99% or "Occupy Wall Street" What is it about?

[PornoMonster]

Ok, I have read a few new places, and it seem the normal talk around. Some people interviewed said they would figure out what they wanted later on.
I did get a hint, that they don't think wall street is equal and 1% of rich Americans need to go.

Are they mad because they don't have money to risk on making companies bigger?
Are they mad because 1% of American hold a majority of the wealth?

I mean what are they protesting exactly?

[$5 submissions]

Best case scenario, their whining will spur regulators to make sure the playing field is level...

Worst case scenario, just a bunch of spoiled clowns who think money grows on trees and will probably shut up once the THIRD GREAT RECESSION (we're about to get hit by the second great recession) wipes out their entitlement mentality and they wake up in the CHINESE CENTURY.

Get ready, it's about to happen.

[porno jew]

because they tanked the economy and real unemployment is around 20 plus percent?

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by $5 submissions

Best case scenario, their whining will spur regulators to make sure the playing field is level...

Worst case scenario, just a bunch of spoiled clowns who think money grows on trees and will probably shut up once the THIRD GREAT RECESSION (we're about to get hit by the second great recession) wipes out their entitlement mentality and they wake up in the CHINESE CENTURY.

Get ready, it's about to happen.

yeah i think people are "entitled" not live in a pinoy dirt hut as a sex slave or bottle washer. fuck off dude.

[$5 submissions]

This threads shows 3 responses but I only see mine. Must be some troll on my FFBV list. LOLLERZ

[bronco67]

I'm not usually on the side of hippies, but there's much more than your general hippie participants in this thing. People are fed up with Wall Street gambling with our economy, and being rewarded with ridiculous sums of money without actually creating or producing a damn thing.

The 99%ers don't seem to have a goal, or idea for a resolution to the problem -- but calling attention to the problem is a start.

[moeloubani]

the only thing americans can do is literally take over their government, excuse all loans and debts, nationalize banks and investment firms and start from there

anything else wont help

[GregE]

Originally Posted by PornoMonster

Ok, I have read a few new places, and it seem the normal talk around. Some people interviewed said they would figure out what they wanted later on.
I did get a hint, that they don't think wall street is equal and 1% of rich Americans need to go.

Are they mad because they don't have money to risk on making companies bigger?
Are they mad because 1% of American hold a majority of the wealth?

I mean what are they protesting exactly?

They started off a bit disjointed but their protest is starting to crystallize into something very much more focused and I think, right on target.

https://gfy.com/showpost.php?p=18464768&postcount=50

[teomaxxx]

Originally Posted by bronco67

People are fed up with Wall Street gambling with our economy, and being rewarded with ridiculous sums of money without actually creating or producing a damn thing.

The 99%ers don't seem to have a goal, or idea for a resolution to the problem -- but calling attention to the problem is a start.

their are simply rewared for beign wealth extractors from the rest of society.


good article on this topic from of the best econ blogs
http://pragcap.com/the-financial-ind...-of-capitalism

THE FINANCIAL INDUSTRY IS NOT THE ENGINE OF CAPITALISM
28 JANUARY 2011 BY CULLEN ROCHE 48 COMMENTS


?Panics do not destroy capital ? they merely reveal the extent to which it has previously been destroyed by its betrayal in hopelessly unproductive works?
- John Mills, ?Credit Cycles and the Origins of Commercial Panics?, 1867

The release of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission?s report contained several enlightening nuggets of information regarding the crisis and its causes, however, none was likely more eye opening than the chart showing the growing discrepancy between compensation in financial services and nonfinancial.



Of course, this is all part of the great financialization of our country. It would be easy for me to sit here and villanize the financial industry, but we must also remember that this is a function of the current environment. After all, the government promotes this huge financial industry through lax regulation and consumers have rewarded the financial sector by taking on excessive debt and paying exorbitant fees for their services. To a large extent the American public is to blame for the excess demand they have attributed to this industry.

Many free market proponents will likely argue that the growth in financial services is a function of demand. It is the natural progression of the US economy as it has become a wealthy service based economy. This is a reasonable response. However, that does not mean it is necessarily good. As a society we have to ask ourselves if this financial behemoth is sustainable and in the best interest of the future of America? Are these high rewards disproportionate to their social productivity? Are we becoming a system that diverts excess capital from long-term investment into short-term unproductive casino-like activities?

