I'm loving what I'm seeing with the Occupy Wall Street movement. The NY protesters aren't letting up and it's growing into other states. But I was watching the news and some suit was being interviewed and he said it won't last. I'm not seeing that. What do you think? Will this thing keep growing? With all the people out of work and with nothing else to do, I say "YES"
Because my Facebook feed is full of geeks and creative types (I'm neither, I'm just friends with them what's are) there were tons of postings about Steve Jobs, all of course thanking him for truly changing the world. But I (because it's who I am) had to ask them - is that a wonderful change that eliminated most of the entry level positions for college graduates? So that you really can't find a job anymore because of that Catch-22 (entry level jobs provided experience that you needed to get the next job up, without that experience you are now pretty much shut out of that career arc). That change that basically eliminated the record companies and their development money in favor of a DIY at-home deal, or hurt the publishing industry so much that contracts are getting very rare, how's that working out for you?
I mean if he made the world such a better place, how come most people think we are on a downward slide, how come dissatisfaction is so high, how come so many people think we are on the wrong track and think things are not getting better?
So, occupy Wall Street will/would be powerful if enough people stop amusing themselves to death, and do something outside their house for a change. There is widespread dissatisfaction, and if all those various groups find a place to meet you might have a perfect storm, but it's got to spread far beyond what it is now, and some sort of solution has to be proposed too.
The people that are most affected are also the people who would be most likely to get out and protest, the younger generation, and that's who you see mostly in the protests. It was the same back in the 60's.
My kids, 28 & 25, have college degrees, the older one an MBA, who has yet to land a real job. I've been telling her that her generation needs to get out into the streets and start protesting because complaining to me wasn't going to work. Like many of her generation, she's got a big school loan that is strapping her down. She could never afford to buy her own home while paying off her loan. And this is adding to the present financial crisis.
The transference of wealth that was supposed to create jobs ended up being simply a transference of wealth with the wealthy keeping all the money. In healthy economies, people spend money and the economy flourishes. Problem is the "1%" has all they need and they aren't spending their money, just making their bank accounts grow. And they aren't creating jobs either.
Like it or not, increasing the tax on the wealthy is a quick and easy way to begin the healing. Then take that money to rebuild the infrastructure. And the jobs created by doing that will cause more spending because the "99%" need things. That will snowball into more jobs and so on. But we have to get a portion of the money out of the hands of the "1%" first.
Of course, we need to clean house too and get rid of the politicians who have been supporting this transference of wealth. They need to experience the fruits of their labor. They could end up on the streets protesting. Wouldn't that be a treat?
I see lots of middle age people out there too. Transferring wealth has never created jobs, investing wealth does.
Occupy Wall Street is in its 21st day and building. I'm going down there next week. I want to encourage them and give my support. I also will share that they don't let anyone hijack their movement-it's their movement. That's what happened to the Tea Party movement.
I just came back from a protest regarding hydrofracking which is another big issue.
It will stick if we have the conviction to carry it through and put ourselves on the line come what may. They count on fear and intimidation, without fear we are unstoppable.
I fully support it. It's one of the best things I've seen in ages.
Sorry for my Australian naivety.
What is the movement about? I get get sensible answers from the newspapers. Can anyone ::)
I was also bemused about the arguments against increasing tax on the wealthy. Why not? I would have thought that was obvious and popular.
I would also suggest death taxes should be brought in. They have been in other democratic countries before including UK and most of Europe. I think the USA has to bite the bullet, Why should horrendously wealthy people die and give their money to people who have not worked for it?
I will no doubt be popular with some and not with others :laugh:
Cindy
Quote from: Cindy James on October 11, 2011, 12:15:13 AM
Sorry for my Australian naivety.
What is the movement about?
Since this is way too complicated for my lazy tush to explain, I'll just have you watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTx6t3FUSkM&feature=feedu
Quote from: VeryGnawty on October 11, 2011, 01:27:10 AM
Since this is way too complicated for my lazy tush to explain, I'll just have you watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTx6t3FUSkM&feature=feedu
Sorry Hon,
Wouldn't connect
Cindy,
This is about the large amount of people in the US that are unemployed or underpaid. They are sick of the Wall Street shenanigans that was presented with the failing economy. These people called themselves the "99 percenters". The Website is here:
http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/ (http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/)
Joelene.
Thanks Joelene,
I think I'm getting that message that the economy is screwed and to put it politely you are being royally screwed by the rich. Oh BTW I am not a radical anything I'm a very middle of the road girl in politics.
Why?
I know that is the most stupid question but why?
You guys, none of this is meant rudely, stand up as the model of democracy and the land of freedom and opportunity. Regan sort of claimed 'he' destroyed the USSR threat by economics. Has China now performed the same thing to the USA?
You have no health system, you have no wealth fare system, people can obtain obscene wealth and watch people die in the street.
What is going on and why don't you vote the buggers out?
Sorry I'm in no way anti-USA, just really worried for all my friends in the USA
Cindy
We have a welfare system that's badly flawed. We got people that are working here illegally, getting paid lower untaxed wages under the table in cash, applying and getting welfare benefits I see about every time I go to the grocer. These people come in from mainly from Mexico and San Salvador. They also get free medical. I have to pay taxes, my medical and food on my savings. I had to forgo the needed roofing job on my house just to get a doctor's appointment and pay for the therapist.
The welfare food program is 3 tiered. First there is the chit that pays for stuff such as baby formula and baby food. The clerk at the register initials the chit, put the chit through the scanner, gets the required amount of formula out of the lockup display, scans the items to ok the sale. Then they bring out the government issue debit card that will pay for any approved UPC code foodstuff listed to a certain amount. Then they pay cash they earned under the table for detergent and soda pop. It takes a while to process this stuff through the checkout and I am in the 15 items or less express lane?
Joelene
Quote from: Cindy James on October 11, 2011, 04:17:00 AM
Thanks Joelene,
What is going on and why don't you vote the buggers out?
Sorry I'm in no way anti-USA, just really worried for all my friends in the USA
Cindy
The politicians have nothing much to do with this. This is a free enterprise system. It was the corporate greed of the 80's and 90's that we are paying for now. The deregulation of certain things helped to do this as well. The politicians who were behind the deregulations in the 80's are dead now. The stock speculators made the stocks and bonds go so artificially high that, when investors around late 1999-2000 started to cash in, they found only hollow shells of worth. One by one the big companies failed and the markets started to slide to where it is now. People were outed of their pensions and were laid off. Enron is the poster boy here, but bigger companies have failed. The events of 9-11 had very little effect in this, it was merely a time marker.
Joelene
Quote from: Joelene9 on October 11, 2011, 05:45:00 AM
We have a welfare system that's badly flawed. We got people that are working here illegally, getting paid lower untaxed wages under the table in cash, applying and getting welfare benefits I see about every time I go to the grocer. These people come in from mainly from Mexico and San Salvador. They also get free medical. I have to pay taxes, my medical and food on my savings. I had to forgo the needed roofing job on my house just to get a doctor's appointment and pay for the therapist.
The welfare food program is 3 tiered. First there is the chit that pays for stuff such as baby formula and baby food. The clerk at the register initials the chit, put the chit through the scanner, gets the required amount of formula out of the lockup display, scans the items to ok the sale. Then they bring out the government issue debit card that will pay for any approved UPC code foodstuff listed to a certain amount. Then they pay cash they earned under the table for detergent and soda pop. It takes a while to process this stuff through the checkout and I am in the 15 items or less express lane?
Joelene
After the Republican Great Depression, FDR put this nation back to work, in part by raising taxes on income above $3 to $4 million a year (in today's dollars) to 91 percent, and corporate taxes to over 50% of profits.
Every billion dollars (a half-week in Iraq) invested in infrastructure in America created 47,000 good-paying jobs as Americans built America.
Reagan promptly cut income taxes on the very rich from 70% down to 27%. Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983 (they're still in that neighborhood, the lowest in the industrialized world).
Regan to cover his tax cuts doubled the tax paid only by people earning less than $40,000/year (FICA), and then began borrowing from the huge surplus this new tax was accumulating in the Social Security Trust Fund. Even with that, Reagan had to borrow more money in his 8 years than the sum total of all presidents from George Washington to Jimmy Carter combined. Reagan's tax cut greatly diminished expenditures on infrastructure (bridges, roads, hospital, colleges, etc.)
When Reagan dropped the top income tax rate from over 70% down to under 30%, all hell broke loose. With the legal and social restraint to unlimited selfishness removed, "the good of the nation" was replaced by "greed is good" as the primary paradigm.
From other articles by Thom Hartmann published at commondreams.org
Since Bush has been president:
over 5 million people have slipped into poverty;
nearly 7 million Americans have lost their health insurance;
median household income has gone down by nearly $1,300;
three million manufacturing jobs have been lost;
three million American workers have lost their pensions;
home foreclosures are now the highest on record;
the personal savings rate is below zero - which hasn't happened since the great depression;
the real earnings of college graduates have gone down by about 5% in the last few years;
entry level wages for male and female high school graduates have fallen by over 3%;
wages and salaries are now at the lowest share of GDP since 1929.
Before Reagan years there were only about 1 million illegal aliens in our work force, when he left office 3 million, and today 12 million. During that same period union membership has dropped from 25% to 7%. Cheap labor increases corporate profits. Before Reagan the enforcement of laws against hiring illegals served as a barrier to their entry.
http://www.skeptically.org/wto/id19.html (http://www.skeptically.org/wto/id19.html)
Quote from: Amazon D on October 11, 2011, 06:57:06 AM
Every billion dollars (a half-week in Iraq) invested in infrastructure in America created 47,000 good-paying jobs as Americans built America.
Yes! If more Americans, especially the younger ones, would like to work with their hands we could get to this nation back on their feet. As it is now, the undocumented worker is doing these things and is doing these things under the minimum wage. I got a whole neighborhood full of them. The mortgagee is documented, but his extended family are not, a foot in the door. The mortgagee and family lives in the house an average of 3 years then abandons the house and goes back home. Their kids go to school, bring down the class academic level and the school system replies to that by turning my local high school into a charter school!
I seen the beginnings of this economic mess when I left the Navy in 1975. It was 18 months after the Vietnam war. Ford was president after Nixon stepped down. The kids that were protesting the war and were "tuned out" went back to school to earn their degrees. Our nation was at the pinnacle then. These kids turned in their Hippie beads and lifestyle for Gucci rings and the chartruse minibuses for baby Mercedes. By the late 70's they were known as YUPpies. Young Urban Professionals. "Upwardly Mobile" was their mantra. These people were spendthrifts and they carried this kind of thing while climbing the corporate ladder, gaining influence. The latter part of the 70's were known as the "Me first" decade and the call was "Looking out for number one". Bad memories back then also with the refusal of the Shrink to start me on hormones.
The 80's saw Reagan with the deregulations. The WWII generation was retiring in droves, leaving the yuppies in upper management. These fancy trades and the hostile takeovers of good companies started, bought, then sold with huge profits. A lot of employees got laid off when the old saw of generations of families working for the same company disappeared. Other companies laid off workers when the newly installed computers red flagged them months before their retirement date. For the bottom line, for GREED! Greed is good.
The 90's saw the emergence of the dot-coms. These companies started with nothing, built up with nothing, and left us with nothing but debt when they collapsed. Then came Enron, once an energy company named the Northern Natural Gas Company from Omaha established in 1935. This company used the deregulations of the energy sector to move up by buying the smaller companies. Because of loopholes in the reporting laws back then, Enron was allowed not to report certain liabilities on their stockholder statements. It all went crashing down in Aug. 2001 when a report of their losses came out. I was let go of my second job at that time after I was laid off from the company I worked for nearly 20 years. My doctor put me on antidepressants. The owner of that niche industry shop has not hired anyone since, five fewer employees, less wages, no holiday pay. That business is now for sale. No sale, everybody goes home.
Joelene
Perhaps a more relevant question is: "would it make any difference," or like the "counter culture" movment of the 60's at the end just generate revenues for the muscians and their associated industries.
Jen61
Congrats on occuping a private park near Wall Street.
Now what? What are your goals? What are your plans for the future? What are your demands?
As far as I can tell these are the same anarcho-commie rabble that show up from time to time. Mooch off of society and leave a mess for others to clean up.
So go on Barack and Nancy, you guys can own this one all you care to.
The Washington Post published a graph (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/business/income-inequality/) showing how the distribution of wealth is directly related to economic health. When the bottom 90% of wage earners have about 70% of the wealth, the economy does well. When they have about 50% of the wealth (as they did during the Great Depression and now), well, the results are obvious.
That graph also shows how the increase of wealth began to grow during the Reagan administration. And on the other end, it shows how the pendulum was reversed during FDR's administration which brought the economy back to life. Capitalism works, but not when those in control of the money and jobs take too big a share of the pie.
That the present movement has no real leadership doesn't bother me. Leadership will come and so will a clear message as long as this thing continues. And I believe it will. There are too many people out of work who have lots of time on their hands.
And if you need to know why people are protesting, take a look at this video clip of Alan Grayson (http://www.billmaher.com/) from the current episode of Real Time with Bill Maher. (It will probably be changed by 10/14 when a new show airs but you should be able to find it by looking for the 10/7 show featuring Alan Greyson.)
I do not get into politics so I will just say I'm not sure
So,
Let me present this.
You have been happy to be willing to live in a 'democratic' system, that isn't. Because it is owned by BIG money. You live in a powerful country, which, very sadly and unfairly, is becoming loathed by many other countries. You have committed your young people to protect others and something else that I cannot place my finger on, and watched them be killed.
Your economy is bad. Your poor are so poor it is even an embarrassment to an Australian who watches her Govt. mistreatment of Aboriginal as terrible.
Your 'middle class' exists to support the rich.
What is going on?
What has happened to the USA?
Sorry
Cindy
Quote from: Cindy James on October 12, 2011, 04:48:49 AM
What has happened to the USA?
Sorry
Cindy
Well I'm not surprised.
What can you really say when you have a people who are trying to pull the country in 3 different directions.
The USA is still the good ol' USA. This is just a pendulum swing and I think it's reached the top of the swing.
What we have right now is a Republican party that lost its conservative common sense and is catering to the serious right wing fringe and a Democrat party that is acting like the Republican party of not so long ago. And its all fueled by capitalism on steroids. Also, our politicians are catering to the mega rich because our campaign laws allow them, and anyone else from anywhere in the world, to donate without limitations to political campaigns. That's a real problem.
But it is possible the pendulum hasn't reached the top of the swing. The voters have to decide that. If they keep being sucked in my slick political ads and the belief any sort of government intervention is bad, well, it's going to be a while before things get getter.
One of the activities I'm involved in is educating people about particular issues. Whenever the opportunity presents itself I can use the facts and the science to back up what I'm saying. There's so much misinformation out there.
Lately, the talking heads are spewing nonsense about the dangers of taking vitamins and supplements. This is bogus nonsense because the medical establishment, which is corrupt and a criminal organization, want to destroy the nutrient industry and organic farms and the alternative fields. Why? So we will be forced to see their doctors and take their pills. Ovr half the medicine approved by the FDA has killed more people than all the wars the US has been in, combined.
Quote from: Cindy James on October 12, 2011, 04:48:49 AM
So,
Let me present this.
You have been happy to be willing to live in a 'democratic' system, that isn't. Because it is owned by BIG money. You live in a powerful country, which, very sadly and unfairly, is becoming loathed by many other countries. You have committed your young people to protect others and something else that I cannot place my finger on, and watched them be killed.
Your economy is bad. Your poor are so poor it is even an embarrassment to an Australian who watches her Govt. mistreatment of Aboriginal as terrible.
Your 'middle class' exists to support the rich.
What is going on?
What has happened to the USA?
