging have none of you heard of "red lining"?

That was the process where by certain areas you couldn't get a mortgage at all, major banks avoided them like the plague. That was the resaon government urged the banks to make loans to poorer people, in these areas.

At least try and argue apples to apples and not oranges.

Oh and you can argue that Carter was an ineffective president, certainly not one of my favorites. But a combination of bad luck(inflation, hostage crisis, oil embargo) made him look a lot worse than he was. But if you look at his record since, mostly what he has done has been good work for the people of the world. Many causes, many efforts not the least of which was his efforts on Habitat for Humanity.

At least he is not selling his soul day and night for 50K on the rubber chicken circuit.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 807
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 1:48:48 PM
You know Paul, I "HATE" revisionist history! You seem to love it. Did Carter make mistakes, maybe, more likely in response to events not seen before, he guessed the best he could. It figures you would see this as his problem alone and NEVER blame a republican for the part they played. But I will try and let you see the truth, I doubt you will, or even acknowledge facts clearly in evidence.

This story cannot be denied, unlike present day events, where the future is yet unwritten. Much as you are reading today, whether right or wrong, we have expanded our money supply, in the hopes that cheap money will stir the economy, it usually only stirs inflation. The jury is out, but the reason was different this time, flooding the system with money was meant to give banks the imputence to make loans, no luck so far. It is there ability to borrow funds for near zero and loan them back to the government for 2% that seems to be the word of the day.

But back then, in fact way before Jimmy, Nixon and his fed chief Burns opened the spigot on the moeny supply in the same hopes of expanded economic growth coming into his reelction year. Prices spiked, even though people had jobs, inflation was killing them, but he was reelected.

When Carter arrived on the scene inflation was rampant already, he an Volker decided to contract the money supply, to try and stem inflation. Maybe good idea, maybe not, more likely bad timing.

Right about then, not only was there unrest in the middle east with the Shah being deposed by the Ayatolah, and the people of Iarn rioting. Carter decided to end oil price controls, which would give rise to the development of Prudhoe Bay. The costs of production there were higher than the set price of a barrell of oil by law instituted under Nixon. This sent oil markets into a tizzy.

The students in Iran rioted and seized the American embassy. Carter ordered an embargo of Iranian oil. Saudi Arabia tried to fill the gap, until the next OPEC meeting, but an inflamed middle east ordered the embagro of oil shipments to the USA. Prudhoe had not been brought on line yet, ergo oil shortages.

To say he blundered, is partially right, I often wonder what other presidents would have done. Invade Iran? Set prices never work, think gold, we had it pegged at $32 something for years, when it floated free it rose to $300 in no time. You cannot artificially set the price of anything, the market does that.

As for "red lining", while I'm sure you knew some unscrupulous bankers, I have no doubt, your delicate sensibilities given your nose, would have kept you from areas like Watts and Compton, so I'm fairly sure you didn't discuss the amount of mortgages being written there. Much less areas like Newark NJ, Detroit MI, Harlem, Bedford Styvesent or other minority neighborhoods. I guess it goes if you don't see it, it doesn't exist right?
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 808
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 4:59:27 PM
See Paul, you can't help yourself.

I KNOW I've met a ton more bankers than you have(just part of what I did). Were some tough, were some no-bullsh1t kinda guys, absolutely. Did they want to get business done, yep. All I dealt with were honest, and I can say without exception, I would not have refferred to them as "mercenary"!

Now maybe we hear and have different meanings for words. But in my book "mercenary" and "unscroupulous" are mere degrees apart from being dishonest or willing to bend the rules to get a deal done at any costs.

"I only addressed the redlining or lack thereof , that I was familiar with in the Southern California area."

Gee, now color me crazy, but I always thought Compton and Watts, were in southern California, in fact in LA, your town or near it. No different than the discussion we had earlier on voter registration, because you don't see it in California, means it won't be changed and disenfranchise legitimate voters in another state?

