Occupy Wall Street?

[jesus_saves]

I ve recently started following this movement and frankly, I m intrigued and interested (this is extremely odd for me as I tend to classify myself as apolitical.) Do other folks have thoughts or interest in the movement?

For reference, here's an article that I thought summed up the movement well:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/opinion/rushkoff-occupy-wall-street/index.html

[JDTAY]

Cue Scurra praise in 5, 4, 3...
_________________
Prohibit nothing. Disclose everything.

[Scurra]

As it's clear I am not apolitical and I am on the progressive side of the political fence then it's fairly likely that I would support this action. Cue no surprise from anyone.

What I find interesting is that a lot of the arguments they are articulating are exactly the same as many of the ones seemingly promoted by the Tea Party movement (exposing corrupt government and business practise, supporting the principle of citizen democracy, demanding openness etc.)
The curious bit is that each "side" has a very different idea about what this will lead to...
_________________
_{still Quiz Olympiad champion. Must get a life.
New definitions: COFFEE - someone who is coughed upon}

[Pablo]

Very insightful, Scurra.

No, seriously, I think that's an insightful observation.
_________________
All religions are the same - Guilt....just with different holidays.

[Undercover Monk]

Wait you mean that people dont want corrupt govt. or business.


AND want to support the ideals of Democracy.




HOLD THE PHONE!!!! elect these people at once.



Seriously when reading item like these on a groups platform my eyes glaze over. Its like saying you dont think puppies should be tortured. Or that cat videos on the internet make you smile (Cmon you know they do )


People In a very general sense all want te same thing. The problem is we have very different ideas on how to accomplish those feats. Its the same reason ethical deabtes on whether the ends justify the means are meaningless. We all want the same ends it is the means that we argue about.


How many politicians want to shrink the deficit, lower unemployment, and promote the growth of the economy. How many truly corrupt businessmen and politicians are there really? A lot less than is being represented in these protests.
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning

[Pablo]

[j_s*]

[Gomez*]

I think the most important thing about Occupy Wall Street is that it proves that there really is a well defined conflict with two sides, and that ceaseless capitulation to the finance industry is going to be met with concerted public outcry.

[Pablo]

[Death Mage]

I know the person attempting to organize the local protest for Saturday.

I, personally, don't see what they plan on accomplishing. The end result of this will be nothing. At all. There will be zero change. I don't even know what they're TRYING to change, but it doesn't matter. Protesting Wall St.? Why? What possible outcome to you expect to achieve?

This is just a bunch of people who are mad about SOMETHING trying to vent their frustrations at whatever the closest continent target happens to be. Tea Party 2 this ain't.

[Edit] In fact, this whole thing just strikes me as a pushed story. There's no substance here, but it's being reported all over the place. I'm inclined to believe that the Left-wing media is clinging onto this as something to hype up as a "liberal Tea Party", to try to counter all the publicity they got. Someone, somewhere, said "this is our answer!" and has been shoving this story to the forefront. Which, of course, makes a lot of other people want to latch on to it.
_________________
* These senseless ramblings brought to you by Insanity™. If you just can't figure the dang thing out, it must be Insanity™.
[YOUR AD HERE!]

[Undercover Monk]

I would say scoffing fits best j*s.

My point was these people are mad about something that is part of the human condition. Socialism doesnt work there will always be haves and have-nots. The beautiful thing about capitalism is the ablity to move from one group to the other.

I never understood why it is the problem of the rich that there are the poor. Why should only the rich receive tax increases. To punish them for their ingenuity or their parents ingenuity. It just never made any sense for me. And before you start calling me elitest let me tell you I work a minimum wage job at McDonalds to help to get me through school.
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning

[Scurra]

In the end, I think the argument isn't that there are rich people. It's that there is no reasonable explanation for why the rich people are rich, other than the sheer randomness of capitalism. And in that case we might as well just replace everything with a lottery.

I do not believe that the argument is that there will always be the haves and the have-nots either. I believe that the argument is that the haves should pay attention to the have-nots, rather than pretend that they do not exist or, worse, suggest that they do not deserve to be haves. The horror of capitalism isn't the ability to move from one group to the other, it's that it is built on promoting the idea that travel is only one way. Yes, the American Dream is that anyone can become President. But it's worth noting that that means that 307,006,549* can't. No, obviously I am not suggesting that everyone should be President. I just think it illustrates the basic principle of capitalism that in order for there to be one winner there have to be a helluva lot of losers rather well.
*using the figure that Google gave me for the US population. Although I realise that it isn't necessarily a helpful one.