Sorry
Cindy
We are the Roman Empire re-incarnated, with subsidiaries in every country and every continent. Truly the first global empire.
Abe President
Jen61
Whatever happens, this guy's buttcrack will stick around the internet for a long time:
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theforestatnight.com%2Ffunny%2FEeeeew.jpg&hash=bf531c9da344126b507f502b053fd53ed3e814ec)
HEY MAJOR CRACK IN AIRPLANE
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.forwardedfunnies.com%2F200703%2Fcrack.jpg&hash=1e20d73d487756b0e6f517bd6e2274dec64cbaef)
What has happened to the USA?
Nothing that you'll ever be able to figure out by watching the media.
Seems like a good place to post this. As it's a real American talking about America.
Forget the politicians. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice ... you don't.
You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own, and control the corporations. They've long since bought, and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls, they got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear
They got you by the balls.
They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying ... lobbying, to get what they want ... Well, we know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else, but I'll tell you what they don't want ... they don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking.
They don't want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. They're not interested in that ... that doesn't help them. That's against their interests. That's right. They don't want people who are smart enough to sit around a kitchen table and think about how badly they're getting ->-bleeped-<-ed by a system that threw them overboard 30 ->-bleeped-<-in' years ago. They don't want that.
You know what they want? They want obedient workers ... Obedient workers, people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork. And just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly ->-bleeped-<-tier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime and vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it, and now they're coming for your Social Security money. They want your ->-bleeped-<-in' retirement money. They want it back so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street, and you know something? They'll get it ... they'll get it all from you sooner or later cause they own this ->-bleeped-<-in' place. It's a big club and you ain't in it. You and I are not in The big club.
By the way, it's the same big club they use to beat you over the head with all day long when they tell you what to believe. All day long beating you over the head with their media telling you what to believe, what to think and what to buy. The table has tilted folks. The game is rigged and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care.
Good honest hard-working people ... white collar, blue collar it doesn't matter what color shirt you have on. Good honest hard-working people continue, these are people of modest means ... continue to elect these rich ->-bleeped-<-s who don't give a ->-bleeped-<- about you. They don't give a ->-bleeped-<- about you ... they don't give a ->-bleeped-<- about you. They don't care about you at all ... at all ... at all, and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. That's what the owners count on. The fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant of the big red, white and blue dick that's being jammed up their ->-bleeped-<-s everyday, because the owners of this country know the truth. It's called the American Dream cause you have to be asleep to believe it ...
George Carlin, 1937-2008
Quote from: tekla on October 13, 2011, 12:13:34 AM
George Carlin, 1937-2008
Even after his death, Carlin remains the best source of political commentary and knowledge.
Actually, he is the best source for all kinds of knowledge.
He was always amazingly funny and fantastically insightful. But in the few years before his death, when he knew he was dying (from about 2005 on) he really took off the gloves. No longer worried about fortune, or fame, or what anyone else thought, he was really free to say exactly what he was thinking, and it's pretty crystal clear stuff.
The 2005, Life is Worth Losing, and the 2008, It's Bad for Ya are masterpieces of comedy as social commentary - or perhaps social commentary as comedy.
but I'll tell you what they don't want ... they don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking.
I think on much of what Carlin says in the above often. I find it remarkable that very few people (and basically none except those who had parents who took it on themselves) under the age of 30 received anything even remotely near the education that the people in here 55 and over got when they were young. Not even in the same ballpark, hell, not even in the same league. Those people reading this who are going through college right now are not going to graduate college with the same level of education and critical thinking skills that Cindy James had leaving high school. And you better be thinking long and hard about exactly why you were chosen (and who made those decisions) to be The Dimmest Generation. Better ask long (and real hard) how come my grade/high school/college education was an extremely important matter of national security - so much so that the Federal Government paid for most of my college and grad school - and why your education is considered so trivial, except as an increasingly long term form of financial suicide.
So cynicism, despair and hope that it all goes away, is now the USA way.
George Carlin was so correct and yet he has not provoked a reaction. I remember well that piece. It inspired me in my life to be active and to try and support the life that I want, and the freedom I think, people should have.
You do have the power to change things.
You have a vote.
OK neither of the major parties are any different except in who owns them.
But can't you start from the grass roots? It will take time, but that is possibly all you have left.
The Roman Empire was destroyed by its corruption and its inability to defend itself because it had spread too far and the power people who ran it forgot about people.
Sounds familiar.
Cindy
The only way we can beat their game is for everyone to vote them out or stop playing their game. i decided to stop playing their game as much as possible. As for everyone voting them out thats not gonna happen because yes people are too dumbed down or follow after issues like abortion or gay rights etc etc. .. As yahshua said worry not for all things here on earth, but plan for eternity above.. and in the mean time, care for all, as if they were your brothers and sisters..
Carlin, and his almost direct decedent Bill Hicks (who tragically died much too soon), had little effect as you see it, because as I see it they were preaching to the choir. Frank Zappa too, who was much more intellectual, and brutal, in his discourse. Yet the fact that they had that huge choirs to preach to is what you are missing.
To view America (as you must because you are not here, and others who do live here that largely see it that way because they are lazy and intellectually vapid) only from the other side of a TV set is pretty much like thinking you know all about all women because you saw a porno movie. Because that media is it's own pornography. It's a pornography of greed, materialism, power and status set in a white, Protestant middle/upper middle class landscape. And, just like learning that women love hot sex from the porno is true enough, but hardly the only thing, or important thing in understanding them, what you are seeing is true to a degree, but only a degree, and there are 360 of those in a full circle, and you are not seeing the other 359. You are not seeing them because they are not covered accurately (if at all) in the media, and many of them being very media savvy know enough to avoid the media at all costs. There are many different types of communities, ranging from the Amish, to counter-cultural influenced, to visionary attempts at utopia in America, and not just now, but at every point in our history.
Cynicism is a hallmark of American culture, it's what we were founded upon, and it's why change is more possible here than in any other place. And not minor changes, sweeping and often disruptive change. Did not the Greek cynics reject power, wealth and fame in search of a simple life because only in living in agreement with nature can people be happy. They held that most problems were the result of the worthless and dangerous conventions and antiquated notions of customs that society used to prop itself up. I'm pretty much down with that. And if you are using it in the more modern and conventional meaning: people who think that others actions derive from purely selfish motives - well this site is pretty much a shrine to that idea. But for sure our Founding Fathers frequently used the term 'enlightened self-interest' to describe what should motivate political decisions, and I see no trouble with that either, it part of being responsible. When we move away from that, basing decisions on what ancient texts, superstitions, or 'our betters' say or think (or what some preacher in brown shoes thinks they say) we move away from good decisions and end up embracing really ->-bleeped-<-ty ones. And, no doubt, we've got plenty of them to undo - starting with the 'corporations are people too' idiocy, which goes back to the 1880, so it's not a new problem.
But I see no despair from those other 359 degrees, that despair comes almost exclusively from that 1 degree that the media represents (invents?) who now find that they have built a lot of castles in the sand, and can no longer deny the tide is coming in. Most of the people who voted in the last election cast their ballot for a pretty radical choice, one that was totally unimaginable only a short time ago. The joy was electric, if short lived because of that entire meet the new boss, same as the old boss problem. On the other hand, many of the people who did not vote for Obama woke up and found that the brother from another mother was about to move into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and basically their heads exploded. It was a national tombstone on their treasured white supremacy nonsense, and knowing that their dream, their way of life was over, well it had to be troubling.
And far from hoping it all goes away, we are seeing a groundswell of people working to ensure that it does. Times they are a changing.
Oh, by the way, what would the reaction of the Australian government and police be to the occupation of it's financial sector, or like in Wisconsin, people occupying the seat of government?
Might as well hear the man speak it...
George Carlin The Best 3 Minutes of His Career "The American Dream" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsL6mKxtOlQ#)
But here's a man who uses his brain...
Jesse LaGreca Confronts fox news unaired footage - occupy wall street (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhO3dTdp6ek#)
Quote from: tekla on October 13, 2011, 12:13:34 AM
Seems like a good place to post this. As it's a real American talking about America.
Good honest hard-working people ... white collar, blue collar it doesn't matter what color shirt you have on. Good honest hard-working people continue, these are people of modest means ... continue to elect these rich ->-bleeped-<-s who don't give a <not allowed> about you. They don't give a <not allowed> about you ... they don't give a <not allowed> about you. They don't care about you at all ... at all ... at all, and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. That's what the owners count on. The fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant of the big red, white and blue dick that's being jammed up their ->-bleeped-<-s everyday, because the owners of this country know the truth. It's called the American Dream cause you have to be asleep to believe it ...
George Carlin, 1937-2008
You thing it is bad in the USA, try the any of the "workers paradise," or any other place for that matter. Do let me know waht they say about "Miranda rigths"
jen61
Oh though I've never been to a workers paradise I did spend a few years traveling the world for one of those companies that are at the apex of building (literally) that American Empire by either exploiting (raping is really a better word) their natural resources or building crap for them that was sinking those nations further in massive unpayable debt.* So I got to travel through the Third World where our sites were often armed camps like Fort Apache in Africa or Indonesia. And I also enjoyed the hospitality of The Kingdom, and if you want to understand how radical maldistribution of wealth (and that's what the Wall Street 99% vs 1% protests are about) creates a 100% totally ->-bleeped-<-ed-up ->-bleeped-<-hole, where a very few live in unimaginable luxury and never lift a finger (does it go without saying that they are about the most personally horrible human beings you'll ever meet?) while the people doing all the real work live a thousand percent worse than your housepets, all kept under control by a primitive desert religion in combination with advanced police state tactics - well you need look no further than Saudi Arabia. It's pretty much the worst place on earth that I've ever been to.
But the analogy that someplace is worse is not relevant. It's like saying you are a great person because your neighbor beats his wife so bad she ends up in the hospital, but you only slap yours around every couple of days.
And, I think that you to a huge degree, and even Cindy to some degree miss a point that I didn't think was all that subtle, but if there has ever been a place that has an extremely difficult time with comedy, it's Susan's, so let me try. When Carlin talks about 'you' he is using a royal you, not one directed at his audience. Matter of fact, not only does his audience agree with him, (which is why they buy the tickets and watch the specials, and buy his books and all that), but they are - well beyond agreeing - laughing at those who don't see what they see is as clear as day. And, the fact that his choir is so large is a testament to how wide-spread this feeling is in reality, even though you rarely see it in the media, because that's most certainty not the America they want to cover, or sell to.
What is going on is that a whole lot of people who really love Desiderata, with all that warm, fuzzy 'it's all about me!' pandering that ends with the epic: You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should are finding out that the alternate version which ends with, You are a fluke of the universe. You have no right to be here. And whether you can hear it or not, the universe is laughing behind your back is probably closer to the eternal truth.
After all, life is a comedy to those that think and a tragedy to those that feel. And all those people laughing are thinking, and a lot of stuff is hitting a critical mass.
* - Every American who does not understand how much - or why - so much of the world hates us that they can applaud when terrorism hits us needs to start with Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins. It's not an Alpha-Omega explanation, but it's sure to be an eye-opening start.
In a serious note we (and the rest of the world) just reflects the asymmetry between technological development and sociological evolution. We have not change, no different than what was going on 3 million years in the rift valley.The smart and more powerful men ruled. The clown, morons,and lazies begged and did menial things to earn their meat.
Yet the com pasion and ability to transcend this human atavism exist; how we change from Fareigee to Federation ?
Jen61
PS I work for your previous maters Tekla, and as long as I deliver the goods they do not give a s.. about my heels or my panties.
When I worked at Bechtel it was amazingly gay. Bechtel loved to hire gay men because they didn't have the same kind of responsibilities that straight married men do. If the company need them to drop everything and get on the next flight to almost anywhere in the world for an uncertain amount of time it was never as much of a problem for them as some guy who had a wife and kids at home. When I did my national security clearance deal I was told to be straight up and tell the truth about everything. The crossdressing was no problem because everyone knew (one reason why stealth sucks), and as long as everyone knew I couldn't be blackmailed with it, that's all they were concerned about. And the dress code was based on construction sites pretty much. I had a suit at my office in case I had to go over the HQ where it was expected that we would dress as corporate whores professionals, but at my office two blocks away, and at the vault I supervised if you were wearing clothing, well, good enough.
And there are two things at work here that few people understand both sides of (if they even understand one side). First, inside the United States if you are not working for the Federal Government or in the military or working for a major contractor, your exposure to it is pretty much confined to the Post Office, getting a passport, and social security/medicare when you get old. Inside the US there really is no massive sweeping Federal presence, it's nothing at all like any other country where the national government is pretty much the only government. That's why all that cultural crap that the extreme right wing brought with them has been so disruptive as they seek to impose on a national level things that had always been up to the states. It's all but impossible for anyone outside the US to really understand how radically different the states and regions are.
And, while most Americans have so little contact with the Feds, they don't see that where the federal government of the US has not really massively grown in their own lives it has expanded to massive levels throughout the rest of the world. In partnership with the large multi-national corporations (the flag follows the dollar) the US government exercises enormous power elsewhere, and combined with the incredibly corrosive presence of American Media it has destroyed traditional values, cultures, and societies all around the world, all for the sake of corporate profits, and left in its wake nothing of value to the people who resided there.
And I think the Occupy movement has in it an element that will eventually focus on the kinds of things we do to and in other countries, if for no other reason than those efforts are burning up tax dollars.
In many ways, this is the Hippie Revolution Redux - something that started simply as a rebellion against the establishment that the Viet Nam war helped escalate into a revolution. Back then, the message was end the war. Today the message, to those who are listening, is end the war against the working class.
Little by little the media is coming to admit there's actually something going on here. That will help fuel this. People are pissed. And this Occupy Movement is a way for them to channel their anger and frustration. This movement transcends generations, race and gender. It's simply about getting a slice of the pie that doesn't leave you still starving. And that includes a very large percentage of the population.
Bloomberg has ordered the protesters to leave Zuccotti Park today so city crews can clean it up. They have refused. But they did offer to clean it up themselves. Zuccotti Park is privately owned so I don't know how that will shake out. But it would be very interesting to see the protesters leave the park and relocate at the Washington Mall. Of course every other Occupy Group throughout the nation would be invited too.
Quote from: tekla on October 13, 2011, 07:19:05 PM
And, while most Americans have so little contact with the Feds, they don't see that where the federal government of the US has not really massively grown in their own lives it has expanded to massive levels throughout the rest of the world. In partnership with the large multi-national corporations (the flag follows the dollar) the US government exercises enormous power elsewhere, and combined with the incredibly corrosive presence of American Media it has destroyed traditional values, cultures, and societies all around the world, all for the sake of corporate profits, and left in its wake nothing of value to the people who resided there.
I beg to dissagree with this paragraph. The globalization of the world is an American creation. The standard of living of Latin America and Asia have increased by several orders of magnitud since the 50's. Local tradtional cultures and societies are well and thrieving while enmesh in the American culture.
Jen61
Which explains why those nations are so heavily in debt to the US and World Bank (a total First World entity), and why most of those places don't even own their own water supply anymore.
I've always questioned protesting. Blocking the streets in SF so people can't work isn't helping anything.
I think it's a phase like all protesting...
Quote from: tekla on October 14, 2011, 09:37:45 PM
Which explains why those nations are so heavily in debt to the US and World Bank (a total First World entity), and why most of those places don't even own their own water supply anymore.
Your statement is only true for some impoverish African Countries, and a couple of Latin American's ones. I would like to point to you that China and Brazil are currently the only two lenders who are rescuing Europe, at the tune 1.2 billion. Ecuador and Chile, because of their own financial management strategies escaped the world's "housing meltdown," and while not devoid of problems (like the rest of the world) have made significant improvements on "social justice."