"I see him at the bottom of the pit"

This also makes me scratch my head! I realize we all have different opinions, different points of view. 2 people can see the same thing and think differently. Usually though, they take into account the views of others, some they might respect from different viewpoints. I would never expect you to consider me in that light, but certainly you must have a friend who sees things a little different and tolerantly than you.

You mean Carter was worse than Nixon, a man who authorized payoffs, dirty tricks, and a breakin? A man who left office one step ahead of impeachment?

I know you'll never see the truth of shrub, responsbile for the deaths of 5,000 american soldiers sent to war because of WMD's that didn't exist. Who's lax hand on the economy plunged us into the worst recession since the depression of 29. A man who allowed people to die in NOLA, while he was at his birthday party. Who took days to get water to those stuck in the superdome after the storm, and that's just hitting the highlights of some of the things he did.

These presidents you hold in higher regard than Carter? Your a sad man paul, you seem to have a problem with all democrats, and worship all republicans.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 809
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 5:56:56 PM
(sigh) love the slight of hand there paul! You seemed to have picked up on the last sentence without say you believed shrub and Nixon were better or worse than Carter, nice dodge!

Compton and Watts, neighborhoods in LA, were red-lined. You said it didn't happen in California.

As for your "idea", I use that term loosely, that's right, you don't agree with them so starve them out, no water, no food, no medical supplies. This way people can get sick, maybe die.

Hey why don't you and a few of your friends, see if the mayor will give you a pardon if you guys can go in there and shoot them all? That way there won't be any more demonstrations. Or better still, why waste bullets, put rat poison in the water jugs being brought in, they will die quietly. Maybe the mayor would then let you take scalps or cut off some heads for your mantel.

Rat poison should be cheap enough right?

Believe me paul, I don't have to read any more of what you say, I know EXACTLY what you are!
 Home_for_30
Joined: 2/6/2010
Msg: 810
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 6:36:56 PM
Oy...very good response and I do agreee with you totally on the lenders being very shady. People can throw facts and statistics around all day...but in the end it's still someone opinion in here. It just happens to be mine that when the dust settles, it is still buyer beware...be it a house, a car or the crappy exercise equipement. I am very close to being a card carrying Libertarian...if they actually had cards. I believe in full personal liberites and full personal responsibilities. I 110% agree about the education part. I have said for years that in high school there should be a requires economics class that focuses on personel finance. How to balance a check book, have a credit card, buy a car...a house...and still have $$$$. I did not get my economics class until i was being discharged from the Marines back in 94. We were required to attend a week long class that showed you what is required to live in the real world. First everyone had to fill out a form and do research on a apartment or house...a car...insurance..food..clothes...basically all yearly expenses. Then we had to look for a job that matched our skill sets. You would be amazed at how many people were begging to stay in the Marines after that class! Sadly, we all had to get out due to force reductions. The moral of the story is that I was taught more in that week then anyone every taugh me before about personal finance. Most learn along the way, screwing up their credit history and getting in over their heads in debt as they go.

On a side note, read an article last night about a woman arrested after a traffic stop due to outstanding warrants linked to failure to appear to court over debt. She didn't go because she didn't have the money to pay the debt she ran up. In the commnets most thought it was only morally wrong, not legally wrong to fail to pay your debts. Then someone brought up Debtor's Prison. Right now it would be full of a bunch of CEO, COO, and CFO's...haha
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 811
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 7:32:37 PM

Prediction? Oh yeah, this one is easy............. This will be a riot the size of the Rodney King riots..................... and it will be this big because they won't have the cajones to keep those coming in specifically for the purpose of rioting, out of the city.


New York or San Francisco?
 Doremi_Fasolatido
Joined: 2/14/2009
Msg: 812
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 7:46:50 PM
You don't need a law degree,or a phd in economocs, or government operations to recognize the economy is sputtering. And, that decent paying jobs are scarce..... Even to the educated, qualified and strangely enough , even the well conected. Hell even a well qualified brown noser could be in danger of being pinched off their jobs.

