Politics and economics have always baffled me, and while I've gathered both through principal and the quality of the arguments I see that the Liberal side of things is the way to go, or at least, ANYTHING not associated with the religious right, I find it almost impossible to defend myself. My brain is a sieve when economics and politics enter the matter, and Occupy Wall Street is a doozy.
I want to say that I support these people. I THINK I support these people. I know it's happening in other, quote-unquote, "smart nations" in Europe and otherwise. I know Fox News does whatever they can to discredit these people, so THAT gives me a pretty good clue that these guys are threatening some rich-man status quos, but damn it all if I can defend my position to anyone when I say that I support OWS. I mean, what can I say when I'm not even 100% sure what the precise goals and demands are? Even on the supposed official SITE, they seemed to suggest that they'd get 20,000 people in Wall Street...so they could then unify to find a reason to Occupy Wall Street...
It doesn't help a "for" argument, y'know?
So what's the real deal here? Is the 99% a flag of freedom to wave in the faces of the corrupt?
Or are they the angry, unwashed masses, who some would say "got what was coming to them by not living within their means, and demanding a bailout for the student loans and unworkable home-loans THEY saddled themselves with, blaming the rich people who were just smart motherfuckers who innovated and were rewarded. I mean, who's GIVING them their jobs? That's right! What if they (millionaires) one day just quit and left them jobless? THEN what would those freeloaders do? So you think the corporations hardly pay any taxes huh? So why did they all move out of California then?"
...
Yeah, sorry about that. That's an example of the sorta' stuff I hear. Watch out when you hint that you support something to some people...
But I know, I know, why am I supporting something if I can't justify it? Isn't that so ignorant of you? Yahdee yahdee yah... Look, I want to believe in people; I don't want to believe the rich people are the good guys and that the poor people all deserve it. At the same time I want to believe as many true things as possible and as few UNtrue things as possible. So I ask this desiring no sugar-coating. If you think my desired position is wrong, tell me so and why. If you're right, I'll change my opinion. All the same, I think this thread might prove useful to others similarly baffled by the shadow-dance of economics and politics.
It's just people trying to prove a point, and going about it the wrong way.
Stupid people trying to blame someone else for what they got themselves into, then not wanting to admit that they were wrong.
Also, income tax in America is really really low compared to the rest of the world.
We make up for that by taxing the shit out of large businesses.
Yes, some of theme have their loopholes, but the majority of them still pay.
These were put there as an incentive to try to get the businesses started in the first place, but then were never removed.
...but that's off-topic.
Anyway, the overall picture here is a bunch of mad people not wanting to take the blame for what they did.
"We exist, we are a majority and we are not pleased with the fact that 1% of the population has this much power. Please do something about it for the majority, govnerment" basically.
It's not that they don't have goals, its that they have many goals, and this causes some confusion about their purpose.
But its basically them being tired of the majority having limited power compared to th rich minority.
[QUOTE=chimitos;32970177]
We make up for that by taxing the shit out of large businesses.[/QUOTE]
You say you make up for it yet you have a rocketing debt, a crumbling infrastructure, a sub par health system and a declining standard of living.
[QUOTE=chimitos;32970177]It's just people trying to prove a point, and going about it the wrong way.
Stupid people trying to blame someone else for what they got themselves into, then not wanting to admit that they were wrong.
Also, income tax in America is really really low compared to the rest of the world.
We make up for that by taxing the shit out of large businesses.
Yes, some of theme have their loopholes, but the majority of them still pay.
These were put there as an incentive to try to get the businesses started in the first place, but then were never removed.
...but that's off-topic.
Anyway, the overall picture here is a bunch of mad people not wanting to take the blame for what they did.[/QUOTE]
What is it, exactly, that you think these "mad people" did that they aren't taking blame for?
[QUOTE=Godrek;32970361]What is it, exactly, that you think these "mad people" did that they aren't taking blame for?[/QUOTE]
The argument I keep hearing back is the people from the housing market disaster, who refinanced their homes into oblivion and bought boats and fancy cars and shit, and had their homes repossessed instead of downgrading to a more modest lifestyle like an apartment. Or former college students with extravagant degrees and outrageous student loans because they took on schooling too expensive for them to afford.