This is not to entirely undermine the important role that financial services plays in the US economy, however, I think we can likely all agree that the financial sector has and continues to grow wildly out of control while reaping an inordinate amount of the benefits that the US economy generates. We must seriously consider whether this wild growth is not disproportionate and now contributing negatively to our future economic prospects. I believe it is. How could this mass financialization be negative?
Added risk to the economy through business cycle volatility.
Talent lost to other more industries which reduces future productivity.
Monopolist capitalism results in a growing wealth gap and hoarding of capital by a select unproductive sector.
Economic stagnation thru the misuse of capital.
Unfortunately, there are no easy answers to this problem and the USA is clearly not taking any extreme measures to reverse course. What we need is regulation that helps to ensure that particular entities are not able to detract from the prosperity of the USA. We need to reduce the Fed?s role in markets so as to close the ties between the central bank and the banks it was created to protect. We need to establish fiscal policy which does not exacerbate the gap between the rich and the poor while also rewarding investment. We need to establish programs that help educate the public about financial matters so that the public can become less reliant on Wall Street ?professionals?. Clearly, none of this has happened and in fact the USA now appears to be growing back into the same exact animal that existed before the credit crisis. Truly a crisis wasted?.

My point here is not to argue that the financial services industry is useless. The financial services industry greases the engine of capitalism. That is an incredibly important function. But we must not become deluded into believing that it IS the engine of capitalism. If it once again grows to become a disproportionately unproductive portion of the economy there is no reason to believe we aren?t at risk of another major crisis. I am always bullish about the long-term prospects for America, however, the financialization of this country is one trend which is not only unsustainable, but could prove as the primary roadblock to future prosperity.

[teomaxxx]

[QUOTE=teomaxxx;18465107]their are simply rewared for beign wealth extractors from the rest of society.


good article on this topic from of the best econ blogs
http://pragcap.com/the-financial-ind...-of-capitalism

or to shortify it with this quote:

Originally Posted by Bill8

Some time ago we moved from a civilizational economy based on primary wealth, like extracted metals fuels and food, or secondary wealth like manufactured items, to tertiary wealth based on symbolic manipulation of money, ownership, information and unequal access to information, that kind of thing.

In an economy based on symbolic manipulation rather than natural wealth or manufacturing, this kind of manipulation by the investing and trading class is how the economy works.

It's essentially a cyclical harvest of the wealth of the general population by the small percentage licensed to be the harvesters.

This is the world we live in. It's quite new tho - only a few hundred years old - who knows if it's a rugged enough complex system to last long.

[epitome]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

the only thing americans can do is literally take over their government, excuse all loans and debts, nationalize banks and investment firms and start from there

anything else wont help

I've always said we need to hit a reset button. I don't know the best way to go about going that, but we need to.

Everything is fucked.

One big complaint a lot of people have is the big banks are not investing in small business. This needs to start happening soon. It is the largest job creator and a huge part of our economy.

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by epitome

I've always said we need to hit a reset button. I don't know the best way to go about going that, but we need to.

Everything is fucked.

One big complaint a lot of people have is the big banks are not investing in small business. This needs to start happening soon. It is the largest job creator and a huge part of our economy.

For years I lived and had a small business in a medium sized town. One day Fifth 3rd bought out the bank I was using. Not only was my loan officer gone so was the entire loan division.

I move to another local bank and within the year BB&T comes in and does the same thing.

Large national banks only want to take consumer deposits, issue credit cards and make expensive auto loans. Small businesses aren't in their game plan except for merchant fees on credit and debit cards.

.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

the only thing americans can do is literally take over their government, excuse all loans and debts, nationalize banks and investment firms and start from there

anything else wont help

will happen at some point.

[Internet Guy]

[nextri]

Originally Posted by GregE

They started off a bit disjointed but their protest is starting to crystallize into something very much more focused and I think, right on target.

https://gfy.com/showpost.php?p=18464768&postcount=50

If a candidate took these exact objectives and ran his campaign on them, he could probably do a great election. It's some common sense things that most people on both sides could agree on.
Preventing unlimited corporate campaign funding, preventing banks from gambling with their depositors' money, and making sure all candidates has a fair chance by ensuring they get a set amount of airtime in the media.

Those are some very basic things that needs to change if there is gonna be any hope for the future of the united states.

[u-Bob]

Originally Posted by bronco67

I'm not usually on the side of hippies, but there's much more than your general hippie participants in this thing. People are fed up with Wall Street gambling with our economy, and being rewarded with ridiculous sums of money without actually creating or producing a damn thing.