When you think about the economy in the last 8 yrs or so, a lot of people have lost their jobs. I wonder if that could have had a correlating response in the housing loan defaults. What I'm saying is it's not always the fault of the folks who take out home loans. Hey, losing your job could deeply affect your ability to pay a mortgage.

I wonder how many mortgage defaults are the fault of lost jobs and or income???? Or conversely, how many are the fault of "bad loans".

At this point it's almost a moot point to wonder. At least to the defaulters and the lenders. All that's left is debt and devalued property. Benefits no one but those with all the dough. OWS, your goal is becoming a bit less foggy with each post.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 813
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 9:30:19 PM
Home for 30, thank you, for the compliment. I have to say great minds think alike!

If you have the time or interest, check page 20, post #483, where I make the very same points you do. Our educational system, allows the poor, even the middle class to graduate, and then wander into traffic with a blindfold on.

We repeat the classes on American and world history 5 or 6 times. We teach them things that most will never remember or use for the rest of their lives, in any number of subjects.

But we expect them to just absorb by osmosis the intracacies of credit cards, compounded interest, balancing checkbooks, how life and health insurance works and most of all borrowing money for cars or houses.

They have no problem sitting a person down, who may only have a high school education, putting a 14 page document that was written by freakin lawyers, that many college educated people would have to ask the meaning of certain terms, to sign a note obligating him or her to it's terms, penalties and payments, whatever they might be.

Please those of you wishing to make it his fault, for not understanding, don't piss on my shoes and tell me it's raining. The real estate agent is quick to explain the simple language of a binder, how it works, that the check will not be cashed until signed and accepted.

Ahh, but once that process is over the game moves into 3 card monty speed. The agent is done, she showed you the house, you made an offer, now her obligation(it always was) is to the seller. The mortgage note is prepared(hahaha) by the lawyers(actually this is done by the lender(bank or mortgage brokers lender) sent to your lawyer for review(boiler plate to him, which means he understands it).

Now he has no time to sit with you before(cause your not payin him enough) to explain all the details. I've even known some lawyers who accept the offer to do the transaction by phone, and never meet their actual client until the moment they walk into the closing room.

If all this was so on the up and up, why did the government force "truth in lending" brochures to be printed? Even THEY don't go into enough detail for the more complicated loans. What I mean by that is balloon payments, interest added to principle, vairable rates, adjustable rates and more names than you can shake a stick at.

Now before somone pipes up and says "if they don't understand it, they shouldn't do it", wake the fuk up! It's been sold as the American Dream for 50 years,by every president since Eisenhower, who wouldn't dream of owning a home? (unless that's your choice for your own reason)

It was different in the days before all these various types of loans were introduced. Then you walked down to your bank who you had been doing business with for years. Produced your assets or a list thereof, showed them your binder, filled out the dozen pages with the banker, showed where you had or were getting your 20% down payment from, and then waited the 3 to 6 weeks until your application was processed.

Now the whole shabang can be done in 10 days, less with a no-doc mortgage. Atleast until the present real estate crisis. Now unless you don't need the money to buy the house and have an A-one credit rating you can't get a mortgage to save your life.
 Doremi_Fasolatido
Joined: 2/14/2009
Msg: 814
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 10:52:46 PM
Mr Oy Vey, thank you for that post. On top of everything you mentioned it's small wonder people are less than satisfied with the economy...... Or the system that governs and regulates the economy. And, does it on our dime and seems to be bent on removing that very dime from our wallets. It's no freakin wonder there's folks walking the streets. Hey, maybe a lot of them have had their homes repossessed. Has anyone even asked???

Or, maybe their newly elected Governors say they are making too much money. and that they are causing the current economic downturns. Never mind the fact those who have the wherewithal have seen their numbers grow mightily in the last 30 yrs. or so.... And, that now those same managers of democracy and "the people" want to not just cut your pay, but also your right to negotiate workplace conditions . Things working people have fought for for years..... Things that make workers "people" and not just numbers on a loss/profit sheet.