My point is that yes we have injustice, poverty, and inequality across the globe; we also -all earthlings- face some challenges in our efforts to maintain and extend good living conditions, but we are also very resourceful and ingenious people, and under the American aegis the world -in a few centuries- will be a better place for every body.
The change will be painfully slow with many sacrifices along the way, but optimist and hope will prevail over the "doom and loom" predicated by socialists and anarchists.
Jen61
Those are not socialists and anarchists out in the streets. It's nurses, pilots, working people. People who've watched the value of their homes fall off the charts, people who've watched their pensions evaporate, people who did 'all the right things': got and education, did well, kept their records clean and end up looking at not being able to get a job, not being able to repay their student loans and having a pretty good notion that theirs will be the first generation that will not be able to do better than their parents, but in many cases profoundly worse.
Bloomberg's ploy to get the protesters to move was a ploy that wasn't going to work. The streets around there were being cleaned as best they could. My own feeling is that the light is being shined on those responsible for the economic mess America is in.
The premise Occupy Wall Street uses definitely can be used regarding other issues. How about forming a ring around Gold Sachs, or Bank of America (which is bankrupt).
I look at my kids. Both well educated and degreed beyond the usual college level. My daughter went to an Ivy League college and racked up a six figure school loan debt. They couldn't give her money fast enough. The Bush Administration had exempted school loans from things like bankruptcy and created a guaranteed payback for lenders of school loans. The lenders were as irresponsible as the mortgage companies, handing out every penny they could to anyone kid looking for a school loan. Can you imagine the reaction when you wave thousands of dollars in the face of an 18 year old? It was taking candy from a baby.
Today, at 29, daughter is happy to hold a job even though what she makes isn't enough to get by on AND pay off her school loan. So she's living at home, like an awful lot of 20 & 30 somethings.
My son, three years younger, isn't doing much better except his school loan is less than half what his sister's is. That's because I signed him up at a state college. He can afford to live on his own because he isn't strapped by a massive school loan payment. But he is still just getting by.
And this is pretty typical of the kids entering the job market in the past ten years or so. If these kids can't do as well as their parents, what does that say for the future of this country?
Some may think occupying the streets accomplishes little but at least they are getting noticed. Yesterday I saw two columns, one in the New York Times, that spoke of the fear the plutocrats are having about this movement. The fact that the richest 400 people in the US have as much wealth as the lower 50% is making the news and people are waking up to the fact an enormous transfer of wealth has happened and it's choking the economy. And the rich are getting worried.
Today there were reports riots have erupted in Rome over this same thing. I can understand why the billionaires are worried.
Quote from: Cindy James on October 11, 2011, 12:15:13 AM
Sorry for my Australian naivety.
What is the movement about? I get get sensible answers from the newspapers. Can anyone ::)
I was also bemused about the arguments against increasing tax on the wealthy. Why not? I would have thought that was obvious and popular.
I would also suggest death taxes should be brought in. They have been in other democratic countries before including UK and most of Europe. I think the USA has to bite the bullet, Why should horrendously wealthy people die and give their money to people who have not worked for it?
I will no doubt be popular with some and not with others :laugh:
Cindy
Looks like you will be able to see it first hand...
Anti-Wall St protests spread to Australia (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-15/anti-wall-st-protests-in-australia/3573134)
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.net.au%2Fnews%2Fimage%2F3573276-3x2-700x467.jpg&hash=30be2cc14b43beceeb7bf153bbec7f8812f178d3)
Major incidents at the huge demonstration in Rome. Full on urban warfare at one point.
Photos of the incidents: http://www.repubblica.it/politica/2011/10/15/foto/una_giornata_di_scontri_il_fotoracconto-23290166/1/ (http://www.repubblica.it/politica/2011/10/15/foto/una_giornata_di_scontri_il_fotoracconto-23290166/1/)
http://www.repubblica.it/politica/2011/10/15/foto/acab_e_carlo_vive_le_scritte_sul_blindato-23297876/1/ (http://www.repubblica.it/politica/2011/10/15/foto/acab_e_carlo_vive_le_scritte_sul_blindato-23297876/1/)
http://www.repubblica.it/politica/2011/10/15/foto/roma_le_facce_degli_scontri-23299120/1/ (http://www.repubblica.it/politica/2011/10/15/foto/roma_le_facce_degli_scontri-23299120/1/)
Thankfully we are not at the point where robots can do all the work or else they would try to remove the mass of workers from society.
Quote from: Amazon D on October 15, 2011, 04:11:29 PM
Thankfully we are not at the point where robots can do all the work or else they would try to remove the mass of workers from society.
They prefer simply to increase unemployment and lower wages. At the end of the day you are 350 million and they are merely tens of thousands. Historically every army eventually gets fed up with killing its own and switches sides...
This was my blogged reaction to pretty much all of this:
Excuse my voice, I was sickly that day.
What my daughter will know (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hi6eV01PxY#)
For those of you who don't have the patience to sit through a four minute on the spot original exercise in cruel irony:
America, you win.
I have a daughter.
And I'll teach her simple things.
Like her 123s and her ABCs. But I don't believe I'll teach her to dream.
I see where it gets you- I know where I've been.
The dreaming, it's useless, they are spit on in the end.
You never can plan for the things that go wrong-
because the people around you want to keep whats wrong going on.
Nobody plans for things to always go wrong.
I'll teach her never to promise, because promises here break you,
If you should ever need to break one.
The things they'll make you do. They'll make you a slave, put you in jail, they'll call you a liar, worthless, and it'll follow you straight to your grave.
I won't force her to college, because she'll never repay
the cost that it takes to get some Paper with the letters B.A.
There's no real promise here. It's all disappeared.
America's changed.
This is no one's land, here
Quote from: Julie Marie on October 15, 2011, 02:31:45 PM
Looks like you will be able to see it first hand...
Anti-Wall St protests spread to Australia (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-15/anti-wall-st-protests-in-australia/3573134)
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.net.au%2Fnews%2Fimage%2F3573276-3x2-700x467.jpg&hash=30be2cc14b43beceeb7bf153bbec7f8812f178d3)
Sounds good to me. The more it spreads the more it will be heard. Even though Australia missed the GFC, there are still massive problems, even if we have the world's greatest Treasurer. Geez the others must be c**p
Greed, as I said before, greed. The corporations and governments are not alone in the blame for all of this. The phenomenon you see here is caused a lot by the power of the internet. The "Arab Spring" earlier this year was caused in part by the access to the internet. It is easier and much cheaper to communicate to the world today than ever in human history. A time now that I can communicate with a few Aussies and others on this thread on the same subjects from the comfort of my home in the Mile High City and elsewhere I travel with internet access available. In the past there had to be organizers at many points with phone and/or telegraph access to get something together like this.
This has occurred in the past in 1932 with the "Bonus Army" march on Washington. They used the more expensive telephone and telegraph system to organize the march. This march was about the WWI vets wanting their war bonus checks early because of the Great Depression with similar things such as unemployment, homelessness, the need for soup kitchens and the like. The Grat Depression was started by greed as well. This is eerily similar. The demostrations are similar. We got one here in Civic Center, they clashed with police tonight.
Joelene
Denver Post article, time limited: http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_19120992 (http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_19120992)
A brief on the Bonus Army: http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/snprelief4.htm (http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/snprelief4.htm)
A Youtube video, part 1: March of the Bonus Army - Part 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiMuzkpT8Xs&feature=related#)
Our treasurer is not incompetent, but he is a puppet too. He has to be to keep his job. This man is supposed to command the American dollar, and it's all too big a problem for him to handle. He's a genius ,gagged by an implied contract. As many here are.
Quote from: Joelene9 on October 16, 2011, 03:11:51 AMThe Great Depression was started by greed as well. This is eerily similar. The demonstrations are similar.
Look at this graph. The change in the distribution of wealth recently is almost identical to that which led to the Great Depression.
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-srv%2Fspecial%2Fbusiness%2Fincome-inequality%2Fimages%2Fshare.jpg&hash=0e9201b759bd241edbbbfa99ca4bf7ee1abac853)
I heard some pundit last night say the richest 10% pay 38% of the taxes. What he didn't say was they also earn 50% of the income.
Sell your domicile, cars, iPhone,pod,pad,PC,PC laptop, drop your Internet, long distance, cable, have no AC or central heat, get an ice box, go back to b/w tv, better yet radio, etc etc etc.
And than I will begin to have some respect for your position.
That is not the world we live in anymore. We are expected to be thoroughly connected. Some, like me, would love to do just as you suggest, to a degree, but we cannot make our meager living without paying out the nose for all of this nonsense.
Quote from: Michelle. on October 16, 2011, 04:11:42 PM
Sell your domicile, cars, iPhone,pod,pad,PC,PC laptop, drop your Internet, long distance, cable, have no AC or central heat, get an ice box, go back to b/w tv, better yet radio, etc etc etc.
And than I will begin to have some respect for your position.
Now that there's not a republican in office, people gotta protest something.
Quote from: tekla on October 13, 2011, 04:02:43 PM
Oh though I've never been to a workers paradise I did spend a few years traveling the world for one of those companies that are at the apex of building (literally) that American Empire by either exploiting (raping is really a better word) their natural resources or building crap for them that was sinking those nations further in massive unpayable debt.* So I got to travel through the Third World where our sites were often armed camps like Fort Apache in Africa or Indonesia. And I also enjoyed the hospitality of The Kingdom, and if you want to understand how radical maldistribution of wealth (and that's what the Wall Street 99% vs 1% protests are about) creates a 100% totally ->-bleeped-<-ed-up ->-bleeped-<-hole, where a very few live in unimaginable luxury and never lift a finger (does it go without saying that they are about the most personally horrible human beings you'll ever meet?) while the people doing all the real work live a thousand percent worse than your housepets, all kept under control by a primitive desert religion in combination with advanced police state tactics - well you need look no further than Saudi Arabia. It's pretty much the worst place on earth that I've ever been to.
But the analogy that someplace is worse is not relevant. It's like saying you are a great person because your neighbor beats his wife so bad she ends up in the hospital, but you only slap yours around every couple of days.
The irony is that you're an American. getting to travel the world, which is a luxery most
AMERICANS can't afford. Thank god for trust funds... it's like a visa, you won't have enlightenment without it.
OMG, you're from the SF BAY AREA TOO! That reminds me, tell me where you live in berkeley. So I can drive my daddy's escalade complete with my new blonde highlights while playing Colbie Calitte through it.
Er, you don't need much money to travel sometimes it is the very lack of it that causes us travel in search of work and a means to support ourselves and our families. Others of us have travelled from repressive regimes or because of our sexuality, trans status, religion or ethnicity. Some of us are also asylum seekers, I spent the day with one who is my dearest friend today and have just got home to type this.
And before anything kicks off I'm also old enough to remember the SAVAK and have seen in person the wounds they inflicted on the victims of their torture. I was full of hope in '79 and despite so much having gone very badly wrong still remain so. However despicable the present regime may be it's less horrific than the fascist puppet one that preceded it.
Yes i do have an icebox which i use ice in winter ( i freeze outside) to keep food cold in. Yes i have a radio and no TV but i do have a phone line and dsl thru it. I take care of my 88 yr old mother who would be in a home costing taxpayers so she isn't. I have no plumbing and use a chamber pot. I AM A HIPPIE and proud to be one. I help people when i can. I live on 14.00 a month in electricity and eat for 3.00 a day for both of us.
I ALSO SUPPORT THE PROTESTORS
Quote from: Michelle. on October 16, 2011, 04:11:42 PM
Sell your domicile, cars, iPhone,pod,pad,PC,PC laptop, drop your Internet, long distance, cable, have no AC or central heat, get an ice box, go back to b/w tv, better yet radio, etc etc etc.
And than I will begin to have some respect for your position.
What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Occupy Wall Street isn't a protest against technology. ???
Quote from: jmax on October 17, 2011, 12:08:23 AM
What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Occupy Wall Street isn't a protest against technology. ???
It all relates to the consumption of capitalism
Quote from: Mahsa the disco shark on October 17, 2011, 12:12:05 AM
It all relates to the consumption of capitalism
Such things are produced and consumed in socialist and communist societies as well.
One of the main points of the movement is ending excessive corporate greed and the corporate influence in our government. It's about returning to the roots of democracy, where everyone has a voice, not just those with massive amounts of wealth. Part of it's also about how bad the economy has been and people coming together to work on solutions. I can't speak for everyone involved (since it's quite a diverse crowd), but this is my understanding of it.
Quote from: jmax on October 17, 2011, 03:08:21 AM
Such things are produced and consumed in socialist and communist societies as well.
One of the main points of the movement is ending excessive corporate greed and the corporate influence in our government. It's about returning to the roots of democracy, where everyone has a voice, not just those with massive amounts of wealth. Part of it's also about how bad the economy has been and people coming together to work on solutions. I can't speak for everyone involved (since it's quite a diverse crowd), but this is my understanding of it.
Corporations control the government.
Quote from: Michelle. on October 16, 2011, 04:11:42 PM
Sell your domicile, cars, iPhone,pod,pad,PC,PC laptop, drop your Internet, long distance, cable, have no AC or central heat, get an ice box, go back to b/w tv, better yet radio, etc etc etc.
And than I will begin to have some respect for your position.
Care to elaborate?
Quote from: jmax on October 17, 2011, 10:42:46 AM
And there lies the problem.
Not really. They are a necessary evil, now outsourcing jobs is the major problem. Not providing jobs for Americans is the biggest danger and I put the interests of my country before any other.
Yeah, I am a Nationalist...so what? I love this country and am so lucky to live here.
How is it not a problem if the corporations control the government? That means they control the laws about outsourcing jobs and other things that impact the availability of jobs here. They're going to do what's best for their profits, not what's best for the American people.
I wanna live in a small place kind of detached. I'm so tired of consumer society. I think southern Canada or France will do fine. I can be alone to think and write, I can leave it for weeks at a time to ride a train all over in search of God knows what.
Quote from: EmmaM on October 17, 2011, 03:54:56 PM
I wanna live in a small place kind of detached. I'm so tired of consumer society. I think southern Canada or France will do fine. I can be alone to think and write, I can leave it for weeks at a time to ride a train all over in search of God knows what.
As far as life style outhern Canada is but the USA, you may be better somewhere in Alaska. As far as France, you better have lots of monies. They sort of tolerate rich Americans. but a poor "gringa" oh my, my, thye stink, are ready targets for the local gendarmerie.
Jen61
This whole "occupy" global protest clearly shows just how Americanized the worl has become. So, it is like all the young engineers I deal with, they are like they want all the big bucks and title but without having to work for it. Orr soem ot the teen in my neighborhood who want their parent to give them a brand bnew car out of high school. It is like every body is whining American style: "where is my cookie ? Like they are entitled to be mantained, kind of like a 1950's house wife.
Jen61
Quote from: Mahsa the disco shark on October 17, 2011, 03:24:46 PM
Not really. They are a necessary evil, now outsourcing jobs is the major problem. Not providing jobs for Americans is the biggest danger and I put the interests of my country before any other.
Yeah, I am a Nationalist...so what? I love this country and am so lucky to live here.
Albert Einstein: "Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. "
Samuel Johnson: "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."
No.
The social contract was breached. Somebody handed us a ton of money to spend on college educations and promised us a job when we got done. There are no jobs. Mister big boss is busy paying his bills with the payment we can barely afford to make instead of hiring. Then he goes looking for recourse when we stop paying because we just can't anymore - kid's gotta eat, ya know? How am I ever supposed to get a decent job with missing front teeth and the inability to stop panicking from worry over wage garnishments that will cost me the 20 hour a week job I had to stop going to that school and sell my soul for? I would grind my spine to dust for someone, I would work in a field, but hell, they're not hiring either.
Quote from: mimpi on October 17, 2011, 10:59:34 PM
Albert Einstein: "Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. "
Samuel Johnson: "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."