The 99%ers don't seem to have a goal, or idea for a resolution to the problem -- but calling attention to the problem is a start.

They seem to be angry and that's a good start.

But let's hope they actually try to understand what's going on. Question is "how is 'Wall street' able to gamble with other people's money?".

If I go to a casino and gamble away my own money, that does not affect my neighbor or his kids or the small business owner down the street. Then why is it that when the banks gamble away their money, it affects the entire population? Because of government intervention.

The free market (as opposed to the current Corporatist (or politicalcapitalist) system we've got now) is a system of checks and balances. It punishes bad behavior and rewards good behavior. It's a system of profit and loss. Those who produce or deliver goods and services other people value and are willing to give something in exchange for, make a profit. Those who act irresponsibly and invest their resources in producing or delivering goods and services no one values and no one is willing to pay for lose their money.

For over a 100 years we haven't had anything that comes even remotely close to a true free market. Big banks are backed by the government. The government picks up their tab when they can't pay. The government bails them out when they are in trouble. The government uses money it takes from the people (tax dollars) and money it borrows (a loan that later has to paid back with interest (by the people)) and uses that to cover the losses made by the big banks.

The solution is not to have more government intervention. The solution is not to 'nationalize' banks (which would amount to transferring even more of the banks' costs onto the people).

The solution is to let the irresponsible banks fail. It's time to tell them: "Hey, if you act irresponsibly, you'll pay the price. You take a loss! No more bailouts!".

If a small business owner acts irresponsibly with his resources, he goes out of business. Time to bring this basic economic truth back to the big banks and big corporations. If they are falling, let them crash and burn instead of trying to catch them with government issued safety nets made out of tax dollars and the wealth of population.

[Barry-xlovecam]

I think it's in response to the "Great Recession" and the general business conditions at hand.

If this is a "flash in the pan" or to be a long-term issue remains to be seen at this point.

However, this is reminiscent of the cry of "SEIZE THE DAY" of my youth in the late 1960s and early 1970s -- we took to the streets and if necessary, fought the man ... We did effect change but only with blood spilled.

So, I can emphasize with the unfolding drama and see it as a call for more social equality. As a "not so small businessman" I can envision the potential benefits so long as this remains a question of more equality within capitalism.

[12clicks]

For every Loser out there protesting, there's someone with ambition making himself rich.

[raymor]

In the interviews I've seen not only does not seem to any consistency to what they want, but must of the individuals don't seem to know what they want. One says capitalism must go, but when asked what should replace it there was no answer. Another says she's protesting unemployment, while saying she wouldn't accept a job if she were offered one. So I guess their mad, but don't know why and don't even pretend to have any solutions. That's what I've seen.

[GregE]

Originally Posted by nextri

If a candidate took these exact objectives and ran his campaign on them, he could probably do a great election. It's some common sense things that most people on both sides could agree on.

I was thinking the exact same thing.

Of course, none of the ones running at present have nearly enough credibility to pull it off.

This is a platform that a thus far untarnished personality with just a little bit of charisma could ride all the way into the White House however.

Problem is, I highly doubt that there's enough time between now and November 2012 for the proverbial man on the white horse to emerge.

[GregE]

Originally Posted by raymor

In the interviews I've seen not only does not seem to any consistency to what they want, but must of the individuals don't seem to know what they want. One says capitalism must go, but when asked what should replace it there was no answer. Another says she's protesting unemployment, while saying she wouldn't accept a job if she were offered one. So I guess their mad, but don't know why and don't even pretend to have any solutions. That's what I've seen.

Morons can easily be found at any gathering. Check out youtube to see some of the headcases that attend teabagger events.

[SomeCreep]

Our country is the most divided ive ever seen. Were in the middle of a class warfare, rich vs. poor. Sucks, I blame Obama.

[sperbonzo]

Originally Posted by u-Bob

They seem to be angry and that's a good start.

But let's hope they actually try to understand what's going on. Question is "how is 'Wall street' able to gamble with other people's money?".

If I go to a casino and gamble away my own money, that does not affect my neighbor or his kids or the small business owner down the street. Then why is it that when the banks gamble away their money, it affects the entire population? Because of government intervention.

The free market (as opposed to the current Corporatist (or politicalcapitalist) system we've got now) is a system of checks and balances. It punishes bad behavior and rewards good behavior. It's a system of profit and loss. Those who produce or deliver goods and services other people value and are willing to give something in exchange for, make a profit. Those who act irresponsibly and invest their resources in producing or delivering goods and services no one values and no one is willing to pay for lose their money.