This has, in fact happened in the state of Ohio. Happened in the last election . PEOPLE in the state of Ohio united together to defeat terribly anti-worker legislation.[SB5/issue 2] Folks came together and accomplished this goal by utilizing our electoral system to not just send a message but also defeat a bill that would have devastated workers voices in the workplace.

The best voice and the loudest voice is that of people united. The OWS folks may be foggy in their intent, But they know someone has been screwing them. The main thing is that they are becoming UNITED......And, that's a good start.Next, they need to utilize our precious democratic electoral system to restore the power to the PEOPLE again..... Before some incorporated, corporationolized,figment of some lawyerspeaking individual s imagination buys it out from under us.....
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 815
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/25/2011 11:16:17 PM

"if they don't understand it, they shouldn't do it", wake the fuk up! It's been sold as the American Dream for 50 years,by every president since Eisenhower, who wouldn't dream of owning a home?



Now unless you don't need the money to buy the house and have an A-one credit rating you can't get a mortgage to save your life.


What are you saying... you don't like the 'American dream' that was sold or you don't like that it was taken away?

You are a self-proclaimed Liberal. What are your views on property rights? From what I understand Liberalism has a view of property rights as:
"…under which the state has the right to reorder property rights as it sees fit.”

Or is that too extreme? I'm just trying to understand since it seems that the loss of home ownership fits with liberalism while property ownership is in opposition.
 Doremi_Fasolatido
Joined: 2/14/2009
Msg: 816
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/26/2011 12:11:08 AM
I personally love the American dream. With luck and hard work I have in fact attained it. At least, as it regards owning my own home. I've always been told it was the smart way to invest your money. The write offs for mortgage interest and the building of equity in my property made sense economically for me but also in the fact someday this place would be mine....Being liberal or conservative was of no consequence in making this decision.

Apparently though, this may have been wrong headed thinking on my part. I lucked out and kept my job. Kept up with my Mortgage payments and kept my property in good shape. Gee, all that and now 8 yrs. after I purchased it it's worth 20% less than what I paid. Excuse me if I don't turn cartwheels of joy over this...

Ya know....if this resulted because of negligence or stupidity on my part I would'nt have even posted this. The fact this was caused by forces external to myself does kind of get me. The fact that people, or corporations, or just crooked bankers profited from this gets me too. Hence, again.... I can see the point of the OWS and sympathise with them...

And in addition, look what happened to the stock market in 08'. Then think what it did to pension funds and retirement accounts. Again, working folk taking it on the chin so a priveledged few can make out like bandits. Don't get me started because this has happened to me too in real life. I know I'm not alone but in this case it's cold comfort. You don't see many 50 plus year olds at OWS rallies but sympathisers are out there.....And thanks to those who decided to screw with middle class working folks we're growing.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 817
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/26/2011 1:34:28 AM
Of course politics should not have anything to do with it. However, the roots of liberalism do not allow for strong individual rights to property. It is always at risk if it is viewed as not being fair to others. So, what I don't understand is why self-proclaim liberal when it goes against what is in your own interest/belief/or how you live? Is it just considered selfish?

Or is it ok for you to have a home as long as it is not over some specific value and if so what value is safe? Do you compare with those in your neighborhood, county, or state? Where is the line drawn to determine the value that is fair for others?

Am I incorrect and liberalism does not consider fairness of value for redistribution? Or does it just not apply to property? Or does it only apply to income derived from profit? Employment?
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 818
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/26/2011 5:33:02 AM
aries, I think you have well expressed one of the most common MISUNDERSTANDINGS of liberalism.

Taking into account that what "liberalism" or "conservatism" means is a tricky business at best, and that THIS self-labeled liberal or THAT self-labeled liberal might well avow that they DON'T believe in private property, in a more general sense that is not the case.

More commonly, it boils down to that someone finds that someone else's pursuit of possession of something is causing THEIR life to be damaged, and so they work against that.