Oh well, I am a scoundrel then.. I love this country. It sure beats Iran.
Quote from: EmmaM on October 17, 2011, 11:05:50 PM
No.
The social contract was breached. Somebody handed us a ton of money to spend on college educations and promised us a job when we got done. There are no jobs. Mister big boss is busy paying his bills with the payment we can barely afford to make instead of hiring. Then he goes looking for recourse when we stop paying because we just can't anymore - kid's gotta eat, ya know? How am I ever supposed to get a decent job with missing front teeth and the inability to stop panicking from worry over wage garnishments that will cost me the 20 hour a week job I had to stop going to that school and sell my soul for? I would grind my spine to dust for someone, I would work in a field, but hell, they're not hiring either.
hey did you get the memo? You aren't promised anything. You gotta earn it like the rest of us.
Quote from: Mahsa the disco shark on October 17, 2011, 11:21:49 PM
hey did you get the memo? You aren't promised anything. You gotta earn it like the rest of us.
!
We have system failure.
Quote from: EmmaM on October 17, 2011, 11:34:33 PM
!
We have system failure.
Oh well... Won't be the first thing I've crashed.
Quote from: EmmaM on October 17, 2011, 11:05:50 PM
No.
The social contract was breached. Somebody handed us a ton of money to spend on college educations and promised us a job when we got done. There are no jobs. Mister big boss is busy paying his bills with the payment we can barely afford to make instead of hiring. Then he goes looking for recourse when we stop paying because we just can't anymore - kid's gotta eat, ya know? How am I ever supposed to get a decent job with missing front teeth and the inability to stop panicking from worry over wage garnishments that will cost me the 20 hour a week job I had to stop going to that school and sell my soul for? I would grind my spine to dust for someone, I would work in a field, but hell, they're not hiring either.
I know where you are coming from. I decided not to get college courses after me being laid off 10 years ago. I saw this coming even before the Enron failure/ 9-11, a marker in our recent history. Some of my fellow middle-aged ex co-workers did do the courses and most are in hock now because completing their courses did not produce any or very little job time. The job market has changed very drastically over the past decade, a college degree no longer guarantees a job as it did in the 70's and 80's. There were a lot of recruiters from the Fortune 500 on campuses around graduation time. It is a crapshoot with higher education now. The influx of illegal workers and the wage advantage taken of them does not help an able-bodied citizen like you to get the outdoor jobs out in the boonies. It is hard seasonal work out there. Good luck!
Quote from: Mahsa the disco shark on October 17, 2011, 11:20:44 PM
Oh well, I am a scoundrel then.. I love this country. It sure beats Iran.
I was born and raised here. I joined the military and got spat at and given the finger while wearing the uniform during the Vietnam War. Despite that I still love my country. I vote, pay taxes and I do the civil duties when called for without complaint. Yes, this beats Iran, Cuba, China and others despite the hell I am still going through with some members of my generation that still shun me because these these duties I have done and the American ideals I still believe in.
Joelene
I took a pic of my posterior tonight and put it on fb with the caption, "OCCUPY THIS"
I did my part.
The only way it sticks is if all of this is followed up by political organization and political action.
Quote from: Julie Marie on October 07, 2011, 01:46:32 PMLike it or not, increasing the tax on the wealthy is a quick and easy way to begin the healing . . . Of course, we need to clean house too and get rid of the politicians who have been supporting this transference of wealth . . . Wouldn't that be a treat?
That and do away with the "tax-exempt" status of "non-for-profits", especially all those religious organizations that overtly influence with their false moralizing just about every aspect of our highly politicized lives . . . The greed of the US dollar trumpeted as the latest, greatest religion precludes any further hope of an always illusionary "separation of church and state". "Anyone ever do a study on how THAT might help our catastrophic US debt / trade deficits? Ya know, those "false idols" and "fallacies that beset man's minds" that our kids don't believe in anyway and they're only beginning to pay for now!
The financial meltdown that happened in 2008 has primarily the result of the rescinding of the Glass Steagall Act of 1933. That act basically said banks can't engage in risky investing. The Act was a direct result of lessons learned from The Great Depression. And those same bank's depositors typically enjoyed protection from bank failure or run-ons through the FDIC, which was created shortly after the Glass Steagall Act passed.
Back then, our elected officials had learned a hard lesson. And they set forth protections so that would never happen again. And it was working just fine. Until...
In 1999 Congress passed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which effectively rescinded the Glass Steagal Act and allowed banks to engage in risky investing. It only took nine years for the collapse. That's the problem when you have no regulations on how those entrusted with holding other people's money invest it. And the lack of regulations on Wall Street invited the same kind of irresponsibility.
Why worry? It's not MY MONEY!
Our legislative branch creates the laws. Our judicial branch is supposed to prosecute those who break the laws. Both failed us. Why? Because huge sums of money were waved in front of the faces of our elected officials and they wanted to keep their jobs. And our system is set up such that you need money to win elections. Campaign laws are so lax they allow anyone to donate anything to anyone without disclosure. Lobbyists fly into DC with boatloads of cash ready to do whatever it takes to get our elected officials to see things their way. How can they resist?
And the rest of us wonder why allowing the foxes to guard the hen house hasn't panned out so well.
I saw one of my former friends. He is this gay guy and he's the biggest attention wanter. Wouldn't you know, he's into the Occupy stuff now.
It's instant ego gratification for most young people... therefore. I will not be participating at any of the protests unless it's going to go see the circus. It is a circus...they never know the real protesters. Just a bunch of unwashed, mad max looking hippy kids.
I'll take you seriously when you cut your hair, put on some nice clothes, and speak in a manner that is appropriate. This anti capitalist b.s. is exactly that...these kids are just waiting for Mommy and Daddy to bail them up.
Does there need to be a solution? Yes. But protesting won't reach it. It has to happen within the culture, by those who have families and morals.
Quote from: Kiera on October 18, 2011, 07:32:53 AM
That and do away with the "tax-exempt" status of "non-for-profits", especially all those religious organizations that overtly influence with their false moralizing just about every aspect of our highly politicized lives . . . The greed of the US dollar trumpeted as the latest, greatest religion precludes any further hope of an always illusionary "separation of church and state". "Anyone ever do a study on how THAT might help our catastrophic US debt / trade deficits? Ya know, those "false idols" and "fallacies that beset man's minds" that our kids don't believe in anyway and they're only beginning to pay for now!
My astronomy club of 350+ members is a non-profit 501 (c)(3) just like any other educational or faith based organization here in the US. We still have to file with the IRS, even though we pay no taxes. We just gave our treasurer a $299 Quickbooks for non-profits to handle our transactions properly for tax reporting. We still have to pay for something or someone to process the transactions anyway. The same with the churches and other places of worship plus some of the LGBT and Transgender chapters. We cannot fund nor back a candidate running for office, the political parties, nor receive funds and other consumables from any of those political entities.
We can lobby for our interest to government officials such as the successful last service mission to the Hubble Space Telescope that was cancelled at that time and NASA (a government agency) gives us free public outreach materials. But the faith based organizations have a hard time lobbying due to separation of church and state issues that would come up.
Joelene
Quote from: Mahsa the disco shark on October 17, 2011, 11:20:44 PM
Oh well, I am a scoundrel then.. I love this country. It sure beats Iran.
Not at football it doesn't! The whole world outside the US was cheering on Iran that day at the World Cup Finals.
Quote from: tekla on October 18, 2011, 06:51:28 AM
The only way it sticks is if all of this is followed up by political organization and political action.
Lennin 1910
I saw a picture yesterday of a small group of people in Antarctica holding Occupy signs. So in four short weeks, the movement has reached all seven continents.
Quote from: Mahsa the disco shark on October 18, 2011, 01:28:02 PM
I'll take you seriously when you cut your hair, put on some nice clothes, and speak in a manner that is appropriate. This anti capitalist b.s. is exactly that...these kids are just waiting for Mommy and Daddy to bail them up.
Does there need to be a solution? Yes. But protesting won't reach it. It has to happen within the culture, by those who have families and morals.
And the general population will take you seriously when you stop pretending that you're a woman and act like the man you were born to be. That's the problem with telling others to conform to social standards. You gotta practice what you preach.
As far as protesting, I think the results speak for themselves: The Boston Tea Party, the Civil Rights March on Washington, Stonewall, the Moratorium against the Viet Nam War, and that's just here in the U.S. Elsewhere in the world there was Tiananmen Square, the Salt March, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and a whole bunch of others. So yeah, protesting really is effective, as long as the masses participate.
I was in the service during the Vietnam War. I missed going there by thismuch. What got America out of Vietnam was when many middle class parents saw that their sons and daughters were coming back injured (physically and emotionally), missing limbs, or dead. Protests are very effective and focused.
Quote from: Julie Marie on October 19, 2011, 08:13:05 AM
And the general population will take you seriously when you stop pretending that you're a woman and act like the man you were born to be. That's the problem with telling others to conform to social standards. You gotta practice what you preach.
I agree. Stereotyping the protesters as attention-seeking hippie kids is the same as saying that all transgenders are perverts just because there are a few guys who really do like wanking in women's clothes while thinking about raping little kids.
People REALLY need to stop watching the mainstream news. If you want to know what the protesters are really like, watch the amateur videos of the protests posted on the internet. Then you'll get to see everything that the mainstream media conveniently forgets to include when they edit their footage.
While some of the protesters may be foolish, not all of them are. There are real problems in this world, and some people want real solutions. The Occupy movement is just like any other. It has a few visionary leaders, some bad apples, and a bunch of regular people who are somewhere in the middle. Of course, people will never know this if all they ever watch is Faux News.
When I was at the Occupy Chicago protest I got a chance to talk to some of "the regulars". Most of them were younger and all were college grads. Every one of them talked about these enormous school loans they have to pay back and how they can't find a job to do that and live on their own. They, like the earlier generations, justified taking out school loans as an investment that would be paid back with future earnings. A lot of them had MBAs because bachelor's degrees are a dime a dozen. And that added a lot to their debt. When they got their degrees they couldn't find a decent job. I heard how they held two and three menial jobs just to survive - AND make their school loan payments. Most payments were the size of a starter mortgage payment. They want to own a home of their own but they have no hope being strapped with huge school loans in a crappy job market.
And we wonder why the housing market is so bad...
There's a petition going around to forgive the school loan debt as a way to help jump start the economy. Already they have 500,000 signatures. http://signon.org/sign/want-a-real-economic?source=c.fwd.in&r_by=1328617 (http://signon.org/sign/want-a-real-economic?source=c.fwd.in&r_by=1328617) I have no problem with that because many of the loan agencies used predatory practices to entice these kids into the loans, knowing they had no way of ever getting out of paying it back (thanks to the Bush administration).
OWS isn't giving up and that's a good thing.
Quote from: Julie Marie on October 19, 2011, 01:36:26 PM
When I was at the Occupy Chicago protest I got a chance to talk to some of "the regulars". Most of them were younger and all were college grads. Every one of them talked about these enormous school loans they have to pay back and how they can't find a job to do that and live on their own. They, like the earlier generations, justified taking out school loans as an investment that would be paid back with future earnings. A lot of them had MBAs because bachelor's degrees are a dime a dozen. And that added a lot to their debt. When they got their degrees they couldn't find a decent job. I heard how they held two and three menial jobs just to survive - AND make their school loan payments. Most payments were the size of a starter mortgage payment. They want to own a home of their own but they have no hope being strapped with huge school loans in a crappy job market.
And we wonder why the housing market is so bad...
There's a petition going around to forgive the school loan debt as a way to help jump start the economy. Already they have 500,000 signatures. http://signon.org/sign/want-a-real-economic?source=c.fwd.in&r_by=1328617 (http://signon.org/sign/want-a-real-economic?source=c.fwd.in&r_by=1328617) I have no problem with that because many of the loan agencies used predatory practices to entice these kids into the loans, knowing they had no way of ever getting out of paying it back (thanks to the Bush administration).
OWS isn't giving up and that's a good thing.
Quote from: Julie Marie on October 19, 2011, 08:13:05 AM
And the general population will take you seriously when you stop pretending that you're a woman and act like the man you were born to be. That's the problem with telling others to conform to social standards. You gotta practice what you preach.
As far as protesting, I think the results speak for themselves: The Boston Tea Party, the Civil Rights March on Washington, Stonewall, the Moratorium against the Viet Nam War, and that's just here in the U.S. Elsewhere in the world there was Tiananmen Square, the Salt March, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and a whole bunch of others. So yeah, protesting really is effective, as long as the masses participate.
Should have known Julie would be the other person to site the dimease of the Glass-Steagal Act!
Brings to mind the forgotten concept of "Jubilee", an Old Testament practice of forgiving one's debt every 50 yrs so they have their ancestral land given back to them. What does debt also do? Earn interest! Never ending circle.
Yes they were effective, but let us hope the current protests don't go the way of the "Bonus War" or the "68' Chicago Democratic Convention Protest", where Political Leaders sic'd the Army and the Police on the Protesters. To effect a change with bite, the protests will have to energize
We The People, ie. "VOTERS", to take it a step further to the polls and quit sitting on fannies watching FOX News or Reality TV shows. Change demands ACTION, and what should those actions be?
The next 12.5 months are sure going to be interesting.
Just a note to all you protesting types. When the '12 GOP Convention takes place, be very careful.
It's here in Florida, Tampa. We have concealed carry here, thank God; and a very liberal "stand your ground law," praise Jesus. So I wouldn't recommend charging the bus lines, happened in '08. Or putting trash bins through store windows, also in '08.
Now back to our regularly scheduled debate. Your sides communism, fascism, and/or socialism has all been tried before and failed; always. It always implodes or stagnates. The Chinese are a few years from collapse. Read some finance papers. Their banks are way, way worse off then ours. Their population has a gender time bomb built in, due to one child. Their government at some point can't stimulate 10% growth by way of infrastructure projects. Those jobs we shipped out a generation or two ago, are now headed to Africa.
Cuba, what a joke. North Korea, their people are starving to death. Venezuela, has rolling black outs. So much for nationalization, eh Hugo?
Meanwhile. The former Soviet bloc states all made a bee- line for NATO and the EU. Why? They knew Russia would revert to being the barbaric little neo-commie/fascist state that it has become.
So I'll take capitalism and corporations anyway. Because in the current system I all but get to vote as often as I care too. I vote on election day, when I shop for goods and when I trade stocks.
Also not only due goods get better, they also get cheaper as each generation of them passes. By that I mean electronics, cars, household goods, appliances etc.
This whole "occupy" thing reeks of "bitching about farmers, with your full mouth full."
There's a ton of money, fortunes to be made right now. Every technological revolution of the Industrial Era has taken place during hard times.
Made by people who worked hard, took risks and reinvested their money into what eventually become OMG, corporations.
So, keep the change.
Every technological revolution of the Industrial Era has taken place during hard times.
Actually the post-war thirty plus years were exactly the opposite of hard times, at least in America, and you going to be hard pressed to find greater innovation, invention and growth in any other 30 year period.
Made by people who worked hard, took risks and reinvested their money
Actually a whole lot of this is based on thoese clowns getting bailed out - BIG --HUGE, and not reinvesting that money when we gave it to them, but sitting on it. That whole risk thing rings kinda hollow these days. To big to fail and all.
Tekla,
PartI: We did have the end of WW2 boom. But a lot of that innovation arose from that very conflict.
PartIi: I was against all but the initial "bailouts". If it's too big to fail, than it should be broken up.
Examples. AIG, at the time too big. GM, I'm not sold on that one.
And now, for everyone's reading pleasure. Was America born out of a lie?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15345511 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15345511)
Quote from: Michelle. on October 19, 2011, 11:20:23 PM
And now, for everyone's reading pleasure. Was America born out of a lie?