For over a 100 years we haven't had anything that comes even remotely close to a true free market. Big banks are backed by the government. The government picks up their tab when they can't pay. The government bails them out when they are in trouble. The government uses money it takes from the people (tax dollars) and money it borrows (a loan that later has to paid back with interest (by the people)) and uses that to cover the losses made by the big banks.

The solution is not to have more government intervention. The solution is not to 'nationalize' banks (which would amount to transferring even more of the banks' costs onto the people).

The solution is to let the irresponsible banks fail. It's time to tell them: "Hey, if you act irresponsibly, you'll pay the price. You take a loss! No more bailouts!".

If a small business owner acts irresponsibly with his resources, he goes out of business. Time to bring this basic economic truth back to the big banks and big corporations. If they are falling, let them crash and burn instead of trying to catch them with government issued safety nets made out of tax dollars and the wealth of population.

absolutely true.


.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

For every Loser out there protesting, there's someone with ambition making himself rich.

the way our current capitalistic society is set up makes it impossible for everyone to be rich, no matter how much ambition or good ideas they have. this society relies on a large percentage of people at the bottom. otherwise it wouldn't work.

[sweetcuties]

I hope it continues and expands throughout the country

[epitome]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

For every Loser out there protesting, there's someone with ambition making himself rich.

No, for every 99 losers out there, 1 person is making themselves rich. People who do things above board rarely get rich, just a comfortable.

Look at this industry. People banging cards or stealing content get rich ... people that used to do ridiculous cross sales got rich. Others running good programs with no unethical tricks usually got comfortable. There are exceptions to the rule, but they are few and far between.

[Doctor Dre]

Originally Posted by $5 submissions

This threads shows 3 responses but I only see mine. Must be some troll on my FFBV list. LOLLERZ

I normally try not to get into theses discussions, as it's way too complex too explain on a message board. It's a bunch of inter-connected issues that are creating the problem. Everyday folks can see there is a problem, but aren't capable of wording it proprely.

1st - The financial crisis
The main problem I see right now is accountability. The people running business are the ones responsible for the current crisis. The governement didn't de-regulate itself. The financial industry lobbied the gov to do it. The CDs, derivatives and other toxic products weren't meant to be. Extending pretty much unlimited credit lines to anybody without verification sure as hell dosen't sound like a good plan to me. That's why they insured it and passed the hot potatoe to the genral populace, in form of AAA rated financial products. The people who created theses products should be held accountable, they knew damn well that the market was gonna fail, years ahead of time. Hell GFY was talking about it a long time before it crashed, it couldn't be that hard to see it comming. Yet Greenspan was denying it until the last minute.

And when you talk wall street, you're also talking about the FED. The FED is 'giving' money left and right to rich businessmen. It's NOT tickling down to the middle class. See : http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...ilout-20110411

Yet I don't see the people responsible in jail. They all got richer, and are better off after the crisis then before. The people who created this problem are now the ones in charge of fixing it, when they should be in jail.

2 - The politicisation of corporations
Corporate is more and more involved in politics. It's involvement will be on levels unprescented in the next election, with the supreme court considering corporations as human beeings as far as first amandement rights goes. The problem is that they're not bound by a moral code, and most of the time, breaking the laws is better for the wallet. They took over the Tea Party and made sure to marginalize it, they will do the same with this org. Instead of the Koch brothers, it will be the unions this time who will try to manipulate the speach in their favor, instead of focusing on the real problem.

Look at what happened with the wisconsin recalls... Corporates (kochs & cie) made sure that it was very hard to vote. They sent disinformation about the dates (wich should be downright criminal) , instaured fake opposition candidates to leech a small percentage of the voteaway , made sure it was as hard as it could to vote for minorities... They are basicly using private money to manipulate and destroy the political system.

3 - Military industrial complex
The americans are paying to police the world for their corporations. They are the one opening the markets, wich coups d'états and military operations. (South america anyone ?). But the corporations are refusing to give back to the system. They try everything they can to avoid paying taxes, the burden then falls on the middle class. They are the one gathering the ressources made avaliable by the army, the CIA and other military orgs and pushing for open markets. Mr Friedman already had a lot of blood on his hands came the time of his death.