Concerns about pollution is a classic example. Some hyper conservatives, say that for someone to tell them that they CAN'T throw any garbage they want onto a piece of land or into a body of water that they own, is an invasion of their rights, and is a declaration that no one has a right to private property. They refuse to recognize that how they USE their private property can be an invasion into someone ELSE'S private life. Once such a conflict gets into a political version of discussing it, adding the labels of "conservative versus liberal" just obscures what's really going on.
 Arlo_Troutman
Joined: 9/26/2009
Msg: 819
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/26/2011 7:04:35 AM

(halftimedad) Let me get this straight:

Carter brought in a policy that chugged along providing help for people for 30 years, but somehow it caused the problem. Funny that it didn't cause problems in the 80's then.


G'day, you hoser! (us Canucks are a tight bunch!)

Your logic is flawed. A simple illustration:

Blowing a little air into a balloon inflates the balloon. Continuously blowing air into a balloon will cause it to burst. I am neither advocating for, nor against, Carter's policies. I am simply pointing out that it is possible to push a good idea to the point where it becomes disastrous.

People got screwed in the economic downturn. It was largely, if not exclusively, because of people playing fast-n-loose with the rules. That is not a justification for *MORE* rules, and quibbling over "who-did-what" is pointless.

How 'bout we refuse to tolerate the people we TRUST to look after our finances, from screwing us over?

Arlo...
 hoopsnhikes
Joined: 4/16/2010
Msg: 820
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/26/2011 8:48:53 AM

I see you're still getting your news from La La Land.

.........

While you're at it, ask her how she feels about that young Marine in Oakland - you remember, the one who was shot in the head with a rubber bullet? He died. Two tours in Iran, and he's killed by US cops in a US city with a 'non lethal' weapon.



ex-Marine Scott Olsen is now dead, murdered by a pig for exercising his lawful right to protest. Two combat tours in Iraq, survives, comes back to be killed by a pig



That of course correlates so well with a dead veteran, or the maced and clubbed students on the UC davis campus. She was inconveienenced, he is dead



Show me, cite your source for the death of the Marine.



Please cite your source.

I googled him. I don't see any reference to him being dead. Is he or ISN'T he?


As has already been requested a couple of times to no avail - is anyone who keeps making these claims on here about Scott Olsen dying going to tell the rest of us where we can read about it?

Because, as with the previous posters who asked for a source, I can't seem to find it anywhere. All I can find is that he was released from the hospital a couple of weeks ago. And because I don't want to be accused of getting my news from La La Land as well, I found the same thing on the DailyKos and CrooksandLiars.

I also saw the same information posted on a couple of Occupy's facebook pages, but I suppose that could be the work of the infiltrators again.

So, did something happen to him after he was released from the hospital? And where can I find this information?
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 821
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/26/2011 9:39:23 AM
Well Aries, your questions cover about 5 things, I will try and answer them.

Liberal or conservative has nothing to do with the issue of owning a home or property, as I've said earlier in this thead. But before we get to that let's just deal with the American Dream.

I think it's wonderful that an American can own a home. But the emphasis of that 2 word phrase is "dream". For some it will never be a reality, not for want of desire, effort or need. It is just the economic reality of the cost in most popular locations(cities, towns and villages) between the initial cost of the property, upkeep and taxes their income versus what they would need monthly makes it an unreality, despite what every president promises.

Sure you can own a home, 100 miles from nowhere in states far from any city or metropolitan area, in these places few building codes or requirements exist. But there are no jobs, no utilities, no sewer, no water, schools maybe 50 or 75 miles or more away, no convienent shopping and that is to name but a few of the shortages. You can exist, but life is very limited and far from the "dream" of the home on tree lined streets, with white picket fences and kids playing that are often pictured.

So financially, a certain segment of the population is shut out of the American dream, by the market(price) it self.

As for "rights" you have the right to your property, as long as you do no harm to someone else. Most towns have ordinances which prohibit such things(I agree). No one wants you to dump your refuse in your backyard because you don't wish to pay for a sanitation service, as an example.

Where the train leaves the tracks for me, is when only percentage of people can own a home, but we try and create the illusion that everyone can do it. Housing prices in the past have risen at a small rate anywhere from 3 to 5% a year. When we get an abaration of 10 to 18% a year, something is wrong.