[QUOTE=J-Dude;32970409]The argument I keep hearing back is the people from the housing market disaster, who refinanced their homes into oblivion and bought boats and fancy cars and shit, and had their homes repossessed instead of downgrading to a more modest lifestyle like an apartment. Or former college students with extravagant degrees and outrageous student loans because they took on schooling too expensive for them to afford.[/QUOTE]
Also pushing Bush for tax cuts, and then letting him have his war.
Less money in and more money out isn't a good plan when you were only breaking even before.
The US needs to raise taxes, especially on the rich. Then these so-called "job creators" will [I]actually[/I] create jobs - but in the public sector. It would also help improve the infrastructure, on top of slowing the rise of the deficit. It's not like the tax breaks are used by CEO's or anyone else to actually hire more people. It goes into private pockets.
The protesters want to hold the rich (bankers) accountable for their role in the Recession. They also want a better general welfare system, and to raise taxes for the rich.
[editline]26th October 2011[/editline]
From this ([url]http://www.marketwatch.com/story/5-myths-of-occupy-wall-street-2011-10-11[/url]) article:
[quote]Myth: Most Occupy Wall Street protesters don’t know what they’re protesting.
Myth-makers: Author William Cohan, Donald Trump, Andrew Ross Sorkin of the New York Times.
Fact: It’s true Occupy Wall Street has become a melting pot of causes: environmentalism, anti-war peace protest and workers rights to name a few. But the protesters are uniformly opposed to a system that favors what they call the 1%: the super rich who have consolidated nearly 40% of the nation’s wealth. It’s no accident that they’ve picked Wall Street as their base. Big banks are responsible for creating the bubble that led to our recession and high unemployment.
Moreover, bank executives who have failed nevertheless continue to get eye-popping rewards: for instance Sallie Krawcheck and Joe Price were ousted from Bank of America Corp. BAC +0.62% a few weeks ago. Their exit packages totaled $11 million. The bank lost $14 billion during the last year, announced it will charge debit-card holders $5 a month and is foreclosing on thousands of mortgages.
The bottom line: you don’t have to be an expert on the machinations of global finance to know something is wrong here.[/quote]
[QUOTE=chimitos;32970177]It's just people trying to prove a point, and going about it the wrong way.
Stupid people trying to blame someone else for what they got themselves into, then not wanting to admit that they were wrong.
Also, income tax in America is really really low compared to the rest of the world.
We make up for that by taxing the shit out of large businesses.
Yes, some of theme have their loopholes, but the majority of them still pay.
These were put there as an incentive to try to get the businesses started in the first place, but then were never removed.
...but that's off-topic.
Anyway, the overall picture here is a bunch of mad people not wanting to take the blame for what they did.[/QUOTE]
these 'mad people' gets fired and become unemployed because corporations wants to maximize their profit all the while getting billion dollar bailouts to write personal checks to their CEOs as their employees get fucked over facing foreclosures when they used THEIR TAX MONEY IN FORM OF THE BAILOUT TO PAY THEMSELVES
totally wrong man, dumb mad people at fault
This ([url]http://www.citypaper.net/blogs/nakedcity/Five-myths-about-Occupy-Philly.html[/url]) article is also informative.
[QUOTE=person11;32970675]The protesters want to hold the rich (bankers) accountable for their role in the Recession. They also want a better general welfare system, and to raise taxes for the rich.[/QUOTE]
[I]"But that tharr's [B]socialism![/B]"[/I]
You should probably talk to people like Zeke for a nice, informative non-biased opinion of the Occupy protests fyi.
snip
no rich people no jobs, the rich people already pay high percentage of taxes..
its just these kids can't accept it..
So what's next?
you are going to cancel your Constitution with these crazy ideas?
at least in my country it has been 3-4 centuries since socialist protests with violence..
anyway, obama is spending more and more money..
helped in lybia, but i think there is a law that he needs congressional approval before he does that..
and he spends little more, takes alot of trips around the world more than any president..
promoting free software (like drupal in [url]www.whitehouse.gov[/url]) which might prevent people who make a living by coding..
and his silly healthcare program? (i heard at the internet it will allow illegal immigrants to get healthcare)
I like the USA for what it is, but its getting darker somehow..