I don't think that's a relevant question. America was born out of anger, formed by a bunch of treasonous rebels. It has gotten out of hand, we see another empire that is abusing an ungodly amount of power, and we're angry again. That's how we roll. Don't know if there will be a rebellion. Don't think so.
Quote from: EmmaM on October 19, 2011, 11:30:14 PM
I don't think that's a relevant question. America was born out of anger, formed by a bunch of treasonous rebels. It has gotten out of hand, we see another empire that is abusing an ungodly amount of power, and we're angry again. That's how we roll. Don't know if there will be a rebellion. Don't think so.
Spoiled Americans are always angry at something,. I've never seen such a nation of ungreatful halfwits.
Oh, but it is relavant!
For those who desire socialism. Declare yourselves to be neo-loyalists and flee to a Commonwealth nation.
The Brits' are seemingly open to the idea.
BTW, American "Liberalism" requires something to be angry about.
Quote from: Michelle. on October 20, 2011, 12:19:52 AM
Oh, but it is relavant!
For those who desire socialism. Declare yourselves to be neo-loyalists and flee to a Commonwealth nation.
The Brits' are seemingly open to the idea.
BTW, American "Liberalism" requires something to be angry about.
I think it's funny, liberals and conservatives are fighting differing ideas of big government. On the one hand, liberals don't want big corporations running the show, and on the other conservatives don't want government interfering with a free market. Both ideas taken to extremes fail, we know this from experience.
Every pundit I've ever heard of built their careers with a backbone of dissidence. They're all unpleasant to listen to, every single one of them. Poisonous.
I don't desire socialism, but I'm plotting my move now. Shame too, I could have paid tons in taxes or contributed a great deal to an economy I liked. Not sure how long it will take, but I'm seriously considering doing it.
Quote from: Michelle. on October 19, 2011, 09:42:52 PM
Your sides communism, fascism, and/or socialism has all been tried before and failed; always. It always implodes or stagnates.
Look at the success of the NFL vs MLB. Last year there was an estimated 100 million people watching the Super Bowl, about 85 million less than the World Series.
"Football is built on an economic model of fairness and opportunity, and baseball is built on a model where the rich almost always win and the poor usually have no chance." Socialism - 1, Capitalism - 0. Look at Sweden and Switzerland, both built on socialism. In the U.S. we think socialism is a dirty word but that's because it has capitalism as it's foundation. Socialism works, when it's actually applied in the way it is really defined.
Quote from: Michelle. on October 19, 2011, 09:42:52 PMThere's a ton of money, fortunes to be made right now. Every technological revolution of the Industrial Era has taken place during hard times.
Made by people who worked hard, took risks and reinvested their money into what eventually become OMG, corporations.
Anyone who knows how economies work, when they do, knows you have to have worker bees. A society with all queen bees will fail. The tired mantra of those labeling the OWS protesters as whiners, lazy, etc. requires one forgets that everyone can't be an innovator, a business owner or a mulit-millionaire. If we all worked our butts off to achieve that we'd have a crumbled economy because there would be no one to do the grunt work.
You want to be a wealthy magnate? Fine. Just accept the responsibilities that goes with that. While you get a big slice of the pie, remember if you leave only enough where the rest are starving, don't expect any gratitude form those under you. Every good manager knows people are the best asset any company has. Treat them like ->-bleeped-<- and expect a lot of crap to be thrown back at you.
For those of you that live in Chicago....
There used to be, and probably still is, at the Museum of Industry and Science, a large exhibit devoted to a man by the name of R. Buckminister "Bucky" Fuller. Inventor of the Geodesic Dome, Author, Philosopher, Mathematician, Inventor, etc... In his last book, Critical Path, he made an interesting statement, that when FDR created the Social Security Administration he by defacto made the USA a _________ nation...U guessed it...
Socialist
So what else is new under the Sun... :laugh:
You show me a capitalist, and I'll show you a bloodsucker. - Malcolm X
The differences in season length between baseball and football are too extreme to make an accurate comparison.
If you care for the Nordic Model, than move there.
Regarding pie. Government can only divide a pie into ever smaller pieces, not grow the pie.
BTW, I never said that the US wasn't already a mixed economy. The problem is the movement towards the State controlling more and more of that pie.
The pendulum that is the American electorate is, most likely, swinging back towards the middle this time around. After a huge leftward lurch in '08 followed by an equal push rightward in '10.
I guess that means its time to get used to the idea of Romney as prez.
Back to the topic in question...
Any updates from around the country on the MOVEMENT?
SJ
US, no. However, Athens is all but in flames. Main story of the day is the demise of Brother Leader, of the Revolution, Khaddaffi. Oh, and Chavez claims to be cancer free. And not surprisingly some freed Palestinians are already making claims of future martyrdom.
I guess the American Movement hasn't advanced far enough yet. That or the Union leaders haven't handed out this weeks marching orders.
It will be interesting if these "activists" start to go after the World Series or football games.
Occupy that, y'all will find out soon how much working America agrees with you.
Today there has been fighting in Athens between Communist youths and Anarchists, the march was 30,000 strong on a weekday. Tomorrow there is a massive sit in (march banned) in Piazza del Popolo, Rome by striking metalworkers organised by the CGIL union. The occupation at St Pauls, London continues.
Meet some of the 1%, what awful people!
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/113690/40-under-40-fortune-cnnmoney?mod=career-leadership (http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/113690/40-under-40-fortune-cnnmoney?mod=career-leadership)
And you meant communists and anarchists rioted against the police?
Quote from: Michelle. on October 20, 2011, 03:53:59 PM
Meet some of the 1%, what awful people!
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/113690/40-under-40-fortune-cnnmoney?mod=career-leadership (http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/113690/40-under-40-fortune-cnnmoney?mod=career-leadership)
And you meant communists and anarchists rioted against the police?
100% male, now there's a surprise...
I meant what I wrote, nothing more.
Enjoy your Empire of Evil while it lasts, all things come to an end, the dustbin of history awaits all empires.
Quote from: Michelle. on October 20, 2011, 03:53:59 PM
Meet some of the 1%, what awful people!
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/113690/40-under-40-fortune-cnnmoney?mod=career-leadership (http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/113690/40-under-40-fortune-cnnmoney?mod=career-leadership)
And you meant communists and anarchists rioted against the police?
They are only the the few of the known ones. The others that are in the shadows and don't want any publicity are the dangerous ones. The comments below that article are quite fiery!
Joelene
https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/
They are moving foreward ;)
Quote from: Amazon D on October 20, 2011, 07:33:01 PM
https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/
They are moving foreward ;)
Forward, always forward :)
Avanti o popolo, alla riscossa!
Quote from: Michelle. on October 20, 2011, 03:53:59 PM
Meet some of the 1%, what awful people!
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/113690/40-under-40-fortune-cnnmoney?mod=career-leadership (http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/113690/40-under-40-fortune-cnnmoney?mod=career-leadership)
And you meant communists and anarchists rioted against the police?
You forgot to add -posthoumusly- Steve Jobs.
They are my heros, My boss is the CEO of one of the largest defense industry company. The guy is a genious, a true consul of the empire.
Jen61
RIP, Steve Jobs.
That list of "ideas" actually has some workable, or at least debatable, ideas contained within.
Term limits and everyonepays at least some tax works for me.
What changes could be made for the "99%"?
Speaking of Steve Jobs...What really catapulted Apple was the MAC OS, and how did that happen? Xerox spent hundreds of millions of $'s through the Palo Alto Research Center during the late 60's and into the 70's and 80's, out of it come Ethernet, Small Talk and the Ink Jet Printer. But they made a fatal error...they didn't license their developments, they became public domain. Even worse...they didn't know what to do with what they had! Enter "The Steve's", and for free Apple had the beginnings of the MAC, and they made it proprietary!
Fast forward to the Summer of 1996 and "The Return of Steve Jobs"...by now Apple had licensed the MAC OS and clones were sprouting up like mushrooms....what was the first thing Steve did within a week of returning as Apple CEO? Cancelled the licenses! The MAC OS was proprietary again...the rest is history!
So how did Steve do it? Not by being a nice guy but by being a Tyrant! Rockefeller, H.R. Hunt, Bill Gates, Watson (IBM) and others built great Empires of Corporate America, and they weren't nice guys either. Sure it provided jobs and economic growth for America, but these people were definitely driven! It still amazes me that Steve was able to sidestep Bill and dreamup the ipod, iphone and ipad, where was everyone else?
But those guys on Wall Street...what did they make? Subprime Mortages, Student Loans, and lots and lots of corporate compensation!
So what's the moral of the story.......
You show me a capitalist, and I'll show you a bloodsucker. - Malcolm X
I have more respect for people who produce something than bankers . stockbrokers, who make $ off others peoples money .. however, all businesses need to share their profits with their employees.. so as not to have too much power with the CEO, because it is the workers who do the actal work, but inventors do deserve a fair share for their inventions.
On Forbes Top 100 wealthiest list, something like 30 of them made their billions in hedge funds, leveraged buyouts, banking, investments, brokerages and other non-producing ways. Four of the top eleven are Waltons - Wal-Mart, which buys junk from China and sells it for a profit, also producing nothing. Outside of technology, there really isn't a lot on that list that made their billions producing something tangible.
But every one of these billionaires needed the 99% to make them wealthy. It doesn't take a lot to make people happy, you just have to give them something. You can't take it all.
When I recall the stories coming out of Silicon Valley in its heyday, I think of all these people who went there, landed a job and became millionaires. Obviously, their bosses had no problem sharing the wealth. And when you see how many billionaires come from technology, it becomes apparent you can become a billionaire AND share the wealth with the people who work for you.
Wasn't there some parable about giving something and it coming back to you tenfold?
Quote from: SandraJane on October 20, 2011, 09:52:47 PM
What really catapulted Apple was the MAC OS, and how did that happen? Xerox spent hundreds of millions of $'s through the Palo Alto Research Center during the late 60's and into the 70's and 80's, out of it come Ethernet, Small Talk and the Ink Jet Printer. But they made a fatal error...they didn't license their developments, they became public domain. Even worse...they didn't know what to do with what they had! Enter "The Steve's", and for free Apple had the beginnings of the MAC, and they made it proprietary!
Fast forward to the Summer of 1996 and "The Return of Steve Jobs"...by now Apple had licensed the MAC OS and clones were sprouting up like mushrooms....what was the first thing Steve did within a week of returning as Apple CEO? Cancelled the licenses! The MAC OS was proprietary again...the rest is history!
So how did Steve do it? Not by being a nice guy but by being a Tyrant! Rockefeller, H.R. Hunt, Bill Gates, Watson (IBM) and others built great Empires of Corporate America, and they weren't nice guys either. Sure it provided jobs and economic growth for America, but these people were definitely driven! It still amazes me that Steve was able to sidestep Bill and dreamup the ipod, iphone and ipad, where was everyone else?
But those guys on Wall Street...what did they make? Subprime Mortages, Student Loans, and lots and lots of corporate compensation!
So what's the moral of the story.......
You show me a capitalist, and I'll show you a bloodsucker. - Malcolm X
Completely appalling.
I WILL NEVER respect the current vehicle for invention and protection. This is why I will give away anything I write for free, if asked. Has doing so made me poor for it? Probably. I can't fathom pulling something from human experience, something that will help others, and locking it down in such a way that others can not run with that idea to make things better. People like these protect greed and the status quo while manipulating people to believe they have done something for posterity. They stand in the way of innovation and growth while parading around shiny shells wrapping old devices designed by the serfs they enslaved with college debt, twisted mortgages, and pretty luring lies about a better future. The dumbest thing they did was provide us an information highway to organize with and call to stand up against them in unity.
"Higher education..." We'll save that for later.
To say I'm jaded is a drastic understatement. This is not a government of the people or for the people. This is a big, tangled, flagging waste. I would like it to be me AND the gov't, not me VS. the gov't, but to call this a functional government is a sick joke. There are people who will NOT leave the country, who have different ideas for a better situation, and they shouldn't have to leave. This place used to hold so much promise, there used to be a dream, and now there seems to be so much stifled potential.
There is no money. All any of us have is debt and debtors. We are an economy built upon false promise. What happens when the feds admit they have no real power without the people they fail to protect from these predators? What will they do when these millions of people who have nothing to lose stop giving them what they need to function? What happens when they can't keep their promises and these reserve notes and electronically tracked balances and property values all become worthless? The government will cave. They certainly can't take anything away at this point. Prison, for some of these millions, would be a welcome alternative to the piling on of debt and uncertainty. All it will take is a vote and these corrupt policy makers can take the rest of their planned political career off to think about the corporate promises they made, the secret empire they thought would never come under question, and the ultimate failure they contributed to.
A different, bigger pie is in order. More people struggling necessitates a different system. The problem won't just go away, even if it moves away.
Oh, by the way. I think we're ignoring Italy, the world's seventh largest economy, and it's failure. Gotta dig up some info there.
Quote from: Julie Marie on October 21, 2011, 08:05:11 AM
On Forbes Top 100 wealthiest list, something like 30 of them made their billions in hedge funds, leveraged buyouts, banking, investments, brokerages and other non-producing ways. Four of the top eleven are Waltons - Wal-Mart, which buys junk from China and sells it for a profit, also producing nothing. Outside of technology, there really isn't a lot on that list that made their billions producing something tangible.
But every one of these billionaires needed the 99% to make them wealthy. It doesn't take a lot to make people happy, you just have to give them something. You can't take it all.
When I recall the stories coming out of Silicon Valley in its heyday, I think of all these people who went there, landed a job and became millionaires. Obviously, their bosses had no problem sharing the wealth. And when you see how many billionaires come from technology, it becomes apparent you can become a billionaire AND share the wealth with the people who work for you.
Wasn't there some parable about giving something and it coming back to you tenfold?
But as you may know, parables are not always what they may seem to be! If one
was quoting the parables of Jesus, I believe one would be surprised that the 1% aren't the kindly benefactors they would seem. (see
Parables As Subversive Speech: Jesus As Pedagogue of the Oppressed, By: William Herzog
Westminster John Knox Press / 1994 / Paperback)
And yes, now its the Silicon chip and oodles of "Code" that is driving the Technological Revolution, not Steel, Oil or the Automobile. Weaponry is a different story for its always in demand by someone.
The Walton's (not John Boy :laugh:) revolutionized the retail industry, and are still out there grinding away.
Something tangible...think about it, the communications industry, that's tangible, brought to you by...Technology...what else?
"In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete."― Richard Buckminster "Bucky" Fuller
Share holders of a company are the owners and thus entitled to it's profits. Employees are entitled to their wages and bonuses. Now, the great companies more often than not have a profit sharing or ESOP type plans for their workers. Also the vast majority of Americans at least indirectly own stocks thru their retirement funds. Even, especially, the public types.
WalMart. Don't shop there. In fact if all of us just paid a little more for domestic goods, we would begin to all but solve unemployment.
But what I find most offensive about these left-ist views is the everyone but me attitude. Everyone but me should work, pay taxes, suffer etc etc etc. Everyone else is too blame for my problems and short comings.
Therefore the left-ist feels they have the right to steal thru any means, the productivity of others. The left-"ist will gladly take free housing, food, medical, vacation etc etc etc... But a job? Heck who needs a job if their getting all that for free. But nothing is free, you stole it from someone else. Calling it taxes and fair is just a rationalization. RATIONing is more likely to occur.
Michelle, I do enjoy a brisk political discussion :)
I've had to rely on those programs, and they don't work. Well, food aid does. I think we converge on some points, but wildly differ on others, and I like it. Makes this a more colorful place.