To suggest that the rich deserve recognition for their "ingenuity" (or, worse, their parents') is, to me, a massive affront to all those who work just as hard all their lives and are rewarded with a declining living standard, as is demonstrably true over the past 30 years. As opposed to the fact that the number of billionaires in the world has apparently actually increased in the period 2008-2010...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/a-breakdown-of-trust/2011/10/07/gIQAVCjrSL_blog.html
(and I would recommend the link to http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/ as well. But not for people who think that "this is just a bunch of people who are mad about SOMETHING trying to vent their frustrations at whatever the closest continent target happens to be.")


Oh, and I too worked a minimum wage job (not McDonald's but an equivalent) during college too. And what it taught me was to respect those people and to wonder why the company was so terrified of them having union rights. That had quite a big influence on my political beliefs. But, as usual, that's a whole different argument...
_________________
_{still Quiz Olympiad champion. Must get a life.
New definitions: COFFEE - someone who is coughed upon}

[Death Mage]

Bill Gates donated billions to charity. He built a company that helped revolutionize global business by standardizing major computing.

Wal-Mart collects and donates hundreds of millions for charities every year. They have raised the standard of living for people all over America by offering a wider selection of lower-priced products than has been available before.

Steve Jobs is not listed on in major charity - no noticeable investments. He made a fortune creating a business that locked out competition - they would not allow anyone else to build hardware for them etc. - and in selling variants of products that had existed before for years, just putting them in a pretty shell.

One of these is considered a hero to the "underprivileged"


F*** the "Occupy Wall Street" protests. They are filled with ignorance. It has nothing to do with "giving back", or any of that bullshit. It's just people hating who they've been brainwashed to hate.
_________________
* These senseless ramblings brought to you by Insanity™. If you just can't figure the dang thing out, it must be Insanity™.
[YOUR AD HERE!]

[Scurra]

[JohnnyFake*]

The anger, IMO, is not oriented against capitalism. The vast majority of Americans understand capitalism is the best social system.

What people are pissed about is that we operate under a capitalist system while the large banks do not. Failure is essential for capitalism to work; but the banks have been saved from their failures through illegitimate loans from the taxpayers via friends in government. You may not think that the bailouts from years ago are the issue today. But, many people have experienced the failure aspect of capitalism over the past three years (foreclosures, unemployment, etc.). The discomfort of this makes the bank bailouts taste that much more bitter. Plus books like Grifftopia (currently reading), have provided the citizenry with a better understanding of how badly they were fleeced.

[Undercover Monk]

@scurra

Of course there has to be losers for their to be a winner. The Declaration of Independence never said sucess was a basic human right. It said life, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happieness. No where in any of our most beloved national documents does it say that everyone gets what they want. Only that they are given the opportunity to try.

How much the rich should give to the poor is a moral and religious issue not a political one. If I ever become a billionaire (not gonna happen but lets say it does) I would want that money to go to my children. Its my money I earned it why is it wrong for me to want to ensure a happy life for those who come after me. Isnt that what everyone from the poorest bum to the richest fat cat is trying to do.

And are you really telling me that efforts of Bill Gates and myself are equal just cause I work hard to pay my way through school. Luck and fate have little to do with the bigger picture in life. Choices are what drives success and failure. I chose to mess around my first few years in college and as a result lost my scholarship. Thats on me. If you invested in wall street and lost everything well you knew that was a risk you were taking (or at least should have known)
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning

[Pablo]

[Pablo]

[Pablo]

Also, the mobs who are now demonstrating have no clue what they are doing. They are angry, frustrated, etc. But there is no consensus there as to what the issues are, either the problems or the solutions. If they think Wall St is the cause of their misery, they are REALLY on the wrong track and even if they....um........"succeed" (whatever the hell that means in this case) their problems will remain. They have no message other than................

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

But it's hard to disagree with them.
_________________
All religions are the same - Guilt....just with different holidays.

[Neo]

[Antrax]

Can anyone succinctly explain what this is about? The link in the first post was pretty incomprehensible to me. Is there a factual article or can anyone give a factual explanation of what this is?
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick!