Honestly no one seems to fucking know.
Corrupt, rich 1% of the population holding most of the economy by their hands.
99%, with nothing at all, no jobs, work, pay, almost nothing; want balance.
tl;dr
there are problems
we want them to be fixed because we've tried the democratic methods
and they're fucked and we don't want to wait a few more years to elect someone else selling another false message of hope and change
There are bad aspects of OWS but they have a clear set of goals I think are good:
[QUOTE]LIST OF PROPOSED "DEMANDS FOR CONGRESS
CONGRESS PASS HR 1489 ("RETURN TO PRUDENT BANKING ACT" [URL]http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-1489[/URL] ). THIS REINSTATES MANY PROVISIONS OF THE GLASS-STEAGALL ACT. [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act[/URL] --- Wiki entry summary: The repeal of provisions of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999 effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. The deregulation also removed conflict of interest prohibitions between investment bankers serving as officers of commercial banks. Most economists believe this repeal directly contributed to the severity of the Financial crisis of 2007–2011 by allowing Wall Street investment banking firms to gamble with their depositors' money that was held in commercial banks owned or created by the investment firms. Here's detail on repeal in 1999 and how it happened: [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act#Repeal[/URL] .
USE CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY AND OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCIES FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS who clearly broke the law and helped cause the 2008 financial crisis in the following notable cases: (insert list of the most clear cut criminal actions). There is a pretty broad consensus that there is a clear group of people who got away with millions / billions illegally and haven't been brought to justice. Boy would this be long overdue and cathartic for millions of Americans. It would also be a shot across the bow for the financial industry. If you watch the solidly researched and awared winning documentary film "Inside Job" that was narrated by Matt Damon (pretty brave Matt!) and do other research, it wouldn't take long to develop the list.
CONGRESS ENACT LEGISLATION TO PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY BY REVERSING THE EFFECTS OF THE CITIZENS UNITED SUPREME COURT DECISION which essentially said corporations can spend as much as they want on elections. The result is that corporations can pretty much buy elections. Corporations should be highly limited in ability to contribute to political campaigns no matter what the election and no matter what the form of media. This legislation should also RE-ESTABLISH THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES IN THE U.S. SO THAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES ARE GIVEN EQUAL TIME FOR FREE AT REASONABLE INTERVALS IN DAILY PROGRAMMING DURING CAMPAIGN SEASON. The same should extend to other media.
CONGRESS PASS THE BUFFETT RULE ON FAIR TAXATION SO THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE & CLOSE CORPORATE TAX LOOP HOLES AND ENACT A PROHIBITION ON HIDING FUNDS OFF SHORE. No more GE paying zero or negative taxes. Pass the Buffet Rule on fair taxation so the rich pay their fair share. (If we have a really had a good negotiating position and have the place surrounded, we could actually dial up taxes on millionaires, billionaires and corporations even higher...back to what they once were in the 50's and 60's.
CONGRESS COMPLETELY REVAMP THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION and staff it at all levels with proven professionals who get the job done protecting the integrity of the marketplace so citizens and investors are both protected. This agency needs a large staff and needs to be well-funded. It's currently has a joke of a budget and is run by Wall St. insiders who often leave for high ticket cushy jobs with the corporations they were just regulating. Hmmm.
CONGRESS PASS SPECIFIC AND EFFECTIVE LAWS LIMITING THE INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AND ELIMINATING THE PRACTICE OF LOBBYISTS WRITING LEGISLATION THAT ENDS UP ON THE FLOOR OF CONGRESS.
CONGRESS PASSING "Revolving Door Legislation" LEGISLATION ELIMINATING THE ABILITY OF FORMER GOVERNMENT REGULATORS GOING TO WORK FOR CORPORATIONS THAT THEY ONCE REGULATED. So, you don't get to work at the FDA for five years playing softball with Pfizer and then go to work for Pfizer making $195,000 a year. While they're at it, Congress should pass specific and effective laws to enforce strict judicial standards of conduct in matters concerning conflicts of interest. So long as judges are culled from the ranks of corporate attorneys the 1% will retain control.