Quote from: Michelle. on October 21, 2011, 05:29:36 PM
Share holders of a company are the owners and thus entitled to it's profits. Employees are entitled to their wages and bonuses. Now, the great companies more often than not have a profit sharing or ESOP type plans for their workers. Also the vast majority of Americans at least indirectly own stocks thru their retirement funds. Even, especially, the public types.
WalMart. Don't shop there. In fact if all of us just paid a little more for domestic goods, we would begin to all but solve unemployment.
But what I find most offensive about these left-ist views is the everyone but me attitude. Everyone but me should work, pay taxes, suffer etc etc etc. Everyone else is too blame for my problems and short comings.
Therefore the left-ist feels they have the right to steal thru any means, the productivity of others. The left-"ist will gladly take free housing, food, medical, vacation etc etc etc... But a job? Heck who needs a job if their getting all that for free. But nothing is free, you stole it from someone else. Calling it taxes and fair is just a rationalization. RATIONing is more likely to occur.
The leftist people i know are all hard workers and help others and are not greedy for themselves like most conservatives i know or have come in contact. Oh they might help their own kind if they have the extra but they are not ones to give to people they don't know. I know many leftist do give to people they don't know personally. The people you mention who do not want to work are people who were raised that way and i do not blame them because well that is how they were raised. Many conservatives ( i know) were raised to go after money and wealth over being caring people unless they have millions or are true christian like people.
Amazon,
Um. I am a conservative, though unemployed since just before 9-11, ALL of my time and on other jobs since that time has been pro bono. I am living off of my savings which includes investments that made a loss but the companies behind those are still around. I did not invest in Enron or others like them because I saw them as they were, a large hollow shell.
I used to make fun of the Enron commercials that ran at that time and the end of the jingle was this instrumented voice that said "Enron" many times. I would respond "Endaround, Endaround.... That was the way they got those many small contracts that looked good on paper, but was one of those things that choked them. Just like the penny stock scandal before them in the late 80's. This leads into a real life meeting of one who was under investigation.
I was repairing cell phones for the company I worked for in the late 80's when one day Barbara, the shop clerk, brought me a phone for a customer was waiting for up front. I repaired the minor problem in the big heavy holster phone that was available then. Then Barbara came back and said that she didn't like the customer, something about him. I then looked at the repair ticket and said uh-oh! The name on that ticket was Meyer Blinder. I went up to the door and looked at the customer waiting area and identified him from a picture in the paper a few days earlier. I told Barbara that the FBI has seized his assets and his penny stock business had been suspended and this snake will pay cash because he no longer had credit.
I finished up the ticket and went up front with the phone and I made sure that it was paid for in cash. His wife came in and paid for the repair. As for Barbara, I never seen her scared like that. She was a London war bride that survived the Axis bombings, nothing seem to faze her before. Nice English accent.
Joelene
Old article about Meyer Blinder: http://www.microcapmarkets.com/penny-stocks/prince-of-penny-stocks.html (http://www.microcapmarkets.com/penny-stocks/prince-of-penny-stocks.html)
Quote from: Michelle. on October 21, 2011, 05:29:36 PM
Share holders of a company are the owners and thus entitled to it's profits. Employees are entitled to their wages and bonuses. Now, the great companies more often than not have a profit sharing or ESOP type plans for their workers. Also the vast majority of Americans at least indirectly own stocks thru their retirement funds. Even, especially, the public types.
WalMart. Don't shop there. In fact if all of us just paid a little more for domestic goods, we would begin to all but solve unemployment.
But what I find most offensive about these left-ist views is the everyone but me attitude. Everyone but me should work, pay taxes, suffer etc etc etc. Everyone else is too blame for my problems and short comings.
Therefore the left-ist feels they have the right to steal thru any means, the productivity of others. The left-"ist will gladly take free housing, food, medical, vacation etc etc etc... But a job? Heck who needs a job if their getting all that for free. But nothing is free, you stole it from someone else. Calling it taxes and fair is just a rationalization. RATIONing is more likely to occur.
Are U sure U R not leaning to the Left dispite your quasi-conservative prose? Against Wal-Mart? Gawd! Some Capitalist Robber Barron/Barroness U would be! :laugh: ...
Or R U a Treasonist Conservative, given your "blasphemy" towards the Walton Dynasty? And don't say U don't shop at Wal-Mart, that's, that's...Un-American! :laugh:
Quote from: Joelene9 on October 21, 2011, 07:23:03 PM
Amazon,
Just like the penny stock scandal before them in the late 80's. This leads into a real life meeting of one who was under investigation.
I was repairing cell phones for the company I worked for in the late 80's when one day Barbara, the shop clerk, brought me a phone for a customer was waiting for up front. I repaired the minor problem in the big heavy holster phone that was available then. Then Barbara came back and said that she didn't like the customer, something about him. I then looked at the repair ticket and said uh-oh! The name on that ticket was Meyer Blinder. I went up to the door and looked at the customer waiting area and identified him from a picture in the paper a few days earlier. I told Barbara that the FBI has seized his assets and his penny stock business had been suspended and this snake will pay cash because he no longer had credit.
I finished up the ticket and went up front with the phone and I made sure that it was paid for in cash. His wife came in and paid for the repair. As for Barbara, I never seen her scared like that. She was a London war bride that survived the Axis bombings, nothing seem to faze her before. Nice English accent.
Joelene
Old article about Meyer Blinder: http://www.microcapmarkets.com/penny-stocks/prince-of-penny-stocks.html (http://www.microcapmarkets.com/penny-stocks/prince-of-penny-stocks.html)
Sounds like he was related to Clinton Manges, who also reeked havoc in Texas, deal maker henchman for the Benson family (Lloyd Benson, Jr's father) that managed to get a $18million cash loan by verbal agreement from Seattle First Bank, reneged on it later and...B of A acquired SeaFirst...
So...what's the news from the Front?
Here's a link to OccupyWallStreet.org;
http://occupywallst.org/ (http://occupywallst.org/)
Not as fun as bashing Liberals or Bloodsucking Capitalists! :laugh:
Quote from: Amazon D on October 21, 2011, 06:12:43 PM
The leftist people i know are all hard workers and help others and are not greedy for themselves like most conservatives i know or have come in contact. Oh they might help their own kind if they have the extra but they are not ones to give to people they don't know. I know many leftist do give to people they don't know personally. The people you mention who do not want to work are people who were raised that way and i do not blame them because well that is how they were raised. Many conservatives ( i know) were raised to go after money and wealth over being caring people unless they have millions or are true christian like people.
You cannot get more lefty than China, wow ! You could not find a ssingle greedy leftyist in that workers paradise.
As for your true christian people all i can say is that I have seen their handy work in civilizing the Amazon indians. Whitin a generation of "accepting jesus" they lost their language and ability to live of the land, most males just become drunks and the females went into prostitution; but hey, they go to church every sunday, "praise the lord."
How much revenue we could make if we were to tax the churches across America ? I saw my ex-wife pastor the other day at the supermaket loading groceries into a brand new "Escalede." I said nice car ! He said: "Oh! it is not mine, it belongs to the church. Yeah, right, the car is drivin by him and his wife all the time, it is always parked outside his home.
Quote from: EmmaM on October 21, 2011, 06:02:05 PM
Michelle, I do enjoy a brisk political discussion :)
I've had to rely on those programs, and they don't work. Well, food aid does. I think we converge on some points, but wildly differ on others, and I like it. Makes this a more colorful place.
True, this is a great place.
Amazon. You got to be kidding me on liberal being more generous. Survey after survey show that conservatives give way more than liberals. Heck VP Biden and his wife give away a total of 6k a year on average. The hated Dick Cheney and his wife I believe give over a 100k a year.
I SHOP AT TARGE', thank you very much.
Finally. OWS age of innocence has ended. They have set an agenda, that runs days into the future!
Quote from: Michelle. on October 22, 2011, 12:46:33 AM
True, this is a great place.
Amazon. You got to be kidding me on liberal being more generous. Survey after survey show that conservatives give way more than liberals. Heck VP Biden and his wife give away a total of 6k a year on average. The hated Dick Cheney and his wife I believe give over a 100k a year.
I SHOP AT TARGE', thank you very much.
Finally. OWS age of innocence has ended. They have set an agenda, that runs days into the future!
See what i mean conservatives think in terms of amount while liberals think in terms of percentages.. I already said some rich conservatives give but they are rich so as jesus spoke about the poor widow who gave all she had compared to the rich man who gave more but it was only a fraction of what he had. Who then gave more !
Quote from: Michelle. on October 21, 2011, 05:29:36 PM
But what I find most offensive about these left-ist views is the everyone but me attitude. Everyone but me should work, pay taxes, suffer etc etc etc. Everyone else is too blame for my problems and short comings.
Therefore the left-ist feels they have the right to steal thru any means, the productivity of others. The left-"ist will gladly take free housing, food, medical, vacation etc etc etc... But a job? Heck who needs a job if their getting all that for free. But nothing is free, you stole it from someone else. Calling it taxes and fair is just a rationalization. RATIONing is more likely to occur.
You've just described about 1% of the population. And I'm sure someone could say the opposite about the right and only be 1% correct. The fact is there is more people in the middle than on both ends combined. It's a Bell Curve. And it's the people in the middle who have
...
lost their jobs
or
have seen their pay decrease against the cost of living
or
who have had to work longer hours for the same pay
or
who have watched their retirement money dwindle
or
who have seen their retirement vanish altogether
or
who have watched a lifetime of savings dwindle away
or
who have lost their homes
or
now own more on their home than it's worth
or
who have college debt equal to a mortgage
or
who now have to work two jobs to make ends meet.
These are hard working people who never asked for a handout and now no longer have what they used to despite the fact they have done everything they can to make things work. Now they are out of options.
That's what the OWS movement is REALLY about. That and identifying WHY we got where we are today and encouraging reversing the government actions that helped get us here in the first place. And yes, it was government intervention into the existing tax laws, investment laws, banking laws and real estate laws that helped create this. It was working and they "fixed" it. Now they have to undo what they did.
The substantial shift in wealth that has occurred over the past 30 years has resulted in a stagnant economy because all that money that used to fuel the economy is now sitting in the mattresses of the uber-wealthy. The so called job creators that the pro-wealthy/pro-corporation bills were supporting didn't create any jobs. The corporations eliminated them and reaped the rewards. Case in point: 2010 was a record year for corporate profits yet the unemployment rate was around 9%. That record, hit in the third quarter of 2010, was preceded by seven consecutive quarters of growth at some of the fastest rates in history. Remember the 2008 tax breaks corporations enjoyed? You do the math.
The supporters of taxing the rich and the corporations, like they used to be taxed, are your every day Joe's, the ones who used to be referred to as the backbone of America but are now called lazy because they can't find a job. The benefactors of the laws that got us here in the first place have done a great job spinning the truth so they can keep on enjoying their newfound mega-wealth. Look at how the Koch brothers bought the Tea Party.
I, for one, am not swallowing their BS.
Quote from: Jen61 on October 13, 2011, 06:38:13 PM
PS I work for your previous maters Tekla, and as long as I deliver the goods they do not give a s.. about my heels or my panties.
What woman wears heels and panties in this day and age? LMAO
There's a great article in the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204422404576596630897409182.html) that, based on everything I have seen and even experienced myself, hits the nail on the head.
QuoteEven with unemployment hovering around 9%, companies are grousing that they can't find skilled workers, and filling a job can take months of hunting.
Employers are quick to lay blame. Schools aren't giving kids the right kind of training. The government isn't letting in enough high-skill immigrants. The list goes on and on.
But I believe that the real culprits are the employers themselves.
I can hear it now, "The employers are to blame? It's not their fault you're a lazy bum!"
QuoteWith an abundance of workers to choose from, employers are demanding more of job candidates than ever before. They want prospective workers to be able to fill a role right away, without any training or ramp-up time.
In other words, to get a job, you have to have that job already. It's a Catch-22 situation for workers—and it's hurting companies and the economy.
I know so many people who are hard workers, highly skilled and have the experience necessary to do the job but still can't find a job to meet those skills. Employers don't want to pay them what they used to earn. They want the talent, except at entry level pay.
No wonder the corporations are doing so well.
Hey Herman Cain! Tell us about that 9% corporation tax plan again!
Julie,
When you say "experienced yourself", have you been to the "protests" in what ever area that you live?
In an earlier post I talked about being there and talking to "the regulars" but I wouldn't consider that being an active participant. But, in reference to my statement above, I'm talking about the expectations employers have of job candidates. It's kind of like, "I'm looking for a Ferrari for the price of a Yugo." When I was out of work and couldn't get anything from the union hall, I'd put out resumes, get responses, go on interviews and land a job. Sometimes I wondered what was wrong with the people who complained about finding a job. For me, it was easy.
In the last few years, I've found jobs online that fit me like a glove. My resume reads like their requirements. I figured I was a shoe in. I'd apply and never hear a peep. And I highly doubt they knew my past. I was even careful not to mention the year I graduated from college and to reduce the number of years experience so they couldn't use that to figure out my age. Still - zilch. My partner Julie has submitted hundreds upon hundreds of resumes, far more than me and she can't get a bite either. In her field, her resume is pretty impressive. Still, nothing. My daughter has steadily worked since junior year in high school, has an MBA from a prestigious college and graduated cum laude. She's working for a health club making about 30K/yr. because she can't find a real job.
Those are some of my personal experiences and one of the reasons I feel OWS is a good thing. In my 60 years on this earth, I've never seen anything like this. At one end you've got employers who want something for nothing and at the other end hard working talented people who have to settle for far less than the previous generations got. The record profits corporates have been enjoying tell you pretty much all you need to know about what's going on.
This video is at times scary but it tells a tale as to how we got where we are today.
DC Douglas' "Why #OccupyWallStreet? 4 Reasons." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK1MOMKZ8BI#)
One Of The Biggest Reasons People Are Mad Enough To Protest In One Eye-Opening Clip
http://front.moveon.org/one-of-the-biggest-reasons-people-are-mad-enough-to-protest-in-one-eye-opening-clip/?rc=fb.fan (http://front.moveon.org/one-of-the-biggest-reasons-people-are-mad-enough-to-protest-in-one-eye-opening-clip/?rc=fb.fan)
The Story of Citizens United v. FEC (2011) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5kHACjrdEY&feature=player_embedded#)
front.moveon.org
It's often referred to simply as Citizens United and it's unleashed an electoral monster on society.
The winter weather will shut them down. We will have to wait and see if they start up again in the Spring.
That could be interesting. You guys could block GOP primary voting places.
Quote from: Michelle. on October 25, 2011, 11:19:45 PM
The winter weather will shut them down. We will have to wait and see if they start up again in the Spring.
That could be interesting. You guys could block GOP primary voting places.
Yes, the President will be in town for his student loan debt speech and the first heavy snowstorm of the season is falling now. The main news around here is what a mess it is going to be for the morning rush!
Joelene
Quote from: Amazon D on October 25, 2011, 06:36:54 PM
One Of The Biggest Reasons People Are Mad Enough To Protest In One Eye-Opening Clip
That video should be featured at the next big Tea Party convention.
Quote from: Joelene9 on October 26, 2011, 01:45:12 AM
Yes, the President will be in town for his student loan debt speech
New Rule: If, after five years of trying, a graduate can't get a job in the field he or she earned a degree, the remaining debt from the school loan will be transferred to the school. I'll call it the
Education Lemon Law.
Quote from: Michelle. on October 25, 2011, 11:19:45 PM
The winter weather will shut them down. We will have to wait and see if they start up again in the Spring.
That could be interesting. You guys could block GOP primary voting places.
I believe that they will be there for the long haul. I remember a protest in a neighborhood I used to live in had a protest which last through most of the winter.
Quote from: Julie Marie on October 25, 2011, 05:03:04 PM
This video is at times scary but it tells a tale as to how we got where we are today.