4 - War on the middle class
The right wing of the republican party is attacking the middle class directly. They are starting a race to the bottom by deregulating everything. Competing for the cheapest wages. In Wisconsin, Scott Walker declared war on the unions. He started by creating a big hole in the budjet by giving corporations a huge tax break, then proceeded to ask the unions to cut about the same ammount in fees. The union accepted, and he still proceeded with his agenda to dismantle bargaining right. He was backed by corporatists Koch brothers and the rest of the establshement, passed bills in last minute votes and disrespected the democratic process the whole time. See https://youtube.com/watch?v=SGDp581g9t0

In michigan, they cut founding to the municipalities, while at the same time passing a bill saying that they would dissolve the local govs of any towns in financial trouble. Basicly firing the mayor, the council and disrespecting the voters once again. They would appoint one administrator, wich once again will strip off the hard working people of their barginnign rights.

5 - The commodity market
The deregulation of the commodity market is another big problem. It's driving the food and the petrol prices way up, once again on the back of the middle classes. Theses tools were meant as way to stabilize the prices, not to drive them up. With all the cheap credit avaliable out there, they need to better regulate them. While buying a house is cheaper then it was before the crisis, filling the grocery cart is twice as expensive. The market is global, and people in the rest of the world are starving while rich people make money off theses markets. You shouldn't be able to inveset multiple times the ammount of money you put in, while never taking delivery of the product.

6 - Conclusion
I could cite hundreads of instances where people in positions of power (politicians or businessmen) abused it and should be in jail. People fail to realise how deep they have to dig to get out of trouble. The jobs aren't comming back. America's biggest asset to the world is that it's a net exporter of intellectual propreity, but everything gets pirated or stolen. When they wake up, it will be too late.

Sept 11 was probably the day where there was the most 'unity' in the world. Everybody wanted to help. The administration used it to polarize the country in order to better manipulate the population. They are dividing the people, making them focus on abortion and gay rights while pillaging and destroying the foundation of the world they live in.

The financial elite clearly declared war on the middle class, not the other way arround. I don't like the 1% beeing used, as a lot of people making 300k a year are legit. But there sure are a lot of crooked people in positions of power.

[Doctor Dre]

Originally Posted by SomeCreep

Our country is the most divided ive ever seen. Were in the middle of a class warfare, rich vs. poor. Sucks, I blame Obama.

It's not just rich vs poor. It's the people who think they are millionaires on a bad streak of luck VS realists. So many ignorant idiots support policies that empower people waaaaaaay above what their paygrade.

I read last week that something like 75 % of medicaid-medicare users said they were agaisn't socialised medecine. Most of them probably don't even realise who's footing the bill.

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

the way our current capitalistic society is set up makes it impossible for everyone to be rich, no matter how much ambition or good ideas they have. this society relies on a large percentage of people at the bottom. otherwise it wouldn't work.

incorrect. if you have good ideas and ambition, you succeed. If you don't, you remain at the bottom.
as I said, for every loser pretesting in NY, there's someone else getting rich (because they're not busy wasting their time protesting)

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by epitome

No, for every 99 losers out there, 1 person is making themselves rich. People who do things above board rarely get rich, just a comfortable.

Look at this industry. People banging cards or stealing content get rich ... people that used to do ridiculous cross sales got rich. Others running good programs with no unethical tricks usually got comfortable. There are exceptions to the rule, but they are few and far between.

as long as the bottom thinks you have to cheat to get to the top, they shall always be the bottom.
Its a common trait among the less intelligent.

[Si]

Originally Posted by u-Bob

They seem to be angry and that's a good start.

But let's hope they actually try to understand what's going on. Question is "how is 'Wall street' able to gamble with other people's money?".

If I go to a casino and gamble away my own money, that does not affect my neighbor or his kids or the small business owner down the street. Then why is it that when the banks gamble away their money, it affects the entire population? Because of government intervention.

The free market (as opposed to the current Corporatist (or politicalcapitalist) system we've got now) is a system of checks and balances. It punishes bad behavior and rewards good behavior. It's a system of profit and loss. Those who produce or deliver goods and services other people value and are willing to give something in exchange for, make a profit. Those who act irresponsibly and invest their resources in producing or delivering goods and services no one values and no one is willing to pay for lose their money.

For over a 100 years we haven't had anything that comes even remotely close to a true free market. Big banks are backed by the government. The government picks up their tab when they can't pay. The government bails them out when they are in trouble. The government uses money it takes from the people (tax dollars) and money it borrows (a loan that later has to paid back with interest (by the people)) and uses that to cover the losses made by the big banks.