ELIMINATE "PERSONHOOD" LEGAL STATUS FOR CORPORATIONS. The film "The Corporation" has a great section on how corporations won "personhood status". [URL]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SuUzmqBewg[/URL] . Fast-forward to 2:20. It'll blow your mind. The 14th amendment was supposed to give equal rights to African Americans. It said you "can't deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law". Corporation lawyers wanted corporations to have more power so they basically said "corporations are people." Amazingly, between 1890 and 1910 there were 307 cases brought before the court under the 14th amendment. 288 of these brought by corporations and only 19 by African Americans. 600,000 people were killed to get rights for people and then judges applied those rights to capital and property while stripping them from people. It's time to set this straight. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Contag;32976310]tl;dr
there are problems
we want them to be fixed because we've tried the democratic methods
and they're fucked and we don't want to wait a few more years to elect someone else selling another false message of hope and change[/QUOTE]
IS it democratic if the 1% bribes their way to look like they're right?
Has the movement accomplished anything yet?
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;32976772]Has the movement accomplished anything yet?[/QUOTE]
It's gotten national attention and has spread quite a bit so I suppose that is something. In terms of legislation being introduced to congress or something, no, nothing of the sort so far as I know.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;32976772]Has the movement accomplished anything yet?[/QUOTE]
It has definately spread more awareness of their cause.
this should help you
[url]http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD1EAFE70A292CCAF[/url]
lots of stuff on OWS, few things not on it as well
Youtube says its 3:27:48 long, all the videos in total.
[QUOTE=Van-man;32976359]IS it democratic if the 1% bribes their way to look like they're right?[/QUOTE]
That's my point exactly. They tried to fix the system through the existing democratic methods, but that hasn't really worked, so they're pursuing alternatives through protesting and the like
[QUOTE=danelo;32977589]It has definately spread more awareness of their cause.[/QUOTE]
Awareness alone means jack shit really. I personally don't see how camping in one place will force anything to change. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for change and I'd love if it happened, but I don't see how it will.
[QUOTE=Contag;32976310]tl;dr
there are problems
we want them to be fixed because we've tried the democratic methods
and they're fucked and we don't want to wait a few more years to elect someone else selling another false message of hope and change[/QUOTE]
that's nice and all but according to ~conservative political wisdom~, you "don't know what you want," so you should go home and quit complaining and let the current political-economic system rape you in the ass. Because you didn't have the sheer luck to be already be born into the upper economic class.
The people who keep using the "They're just troublemaking youths/anarchists who want to trash everything" and "they don't know what they want" arguments are irritating to no end. If the 1st argument were true we'd have people outright lighting shit on fire a la London Riots 2011. Right now it's mainly just sit-ins and for the most part, peaceful protests. If the 2nd argument were true we'd immediately see a split in the protestors and this would block any kind of organization whatsoever. People are organizing, right now the movement is simply de-centralized and without a central leader. There are already slogans ("We are the 99%," "Occupy X," etc) that most of the protestors agree with.
[editline]26th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;32980905]Awareness alone means jack shit really.[/QUOTE]
The same way it meant shit regarding AIDS in the 80's. The same way it means nothing regarding current LGBT issues. Spreading awareness does help a cause imo.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;32976341]There are bad aspects of OWS but they have a clear set of goals I think are good:[/QUOTE]
I find this a VERY attractive list, but I wouldn't be intellectually honest in adopting it if I didn't ask where it came from. Can the source be provided by any chance? Would add a LOT of credibility if I were able to say where this list came from, and not merely say "...uh...someone just posted this in a forum...I don't know where it came from or if it's legitimate."
[QUOTE=J-Dude;32983582]I find this a VERY attractive list, but I wouldn't be intellectually honest in adopting it if I didn't ask where it came from. Can the source be provided by any chance? Would add a LOT of credibility if I were able to say where this list came from, and not merely say "...uh...someone just posted this in a forum...I don't know where it came from or if it's legitimate."[/QUOTE]
just google OWS demands
there are plenty of sites
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.