DC Douglas' "Why #OccupyWallStreet? 4 Reasons." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK1MOMKZ8BI#)
I remember vividly the savings and loan scandal. The brokerage house I worked in received a bunch of this junk. I took on look and remarked to my colleagues that this is bad. That was in 1988. When I left the 1995 those junk certificates were still sitting in the vaults.
When all is said and done, and people who care go back and look at what happened it's going to be seen that the S&L robbery was just a prelude, a trial run if you will, for what happened on Wall Street. People, all that money did not just disappear. It went somewhere, and everybody in charge is extremely slow to ask that question, and to really pursue the next logical one - who got it? Where did all the money from inflating the price of homes (a very deliberate and long-term manipulation) to nearly insane levels, as much as 100% overvaluation in some places, where did that money end up? When something loses huge sums of money, for the most part, someone else makes that huge sum. Where did all the money the banks ended up losing flow to? Did it just evaporate? The government bailed out these investments by basically buying all of the investments that had become worthless, they spend $1 trillion dollars on worthless paper. Who sold that paper and made that money in the first place? Did they know it was worthless (or at least not nearly worth what they were selling it for)? Did they use faxs, telephone calls and computer services to sell it? How is that not wire fraud?
Or, how did it come to pass that the cost of a college education increased so rapidly (far in excess of other goods and services) at the exact time that the value of degree itself was becoming more diminished (as was the education behind it)?
Who was responsible for bringing on the cheering section to support home ownership, college degrees, and other kinds of investments, knowing that those investments were losing money, not gaining it?
Maybe this will wash out some of that money
BOMBSHELL - Massachusetts Supreme Court Rules That Most Foreclosure Sales From Previous 5 Years Are VOID
http://dailybail.com/home/bombshell-massachusetts-supreme-court-rules-that-most-forecl.html (http://dailybail.com/home/bombshell-massachusetts-supreme-court-rules-that-most-forecl.html)
Quote from: tekla on October 26, 2011, 03:21:32 PM
Where did all the money from inflating the price of homes (a very deliberate and long-term manipulation) to nearly insane levels, as much as 100% overvaluation in some places, where did that money end up? When something loses huge sums of money, for the most part, someone else makes that huge sum. Where did all the money the banks ended up losing flow to?
Oh, that question has been answered over and over. The answer is everywhere. And the answer is it moved from the bottom 95% into the hands of the top 5%. The higher up you are on the income scale, the higher percentage increase you have seen in you income.
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toomuchonline.org%2Fart_charts_2010%2Fsep_20_census.png&hash=5e7fb14008c5f747555e2676cfedd7f1d05131e3)
Quote from: gennee on October 26, 2011, 01:36:49 PM
I remember vividly the savings and loan scandal. The brokerage house I worked in received a bunch of this junk. I took on look and remarked to my colleagues that this is bad. That was in 1988. When I left the 1995 those junk certificates were still sitting in the vaults.
Yes, Genee I do remember the S&L scandal and the government backed Resolution Trust Corp. (RTC) that followed to take care of those junk and other assets. Not much was done here, no big boys involved paying restitution, no one indicted. Just a quiet sweeping under the rug, or vault in your case.
Joelene
occupy wall streets time = occupy protest protest How to really annoy the banks and finance companies This works... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgkSiyIUz_w&sns=fb#)
pass it on :)
And maybe once the banks have received enough wood and shingles, they can start building houses to house all the people who they threw out of their homes.
Thank you Mike for being an honorable cop !
A Message to All Police Officers From Occupy Wall Street (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUKeZLeGTDk&sns=fb#)
Quote from: Amazon D on October 29, 2011, 05:52:32 AM
pass it on :)
lol, just came here to post this, but you beat me to it by a long shot... ;D
He certainly makes some good points. I do see similarities between what is going on today and the protests during the Viet Nam war. And I do think things will continue to escalate. And if the local authorities act like they did back in the 60's, I see history repeating itself.
Many criticizers of the Viet Nam protests today weren't even alive when it happened. When I hear their hippie analogies, I just shake my head, knowing they weren't there. They didn't see good kids get drafted, then sent over to a foreign land, where they had to fight in jungle warfare, something they were woefully unprepared to do. They didn't see these kids become very different people and didn't hear the stories of using drugs just to make it through the hell they lived every day. They didn't see soldiers returning home only to be seen as outcasts, degenerates and lowlifes. No one would hire them. For some, even their families rejected them. Being made a soldier ruined their lives. I saw this and at times I cried.
Now that there is no draft, we see an attitude towards soldiers that is a total 180 from the Viet Nam days. Soldiers are again heroes, noble warriors, protectors of our freedom. The protests that happened during the Viet Nam era ushered in the end of the draft and helped make this possible. Because instead of being able to drag kids out of their lives and throw them into war, our government had to make fighting for this country a noble and honorable calling or they wouldn't have any soldiers to fight their wars.
So when I see soldiers like the sergeant in the video standing up for the average person and being seen as a hero, I'm happy our government has been so instrumental in making them heroes again. Because if this was the Viet Nam era, that sergeant wouldn't even have been given the time of day.
Being made a soldier ruined their lives. I saw this and at times I cried.
This is still true. We have a whole new generation who have gone through the Mideast, and war messes people up. They are just doing a much, much better job of hiding the whole thing. People care a lot less about our wars now that they are not on the damn news every night. And when the entire cost of the war was not paid by anyone, it was just taken out as a marker with Red China and our kids will have to cash it. But that's later, why worry now? Come on, relax. Thelma and Louise are in the drivers seat and riding shotgun, what could possible go wrong?
And I love it when people start calling out the hippie word. You do realize that for the most part, they were right?
Dirty F@#*ing Hippies Were Right! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKEZoY-TMG4#)
THE TRUTH ABOUT "OCCUPY THE PLANET" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IASIiMZzPE#)
so in the last decade we have gone from the extreme right to the middle to hopefully the left and to real freedom of speech but its gonna take all of us to get involved
http://www.facebook.com/groups/190620297682021/ (http://www.facebook.com/groups/190620297682021/) join this Facebook group
https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/ (https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/) see the declaration
http://www.petitiononline.com/99declar/petition.html (http://www.petitiononline.com/99declar/petition.html) sign the petition
pass the above to all your friends
http://occupychi.org/2011/10/07/our-proposed-demands/#more-879 (http://occupychi.org/2011/10/07/our-proposed-demands/#more-879)
Our PROPOSED Demands
These are the list of proposed demands. They will be up for vote tonight at 7pm @ 500 S Michigan Ave in front of the horse.
1.PASS HR 1489 REINSTATING GLASS-STEAGALL. – A depression era safeguard that separated the commercial lending and investment banking portions of banks. Its repeal in 1999 is considered the major cause of the global financial meltdown of 2008-2009.
2. REPEAL BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY
3. FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS who clearly broke the law and helped cause the 2008 financial crisis.
4.OVERTURN CITIZENS UNITED v. US. – A 2010 Supreme Court Decision which ruled that money is speech. Corporations, as legal persons, are now allowed to contribute unlimited amounts of money to campaigns in the exercise of free "speech."
5. PASS THE BUFFET RULE ON FAIR TAXATION, CLOSE CORPORATE TAX LOOPHOLES, PROHIBIT HIDING FUNDS OFFSHORE.
6. GIVE THE SEC STRICTER REGULATORY POWER, STRENGTHEN THE CONSUMER PROTECTION BUREAU, AND PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR OWNERS OF FORECLOSED MORTGAGES WHO WERE VICTIMS OF PREDATORY LENDING.
7.TAKE STEPS TO LIMIT THE INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AND ELIMINATE THE PRACTICE OF LOBBYISTS WRITING LEGISLATION.
8. ELIMINATE RIGHT OF FORMER GOVERNMENT REGULATORS TO WORK FOR CORPORATIONS OR INDUSTRIES THEY ONCE REGULATED.
9. ELIMINATE CORPORATE PERSONHOOD.
10. INSIST THE FEC STAND UP FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN REGULATING PRIVATE USE OF PUBLIC AIRWAVES to help ensure that political candidates ARE GIVEN EQUAL TIME for free at reasonable intervals during campaign season.
11. REFORM CAMPAIGN FINANCE WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE FAIR ELECTIONS NOW ACT (S.750, H.R. 1404).
12. FORGIVE STUDENT DEBT – The same institutions that gave almost $2T in bailouts and then extended $16T of loans at little to no interest for banks can surely afford to forgive the $946B of student debt currently held. Not only does this favor the 99% over the 1%, it has the practical effect of more citizens spending money on actual goods, not paying down interest.
And then use the above to help you decide who you will vote for in the next election. Maybe apathy wouldn't be so widespread if citizens used their votes as their voice. Too many adopt attitudes that ultimately result in losing the most powerful tool we have to control this country.
re: #4 and 9 - you have to start by nullifying Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 118 U.S. 394 (1886). And it should be done, at the very least we should have a serious national conversation about the topic. To help ease the pain, I'm going to drop corporate taxes, which are either a joke, or just directly passed on to the consumer.
#7 yes, but 8 is problematic, as those people are in fact the experts, knowing more about the topic and facts than just about anyone else. I'd like to see it slowed somewhat, but I'm not sure how.
I don't have a problem with #8 because odds are those people were already being enriched by the industries they regulated while holding government regulator positions.
"Hey, while I hold this office I'll give you guys some breaks so long as when I leave office you guys have a nice job waiting for me." Yeah, I don't trust 'em.
The whole corporations are people thing has a number of problems. According to Mitt Romney, corporations are people because the money corporations earn eventually goes to the people. I think what he was alluding to was since people make up corporations, corporations are people. If that is the gist of this whole thing, then any organization made up of people is a person too. And while the capitalists may like the idea of corporations having a say so in our government, the Christians might have a major problem with the Church of Satan having the same rights.
Another problem is duality. A member of a corporation has their own voice. And the corporation they are a member of has their own voice. So each member of a corporation has two voices. Isn't that double dipping?
Then there's conflict. The corporate voice may not be expressing the voice a given member wants to be heard. The typical corporate voice will be focused on corporate profits and little else. The member voice may only care about profits to the extent it directly effects them. But they may have plenty of other things they would like their corporate voice to focus on.
The reality is the corporate voice is determined by the people on top and they use that power to say what they want to be heard and give little or no consideration to what the rest of the members want to be heard.
People are humans and humans are people. Corporations are not human nor are they people.
My anarchist friends tell me that, "No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in."
http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/10/21/the-campaign-for-co-operative-socialism-part-i/ (http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/10/21/the-campaign-for-co-operative-socialism-part-i/)
http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/10/23/the-campaign-for-co-operative-socialism-part-ii-2/ (http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/10/23/the-campaign-for-co-operative-socialism-part-ii-2/)
http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/10/25/the-campaign-for-co-operative-socialism-part-iii/ (http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/10/25/the-campaign-for-co-operative-socialism-part-iii/)
http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/the-campaign-for-co-operative-socialism-part-iv/ (http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/the-campaign-for-co-operative-socialism-part-iv/)
http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/10/29/the-campaign-for-co-operative-socialism-part-v/ (http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/10/29/the-campaign-for-co-operative-socialism-part-v/)
http://www.facebook.com/OffGridPeople#!/pages/The-Shift/109438815833127
The Shift
"The challenge of our time is to reclaim our power from the elite. Let's face it, if we had our own local government, local currency, local food production and local energy production, we wouldn't need the elite, their corporations and their phony governments controlled by them. If we stopped working hard to run their systems and, instead, created our own systems, owned and controlled by us, we would be free from them and we would starve their corrupt systems to oblivion."
............................................. ................................................................... ..................
http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/occupy-movement-must-start-organizing-in-cafes-to-reclaim-the-commons/ (http://theshifthub.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/occupy-movement-must-start-organizing-in-cafes-to-reclaim-the-commons/)
Occupy Movement Must Start Organizing in Cafes to Reclaim the Commons
Posted on November 1, 2011 by nguedes| Leave a comment
By Nelson Guedes
Photograph: Tibor Bognar/Corbis
As the occupations continue to grow across the country and around the globe, I wonder what the next step will be and I can't help to ask myself rather the occupiers realize how incredibly powerful they are. For countless years, we have been apart; we have been disconnected from each other. We have forgotten our collective inner power, the power of the People. I believe that if the Occupy Movement wants to succeed, we must find that power within us and manifest that power in our actions. In this article, I touch on the subject of that inner power and how to bring that out and manifest it in the physical plane.
From Demands to Empowerment
There's a reason the status quo wants the Occupy Movement to give them demands. They want us to have demands. Why? Because when we acknowledge that we have demands for them, we are giving away our power to them – we are acknowledging that they have the power and we have no say. When we have demands, we acknowledge that they own us and we must beg them for change. They want us to think that way, so that we don't discover our inner power. The truth is that WE have the power. The only reason the plutocrats are in power is because we have willfully given our power to them in exchange for convenience. This convenience can be found in the energy that powers our houses, the trucks that bring food to our supermarkets and, ultimately, the phony representatives that were supposed to be working for us. It is time to reject their convenience and reclaim our power.
Reclaiming Our Power
The challenge of our time is to reclaim our power from the elite. Let's face it, if we had our own local government, local currency, local food production and local energy production, we wouldn't need the elite, their corporations and their phony governments controlled by them. If we stopped working hard to run their systems and, instead, created our own systems, owned and controlled by us, we would be free from them and we would starve their corrupt systems to oblivion.
In order to achieve this goal of reclaiming our power, there are several requirements we must meet, many which I have already mentioned, but should be studied further in articles to come. For now, we must take one step forward towards our freedom and establish a permanent network that we can use to organize ourselves.
Back to the Traditional Way
In the old days, when the governments ceased to work for the People and instead worked in the interest of the elite, the People would meet in cafes to organize against their common foe. Likewise, we must go back to our roots and organize in our cafes. This time, we must go beyond the old days and, instead of working to bring down an old system, we must build a brand new one, owned and controlled by us.
There are a few reasons why we must start organizing in cafes. First of all, there are more cafes then there are parks and other open public spaces. Organizing in more spaces will increase our visibility and will allow us to connect with more people. Second, a permanent occupation is not required in cafes. We could collaborate with cafe owners to make a visible poster listing all our weekly meetings. Such a poster would be working on our behalf while we go back home and recharge. Third, as more people get exposed to the message, we can then expand on both the frequency of assemblies in cafes and our reach – the number of cafes we hold assemblies at. Fourth, cafes are easier spaces to organize at as they are not exposed to the weather and are unlikely to attract the attention of the police. Finally, organizing in cafes will helps us reshape our culture, refocusing our culture to our communities, our neighbors and community engagement for the sake of our community's health and the future of our children.
In conclusion, it is important to realize that Organizing in Cafes is no substitute for Occupying Public Spaces. Organizing in cafes is just a step forward, an addition to what we are already doing in our occupations. Furthermore, if we want to truly change the way our society works, we must be the change we want to see and transform our society with our actions. We must organize ourselves, creating permanent networks for organized action. By creating such networks, we establish the foundation necessary to create the alternative systems we need to reclaim our power from the elite.
Nelson Guedes spent much of his life researching the connections between several subjects, such as Philosophy, Psychology, Politics and Economics, in an effort to find the root causes of global problems and their solutions. The result is a complete, comprehensive and, yet, simple understanding of how the universe works and how we can collectively work together to maximize the benefits of our collective actions.
Further Reading:
- Coffee and revolution
Yeah, there was a nice sign at the Occupy Santa Rosa (and really, who wouldn't want to? right next to the Luther Burbank Gardens and all) camp that read "I'll believe corporations are persons when Texas executes one." Back in the very different days of the 80s/90s I always had a huge section on SCC v SPR in any history class I taught where it pertained, and in all my AmGov classes because it was so important to the rise of total corporate domination of the American - and eventually the world - economy, and increasingly dictates to the society and culture of everyplace also.