[Neo]

[Neo]

Or, perhaps this version might make more sense, as this is all hard to explain.

We're pissed off! Here are some things pissing us off!
Also I'm pissed off about these things!
And these things!
And these other things!

All of those things? Really? You can't be upset about all of those things! That's stupid! If you were a REAL protest, you would only be pissed off about a small number of things, and then you would present those grievances to us in a single, organized matter. Then you would go away after a weekend, and we would go back to ignoring you. Oh, and by the way, we know you're not serious, because you didn't give us magical plans to fix everything, thus doing our jobs for us. Now run along, while people with money go back to getting more money.
_________________
_{Ad Astra}

[Antrax]

Not sure what a corporate person-hood is, but why protest bailouts in Wall Street? Isn't this a government decision?
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick!

[Death Mage]

No no no. Government is perfect. Government is clean and pure as the wind-driven snow. Any problems with government are caused by those evil, greedy corporations that are bullying those poor, innocent congressmen into doing things they really don't want to do.
_________________
* These senseless ramblings brought to you by Insanity™. If you just can't figure the dang thing out, it must be Insanity™.
[YOUR AD HERE!]

[Gomez*]

[Antrax]

Thanks Gomez. I must say I consider your viewpoint strange, but I think it's fascinating we have practically the same movement here, more or less - at least a, b, and d would be also be described by the average Israeli as problems with current-day Israel.
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick!

[Death Mage]

Now now now, before you get too excited about jumping on the "banks are bad" bandwagon, let us not forget that it was, and still largely is, government regulations (you know, C on Gomez's little list there) that have made it harder and harder for banks to deny bad loans. They don't want to be seen as discriminating against people who can't pay them back, after all.
_________________
* These senseless ramblings brought to you by Insanity™. If you just can't figure the dang thing out, it must be Insanity™.
[YOUR AD HERE!]

[Pablo]

[Scurra]

[Jack_Ian]

Now it's global, well international at least.

[Zag]

If this is too long for you, just skip to the last two paragraphs.

[Gomez*]

[Gomez*]

Did I say "blow your mind?" I meant "Make you want to kill someone".

[Neo*]

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/149476/ben-jerrys-becomes-first-high-profile-company-to-support-occupy-wall-street/

[Pablo]

[Gomez*]

[Zag]

Given that the idea of banks being regulated is never going to help, because it is hopeless in reality. The government shouldn't try, other than SEC continuing to prevent insider trading (or trying to), and cracking down on outright fraud. This quasi-fraud perpetrated by the big banks is not something regulation could ever have hoped to catch, so there's no point in trying. Some of the later stages of it were, in fact, outright fraud and should have been prosecuted, but the earlier stages were not. In fact, at first, it was really a good idea, as I described in my tome above.

Instead, the government should do their primary purpose in regulating business: trust-busting. We should never be in a position of any couple of corporations being "too big to fail" such that bailing them out is something that we would consider. If that's the case, then they obviously represent a monopoly and we should break them up before it gets to that.

BTW, if anyone here wants to argue that government should NOT be involved in trust-busting, please don't bother. I won't take the bait. I'll just preempt your argument by telling you to go read a history book or two. Start with a biography of Teddy Roosevelt, which is an entertaining read, anyway, and will get you started.

[DM via phone w/ no kb*]

Yea, because banks are always so eager to give out money without being concerned about getting paid back.

[Pablo]

Zag, here's a thought.....just a thought, not a fact. Not even a theorem. OK? You don't need to crank up your devil's advocate overdrive right off....maybe just let it sink in for a while, chew it, digest it, and then, who knows? Maybe you'll puke it out, but maybe it will be absorbed into your system and help you grow. Or, maybe it will just go through....... well, just think about it:

It is just maybe possible that no company could ever become "too big to fail" without government assistance, i.e. favorable legislation or favorable court rulings, or without government no-bid contracts, all of which can be and are secured by lobbyists.

Secondly, maybe the power of "trust busting" is just another tool in the wrong hands. The power to limit or bring down corporations is a huge power, and who's going to oversee the government to assure that it's being applied appropriately? Here's a hint......."no one".
_________________
All religions are the same - Guilt....just with different holidays.