The solution is not to have more government intervention. The solution is not to 'nationalize' banks (which would amount to transferring even more of the banks' costs onto the people).

The solution is to let the irresponsible banks fail. It's time to tell them: "Hey, if you act irresponsibly, you'll pay the price. You take a loss! No more bailouts!".

If a small business owner acts irresponsibly with his resources, he goes out of business. Time to bring this basic economic truth back to the big banks and big corporations. If they are falling, let them crash and burn instead of trying to catch them with government issued safety nets made out of tax dollars and the wealth of population.

Got to agree with this.

They have no accountability, and it is about time that they did.

[Best-In-BC]

Originally Posted by $5 submissions

Best case scenario, their whining will spur regulators to make sure the playing field is level...

Worst case scenario, just a bunch of spoiled clowns who think money grows on trees and will probably shut up once the THIRD GREAT RECESSION (we're about to get hit by the second great recession) wipes out their entitlement mentality and they wake up in the CHINESE CENTURY.

Get ready, it's about to happen.

ROFL

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

incorrect. if you have good ideas and ambition, you succeed. If you don't, you remain at the bottom.
as I said, for every loser pretesting in NY, there's someone else getting rich (because they're not busy wasting their time protesting)

the top 1% have a vested interest in keeping the remaining 99% down. if not, then billionaires become millionaires, millionaires become 'hundred thousandaires' and so on. there is only so much wealth to go around.

[BFT3K]

I totally support a movement to take our government back. What I don't support (understand) is what a bunch of unfocused sign holders are going to do about it.

A sign that reads "REINSTATE GLASS-STEAGALL" for example, may actually MEAN something. It could result in people focusing on something SPECIFIC. A demand that is defined.

BOYCOTT KOCH INDUSTRIES is a sign with a message, and maybe it could gain traction, and harm an evil corporation. Tweeting that "corporations are evil" on a new iPhone for example, is hypocrisy at its highest level.

A sign that says "Take Back Wall Street" is just a sign. It means nothing. It does not suggest a solution, it is just a sign.

An "organizer" was just interviewed on the news, and when he was asked what, specifically, the movement wanted, his answer was totally fucking useless. He looked like a clown.

Again, I'm all for changing the corrupt system, but without a SPECIFIC agenda with SPECIFIC goals and demands, the movement can easily become diminished in importance, as its participants' goals are all over the fucking place!

Who wants animal rights, women rights, student loan reform, who's mad at Wall Street, etc.

They need to come up with a handful of goals that are popular, and do-able, and FOCUS on them. All signs they are holding should be SPECIFIC to those goals!

[brassmonkey]

im ready to protest

[PornoMonster]

So what is the result these people want? Take the 1%'s Money? knock them down, have them start over?
If they do this or say just even Tax them more, and remove the loop holes, no one is getting this extra money. It will be spent on political BS, or some other rich person/companys pockets of whatever current admin is in office. The gov will not use it to pay the debt.

[PornoMonster]

Originally Posted by BFT3K

I totally support a movement to take our government back. What I don't support (understand) is what a bunch of unfocused sign holders are going to do about it.

A sign that reads "REINSTATE GLASS-STEAGALL" for example, may actually MEAN something. It could result in people focusing on something SPECIFIC. A demand that is defined.

BOYCOTT KOCH INDUSTRIES is a sign with a message, and maybe it could gain traction, and harm an evil corporation. Tweeting that "corporations are evil" on a new iPhone for example, is hypocrisy at its highest level.

A sign that says "Take Back Wall Street" is just a sign. It means nothing. It does not suggest a solution, it is just a sign.

An "organizer" was just interviewed on the news, and when he was asked what, specifically, the movement wanted, his answer was totally fucking useless. He looked like a clown.

Again, I'm all for changing the corrupt system, but without a SPECIFIC agenda with SPECIFIC goals and demands, the movement can easily become diminished in importance, as its participants' goals are all over the fucking place!

Who wants animal rights, women rights, student loan reform, who's mad at Wall Street, etc.

They need to come up with a handful of goals that are popular, and do-able, and FOCUS on them. All signs they are holding should be SPECIFIC to those goals!

I am going to go see if they are still protesting in my town, and if so, I am going to interview them. To me it makes them look bad that the main thing is they thing to top have to much money, while they camp out for weeks, instead of looking for a job or training for another. Maybe there needs to be a MAX amount a person can Own or make??