When we create mortgage models designed to fail, UNLESS the value increases by these higher rates, we are creating a future problem. If you allow a person to get a mortgage that will double or worse the payment, in 2 years, when we know from their job no way their income will make making those payments possible, the RE broker, the mortgage broker or banker, the lawyer who closed the deal, hs set them on the road to disaster.

Do that 15 times in a neighborhood of 50 homes, you have created a recipe for lower values, thereby hurting not only the 15, but the 50. Those people in the process(RE broker, Mortgage broker, banker and lawyer) no longer care, they received their fee and are onto the next sale.

My final point and one I brought up much earlier is your corporate neighbors. If they decide to store or dispose of hazardous materials on their land. This can have a detremental effect on property values AND people's safety. Then the entity hides behind laws and protracted lawsuits, to either reduce their responsibilty or get the government to aid in the cleanup.

But to get back to the original premise. There are a whole lot of people who would own a Ferrari, Bentley, Mercedes but can't afford them, that doesn't mean we should find ways for them to own them, they must just accept that life doesn't make everyone equal in what they can own.

"it seems that the loss of home ownership fits with liberalism"

I think you have liberalism confused with communism. Where everyone should have exactly the same things. Liberalism also means(to me) that everyone deserves a place to live, not get to occupy a refrigerator box under an overpass, because they are poor.

Now how that last bit is done, causes quite a controversy.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 822
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/26/2011 9:50:21 AM

More commonly, it boils down to that someone finds that someone else's pursuit of possession of something is causing THEIR life to be damaged, and so they work against that.


The property rights question is directly related to this. The conservative view of property rights is that it will be really hard to abridge what I do on my property and that is a tenent of liberty. That does not mean above the law. That does mean that if I have not violated a law the government has no authority.

What you define above is that without violation of law it is ok to abridge rights of possession. Almost as if to say that 'property becomes communal' once it is deemed valuable enough. Can you define that better?
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 823
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/26/2011 9:57:07 AM

But to get back to the original premise. There are a whole lot of people who would own a Ferrari, Bentley, Mercedes but can't afford them, that doesn't mean we should find ways for them to own them, they must just accept that life doesn't make everyone equal in what they can own.


The original premise is Occupy Wall St and how the rich have consolidated wealth and that it is the role of government to remedy through liberal ideals.

For myself I personally believe most 'self-proclaimed' liberals are actually conservative. Property rights are one of those ideals. Liberalism seeks redistribution of another’s property (although in our case it is just income and not tangible property) so that puts it just below communinisim as you described.
 want to travel
Joined: 7/29/2006
Msg: 824
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/26/2011 9:57:19 AM
Look
Occupy wall street, and many other towns are fine, we do live in a free society
the news media here is always on about the mess, these people are leaving behind!!!

well living as I do in the RUST BELT, across from detroit, and the river by the same name, I wonder why the media is not making a big deal about the TOXIC sludge left by the corporations in every body of water within 500 miles of here, not to even bring up the air quality

as far as the protesters go, I really think they have several good points

one ,I am not an economist, I can see the poor getting very poor,the middle class, one or a few paychecks away from disaster ,governments doubling the national debts
giant financial institutions and even countries, relying on the humble tax payer to bail them out!!!

like I said I am not an economist, but you would have to be pretty simplistic to think that all is well with the global economy,and that what is happening, can go on indefinitely , it can not, the debt is so great that it would take lifetimes to pay it off

and like I said, I am no economist, but in my minds eye, capitalism, is based on "sink or swim", not too big to fail.....
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 825
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/26/2011 10:19:49 AM
Oh yeah, and what good points did the protesters make? its good to disrupt other people lives who working to feed their families? or its okay to litter and make a mess of a public place? to tweet on twitter and post their crap on their Facebook pages about the greed of corporations...................meanwhile Facebook and Google (and many others) uses a " double Irish tax strategy " to shelter profits from Uncle Sam ,but where is the outrage over that?
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Occupy Wall Street