[porno jew]

we live in an age of technology aided mass decentralization and there hasn't been a unified ideology to unify people for a while now. there is as many unique world-views as people, i guess the only thing that unifies them is anger at the bankers for blowing up the world economy and looting their tax dollars. they should focus on that.

[BFT3K]

Originally Posted by porno jew

we live in an age of technology aided mass decentralization and there hasn't been a unified ideology to unify people for a while now. there is as many unique world-views as people, i guess the only thing that unifies them is anger at the bankers for blowing up the world economy and looting their tax dollars. they should focus on that.

Exactly! A bunch of unemployed kids wearing Halloween costumes, and holding random and vague signs, covering all issues in the world, is not good enough to make a difference.

They need to focus on very specific issues they hope to change. As this movement began with the name "Occupy Wall Street" then taking on corrupt banking and financial issues seems like the best target, otherwise they will just become a laughing stock.

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

the top 1% have a vested interest in keeping the remaining 99% down. if not, then billionaires become millionaires, millionaires become 'hundred thousandaires' and so on. there is only so much wealth to go around.

I assure you, despite what you imagine, the top 1% is too busy earning to worry about keeping anyone else down.

[Caligari]

Originally Posted by porno jew

we live in an age of technology aided mass decentralization and there hasn't been a unified ideology to unify people for a while now. there is as many unique world-views as people, i guess the only thing that unifies them is anger at the bankers for blowing up the world economy and looting their tax dollars. they should focus on that.

that is exactly the point, they need to fine tune the message and stay with it.
get rid of the extraneous crap and you will see millions in the streets.

if no one believes that, look at the comments in the yahoo news articles. there are thousands of people who approve of the protesting if they are talking about dealing with govt corruption and ending wall street hijinx, lobbyists, etc.

Obama is doing a live question and answer session today.
Will someone get through with the question as to why he has not only ignored the entire "main street vs wall street" issue, but why he compounded the crisis by going along with Bush to add yet more bailout money for these criminals?

The shit is in his face right now, he can't ignore it for much longer because it's about to be at his doorstep in washington.

[media]

Originally Posted by BFT3K

Exactly! A bunch of unemployed kids wearing Halloween costumes, and holding random and vague signs, covering all issues in the world, is not good enough to make a difference.

They need to focus on very specific issues they hope to change. As this movement began with the name "Occupy Wall Street" then taking on corrupt banking and financial issues seems like the best target, otherwise they will just become a laughing stock.

I agree.. I totally hate when a protest for a great cause starts to attract the typical clingers that join in and try to bring their own cause into the mix because they feel like a larger force or their message will be heard.. or bandwagon jumpers who just want to be there to feel like they are doing something with their lives, when in reality they have no damn clue what the main issue is/was..

One main goal and a clear cut message is the only way to go..

[PornoMonster]

Originally Posted by BFT3K

Exactly! A bunch of unemployed kids wearing Halloween costumes, and holding random and vague signs, covering all issues in the world, is not good enough to make a difference.

They need to focus on very specific issues they hope to change. As this movement began with the name "Occupy Wall Street" then taking on corrupt banking and financial issues seems like the best target, otherwise they will just become a laughing stock.

It is not often I agree with you! LOL

[crockett]

Originally Posted by $5 submissions

Best case scenario, their whining will spur regulators to make sure the playing field is level...

Worst case scenario, just a bunch of spoiled clowns who think money grows on trees and will probably shut up once the THIRD GREAT RECESSION (we're about to get hit by the second great recession) wipes out their entitlement mentality and they wake up in the CHINESE CENTURY.

Get ready, it's about to happen.

I guess people are spoiled that jobs keep getting sent over seas and it's encouraged by the govt in form of various incentives. I could accept loss of jobs in this country due to the competition factor.

However when the govt as far back as Regan has been pushing our companies overseas.. I can completely agree that something has to change. Entitlement mentality as you claim, is excusable because people are entitled the ability to make a decent living.

What is not acceptable is the fact our govt has been pushing jobs overseas or supporting their good ole boys net works which hinders growth in this country.

And no it's not about taxes as 12 clicks will surely chime in about..

[Caligari]

heres a link on the live obama q&a today, i hope they let some real serious questions thru-
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/newsmakers/

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by crockett

I guess people are spoiled that jobs keep getting sent over seas and it's encouraged by the govt in form of various incentives. I could accept loss of jobs in this country due to the competition factor.

However when the govt as far back as Regan has been pushing our companies overseas.. I can completely agree that something has to change. Entitlement mentality as you claim, is excusable because people are entitled the ability to make a decent living.

What is not acceptable is the fact our govt has been pushing jobs overseas or supporting their good ole boys net works which hinders growth in this country.

And no it's not about taxes as 12 clicks will surely chime in about..

not about taxes?

then tell me, genius, how is the government "pushing our companies over seas"?

[PornoMonster]

Originally Posted by crockett

I guess people are spoiled that jobs keep getting sent over seas and it's encouraged by the govt in form of various incentives. I could accept loss of jobs in this country due to the competition factor.

However when the govt as far back as Regan has been pushing our companies overseas.. I can completely agree that something has to change. Entitlement mentality as you claim, is excusable because people are entitled the ability to make a decent living.

What is not acceptable is the fact our govt has been pushing jobs overseas or supporting their good ole boys net works which hinders growth in this country.

And no it's not about taxes as 12 clicks will surely chime in about..

Hope they don't raise taxes then ......

[crockett]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

not about taxes?

then tell me, genius, how is the government "pushing our companies over seas"?

They send jobs over seas for the cheap labor and the fact that don't have to do all the shit they have to do here in the US. Think anyone pays workers comp in China or jumps through the hurdles for worker safety or uses various procedures to protect the environment as we do in the US?

None of that is bad as it's all good, but it puts our companies at a unfair disadvantage with-in our own boarders. We should be putting tariffs on imported goods to allow our own companies to compete with-in our own country, being we do take the extra steps to try and protect workers & our environment.

Taxes are very little compared to the costs of labor and all the added costs that go along with that here in the US. Of course your 1 track mind can't see past taxes and can't see the bigger issues because you only care about what affects yourself.

If the govt wanted to even the playing field for US companies with-in this country, they would only need to charge tariffs on goods imported into this country. Instead our govt has signed away the ability to compete with-in our own country, thanks to so called fair trade agreements with other countries.

It's now cheaper to produce in China and ship it back and taxes are not a very big part of that cost. If we exported and built shit as we did in the past, it would be one thing, but we don't anymore so things need to change.

[12clicks]

Originally Posted by crockett

They send jobs over seas for the cheap labor and the fact that don't have to do all the shit they have to do here in the US. Think anyone pays workers comp in China or jumps through the hurdles for worker safety or uses various procedures to protect the environment as we do in the US?

None of that is bad as it's all good, but it puts our companies at a unfair disadvantage with-in our own boarders. We should be putting tariffs on imported goods to allow our own companies to compete with-in our own country, being we do take the extra steps to try and protect workers & our environment.

Taxes are very little compared to the costs of labor and all the added costs that go along with that here in the US. Of course your 1 track mind can't see past taxes and can't see the bigger issues because you only care about what affects yourself.

If the govt wanted to even the playing field for US companies with-in this country, they would only need to charge tariffs on goods imported into this country. Instead our govt has signed away the ability to compete with-in our own country, thanks to so called fair trade agreements with other countries.

It's now cheaper to produce in China and ship it back and taxes are not a very big part of that cost. If we exported and built shit as we did in the past, it would be one thing, but we don't anymore so things need to change.

I agree completely on our lack of tariffs being a big part of the problem but if you think losing 35% of your post labor cost profits isn't a big expense, you're clueless.
and as long as you advocate higher taxes on just our best and brightest, you'll always taste the back of my hand over it.
That thinking is all the uneducated, unable have. "dear Mr. President, since I failed and am bitter about it, please exact my pound of flesh from those who worked smarter and harder than I did by raising their taxes"

son, envy is not tax policy.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

I agree completely on our lack of tariffs being a big part of the problem but if you think losing 35% of your post labor cost profits isn't a big expense, you're clueless.
and as long as you advocate higher taxes on just our best and brightest, you'll always taste the back of my hand over it.
That thinking is all the uneducated, unable have. "dear Mr. President, since I failed and am bitter about it, please exact my pound of flesh from those who worked smarter and harder than I did by raising their taxes"

son, envy is not tax policy.

You are missing what I'm saying. Of course taxes are a decent part of it all. However in the scope of the entire package taxes are not as big of an issue as you try to make it.

I'm talking the entire circle, from starting a company, building it's factory and so on.. Taxes are not the major hurdle until profits are high.

However all the other things still are and that's what stops innovation and start ups from succeeding & competing with-in this country. Taxes are typically only the issue once a company has succeeded and is looking for more profit.