Capitalists should not mind the absence of corporate power in politics because they (the capitalistic people) will still have a massive say in what goes on.
But we (or at least any of us unfortunate enough to live in some designated 'swing' area) are going to experience such a deluge of political ads all of which come from some nebulous source where the funding is hazy and no one will really know who is funding what, in the next election. It's going to be massive and almost brutal. We'll see what people say after that.
A hodge podge goverment will be better than what we have.. It may even work ;)
Are Unions persons? If so, why not Corporations?
Keep Unions out of things. Plus deny government employees collective bargaining rights and you have a starting point in regards to corporations.
Quote from: Michelle. on November 02, 2011, 02:13:54 AM
Are Unions persons? If so, why not Corporations?
Keep Unions out of things. Plus deny government employees collective bargaining rights and you have a starting point in regards to corporations.
Union members vote where they spend their money and besides they are american, whereas corporations have CEO's and boards who decide and many are multinational and not aligned with any country and definately not all american.
My union has a Political Education Fund. The members do not vote on how all that money is spent but they can opt out of contributing. But there's also the dues. Some of that money goes to political action. Not all of that is directed by member votes but if the officers do anything the members disagree with there will be an uproar and an ousting, if it's severe enough.
But there's no way unions are structured like corporations. Union officers cannot fire a union member but union members can fire a union officer. That's very different from corporations.
Still, the idea any big money organization is allowed to influence elections is, to me, completely contrary to what this country stands for. This is supposed to be a government of the people, by the people and for the people. That effort is lost when organizations are allowed to dump millions into election campaigns. The people elected by that influence become of the organization, by the organization and for the organization puppets.
Quote from: Michelle. on November 02, 2011, 02:13:54 AM
Are Unions persons? If so, why not Corporations?
Keep Unions out of things. Plus deny government employees collective bargaining rights and you have a starting point in regards to corporations.
Eh? Corporations
are people in the U.S, as dumb as that sounds
I know that and agree with that also.
You don't like who/what "someone" supports? Form your own PAC and or 538.
Occupy Oakland had a coup with their general strike Wednesday. Getting people to be part of a general strike is rarely successful.
Oakland turns to first general strike in 65 years (http://rt.com/usa/news/oakland-general-strike-city-425/)
They also took over one of the nation largest ports and damaged property.
The media will roll the fires and police response for the next few news cycles.
The Occupy movement has now been co opted by the criminal element, like it was more than that to begin with.
Now we know the real Obama/Dems, rioters and looters par excellence.
Quote from: Michelle. on November 03, 2011, 12:49:39 PM
They also took over one of the nation largest ports and damaged property.
The media will roll the fires and police response for the next few news cycles.
The Occupy movement has now been co opted by the criminal element, like it was more than that to begin with.
Now we know the real Obama/Dems, rioters and looters par excellence.
Your so stereotypical teaparty. Many Occupy protestors do not like Obama. Alse they do not agree with radicals and those who commit crimes.. Many times the police put instigators to stir up trouble to make the 95% peaceful ones look bad. Its happened many many times and the police have been caught and admitted to doing it.
I never saw any, not one, news report of mass arrests at any Tea Party event. Nor destruction of property. Nor outright riots against the police.
Those kind of events are what will shape the general publics view of this so called Occupy movement.
Sad, the Occupy movement actually had a passing moment where their best ideas could have been blended with those of the Tea Party. Remember the basis of their start? It was the bank and AIG bailouts. Nothing says 1% like the bailouts.
Quote from: Michelle. on November 03, 2011, 09:34:27 PM
I never saw any, not one, news report of mass arrests at any Tea Party event. Nor destruction of property. Nor outright riots against the police.
Those kind of events are what will shape the general publics view of this so called Occupy movement.
Sad, the Occupy movement actually had a passing moment where their best ideas could have been blended with those of the Tea Party. Remember the basis of their start? It was the bank and AIG bailouts. Nothing says 1% like the bailouts.
All from this: "Too big to fail"! This is an epic worldwide
FAIL.
Joelene
Quote from: Michelle. on November 03, 2011, 09:34:27 PM
Sad, the Occupy movement actually had a passing moment where their best ideas could have been blended with those of the Tea Party. Remember the basis of their start? It was the bank and AIG bailouts. Nothing says 1% like the bailouts.
Tea Party wouldn't tolerate their rioting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/us/protest-in-oakland-turns-violent.html?_r=1 (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/us/protest-in-oakland-turns-violent.html?_r=1)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_bloc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_bloc)
http://redgreenandblue.org/2011/11/03/black-bloc-radicals-tried-to-derail-occupy-oaklands-general-strike/ (http://redgreenandblue.org/2011/11/03/black-bloc-radicals-tried-to-derail-occupy-oaklands-general-strike/)
Black Bloc Provocateurs Vandalize Property During Occupy Oakland's General Strike (11-02-2011) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWHjPdAS1oU#)
It's really unfortunate. The effective and peaceful shutting down of the port was respectable, but the property damage elsewhere in the city is just going to give Fox more ammo. Many involved did not approve and were trying to stop it from happening.
Quote from: Mahsa the disco shark on November 04, 2011, 01:21:40 AM
Tea Party wouldn't tolerate their rioting.
You mean the Koch brothers
wouldn't tolerate their rioting. The Tea Party doesn't want to lose their support.
I have never seen a bigger bunch of confused people. But as with all gatherings of confused people, they are easy to led. Big money pulls their strings and they don't even know it.
___corrected positive to negative
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 04, 2011, 07:48:30 AM
You mean the Koch brothers would tolerate their rioting. The Tea Party doesn't want to lose their support.
I have never seen a bigger bunch of confused people. But as with all gatherings of confused people, they are easy to led. Big money pulls their strings and they don't even know it.
Where is that like button when you need one ;)
Its crazy how upper middle class peeps like to think they are a part of the 1% by supporting their side... spoiled white girls ::) and even those right wing evangelicals who have no true love for their brother like jesus taught :'( may God have mercy on their souls :angel:
The results are still the same. The polling on the OWS has turned upside down. A plurality now disapproves.
On the whole Tea Party thing, way to throw insults. How, how liberal of you. Or does your side still prefer the term Progressive? What is the unused up, undamaged term these days?
Speaking of labeling... ::)
As far as the Tea Party being confused, what I'm talking about is the things they stand for and how they are in conflict with each other. According to their many websites (I don't know which one is the official one), they want reduced taxation and a reduction of the national debt and federal budget. Matt Kibbe, president and CEO of Freedom Works and big time Tea Party supporter, was on a talk show. He was asked how we do this. His answer was all over the board until, after the host tried to pin him down to a plan, he simply stood by the need to reduce taxes, government spending, the budget but still keep this country strong. Great idea, but none of those touting it can figure out how to do it without hurting this country and its citizens.
The Tea Party want a strong military but smaller government. How are they going to pay for that military with reduced tax revenue while trying to pay down the national debt?
They want less government intervention, even in the face of the fact that corporations, banks and Wall Street can't be trusted to regulate themselves. Alan Greenspan, the guy who helped usher in deregulation, even admitted to that. Yet they seem to be pro-big money and have accepted generous "donations" from billionaires such as the Koch brothers.
They are pro-domestic employment, want gainful employment for US citizens and the ability to earn a decent wage yet support the same people who have helped stagnate wages, demanded more of their employees, laid off workers and sent jobs overseas.
They claim "Judeo-Christian values are embedded in our founding documents" yet there is abundant evidence that most, if not all of, of our founding fathers felt religious beliefs had no place in government. Some of our founding fathers were atheists. Why would they embed religious values in our founding documents? The answer is, they didn't.
They claim the Constitution is inherently conservative. Have they really read it? Do they know the history of how it was formed? Our Founding Fathers were rebels, protesters, and anything but conservative. The were more like the OWS people than the Tea Party people. They stood up to the conservative beliefs of their "homeland" and fought to break free of that. They didn't throw rocks or set fires in garbage cans, they shot guns and canons at the people defending their conservative government and today are considered heroes.
And then there's their "traditional family values" belief. It reminds me of the drum beating done by Focus on the Family, the National Organization for Marriage and the American Family Association. These, and others like them, are organizations that would take every one of us and throw us into reparative therapy if they could. Does that mean supporting the Tea Party is in conflict with supporting a pro-LGBT attitude? It certainly looks like it. The "traditional family values" slogan has long been used to repress individuals, encourage conformity and create a pro-religious environment. I don't see this attitude in our founding documents.
I don't label my perspective with ideology, it's just common sense. You can't stand for two things that oppose one another. And supporting some one or some thing that opposes your life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is self destructive.
Finally a down to earth, God honest way of fighting the "man".
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BANK_TRANSFER_DAY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-11-04-19-26-20 (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BANK_TRANSFER_DAY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-11-04-19-26-20)
Next, those who moved will bitch about the lack of free ATMs.
You do make some interesting points about the Tea Party, JM.
I imagine their power is waning. Soon they will roll back into the GOP.
The scary thing about both OWS and the Tea Party to me is the Populist nature of it all.
Thats the type of stuff that ends with bloodshed.
Quote from: Michelle. on November 06, 2011, 01:07:50 AM
Finally a down to earth, God honest way of fighting the "man".
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BANK_TRANSFER_DAY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-11-04-19-26-20 (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BANK_TRANSFER_DAY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-11-04-19-26-20)
Next, those who moved will bitch about the lack of free ATMs.
You do make some interesting points about the Tea Party, JM.
I imagine their power is waning. Soon they will roll back into the GOP.
The scary thing about both OWS and the Tea Party to me is the Populist nature of it all.
Thats the type of stuff that ends with bloodshed.
This worldwide financial unraveling and its associated hardship will pale in comparison with the food-, water-, and energy-shortages coming in just but a few years. What ? you may say ! well, the carrying capacity of earth is 6.4 billion, we just reached the 7 billion mark.
What is the solution ? Lowering the developed contries (everybody but Africa) standard of living will help, but not for too long. In the absence of "miracle technologies," what is the solution ?
Some food for thought.
Jen61
PS. The 1% is fully aware of this dilemma/problem, they are trying to find a solution, but there is no plan !
--Sad, the Occupy movement actually had a passing moment where their best ideas could have been blended with those of the Tea Party.
--Tea Party wouldn't tolerate their rioting.
Wouldn't the Tea Party have to climb off their hover-round (paid for with government money) first?
One is a fake invention of some political operatives and a TV network the other is truly that kind of grass roots
Those two groups were never within 100 parsecs of each other.
At the most basic level the intellectual foundation of the Tea Party is found in one of my favorite Tea Party rally signs (well aside from the classic "keep government out of my Medicare" which is uniquely clueless) is: No New, Fix Old. At heart and in vision the Tea Party, like most of the extreme right wants to go back to the 1950s when everything was (at least for them) swell.
On the other hand, the people of occupy think much more along the lines of that famous Street Artist/Rapper/TV Cop Ice-T, who in his blended treste using a rap style over a hardcore punk music looked at the the reality of life in inner city America vs. the images of everyday life on TV in shows like Leave It To Beaver and said: ->-bleeped-<- ain't like that, it's real ->-bleeped-<-ed up.
One group sees a few problems, that with some application of classical political solutions would lead us back to the glory days of the Shinning City on the Hill were the now happy Tea Party could live out the rest of their lives frolicking in their own version of the Elysian Fields (which has no blacks, no Mexicans, No gays and where women know their place). The other sees problems that are systemic, intractable, and rapidly becoming terminal.
And anyone who thinks - even remotely - that somewhere between No new, fix old, and ->-bleeped-<- ain't like that, it's real ->-bleeped-<-ed up there was a passing moment where there could have been a magical agreement between the two, well that person couldn't be more wrong.
At any rate, it's not about 'will it stick' but 'will it spread.' The way I see it, for several years now many people were predicting the economic instability we were facing would lead to protests, and ultimately riots and civil unrest if it continued. Now we are seeing that. It may not be bad yet, but I think it will inevitably will get worse because the economic situation isn't improving.
I spend a couple of nights down at the Santa Rosa occupy, and a few at the SF occupy. Not being a big TV watcher, and like all big-time newpaper readers I have this thing about seeing it for myself.
If that's all it is, and all it amount to then enjoy your protests, kids, because it's not happening. You're gonna meet the new boss same as the old boss. We've seen this movie before. 1968. 1977. 1999. Its always the same damn thing, a bunch of idealists and fringers thinks they're going to change things, and in the end does absolfarkinglutely nothing but rile a few feathers and get their names in self-congratulatory wiki pages or books. Meanwhile power continues to concentrate, people continue to be marginalized, and eventually you find a way to sort of survive on your own ... til the next bubble or the next upheaval you had no hand in causing yet are being the victim of.
But, what the right finds scary about all this is not the Occupy stuff, but the notion that we currently have a number of groups that could join in on something/anything that at root encapsulates their live at this moment at SALT,IRFU who could find common cause, who have common problems, and who have (and this is the scary part) nothing really left to lose anymore. They had the chance already to drink the Kool-Aid of 'gee, wasn't it better before and should we not go back there' and rejected it.
Not about the validity of any of the claims, but about the reality that there are a lot of people out there who feel they have been wronged.
- Homeowners underwater and those who have lost pretty much all the money they ever had in real estate over the past 10 or so years.
- students with huge loans outstanding and no job at the level of their training and ability, and no real outlook of one either.
Add in the following groups that more than likely overlay some of the above.
- people who want to see a repeal of 'corporate person-hood.'
- people who want to see the domestic police state rolled back, particularly in the areas of the Patriot Act and drug laws.
- Peace groups/anti-imperial groups - END THE ->-bleeped-<-ING WARS, BRING THE TROOPS HOME, KEEP THE TROOPS HOME.
- Environmental groups
And, (this is critical), they have to get the support of the Trade Union Movement who are the one group of people who actually have the power to pretty much Shut Down Everything.
Real revolution has not started, and from the looks of it as well as from American history, probably won't. I did say probably. But that is still highly unlikely because most Americans remain pretty much incapable of electing anything but another criminal, or in holding accountable any actual responsible party. Or even in agreeing who those responsible parties are.
JM and Tekla, good points.
About drugs. Unleash 'em. The pot in particular. I believe it was Nixon who said, "a drug smoking student, is a non protesting student." >:-) Tricky Dicky, gotta love him.
Though concentration of wealth and/or power will all ways be a problem. The Cuban economy has 90% of the money held by 13% of the population. Even there folks have managed to amass bank accounts of some $200k. The people doing it, small farmers. They where the first to be allowed to sell excess goods.
Your always going to have capitalism, or at least in some form.
The question now is starting to moves towards. Do you want a revolution or a reformation?
Julie, we can agree on one thing. I am not giving up my western lifestyle either. Yes, we should be more accepting of homosexual relationships. Hecks, peeps like us could even adopt the little darlings of those who have no earthly business being around kids.
I though believe in GROWING THE PIE!!!
Quote from: Michelle. on November 06, 2011, 11:29:18 PM
About drugs. Unleash 'em. The pot in particular. I believe it was Nixon who said, "a drug smoking student, is a non protesting student." >:-) Tricky Dicky, gotta love him.
Well something we agree on. Yes the leaders have known to relax drug laws or arrest to get the people stoned so they could move on with their rip off the poor agenda.. It happened before and its gonna happen again..
and for Tekla
IT HAPPENED BEFORE IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN
... where will you be when it happens ??
We are the 99 percent (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ILgfDhAEKQ#)
Kat, you said something I really didn't want to hear or believe but I've seen it too - If that's all it is, and all it amount to then enjoy your protests, kids, because it's not happening. You're right. And I was in denial. I keep thinking this thing will escalate. But I fear it won't.
The last time there was a real protest in this country was 40 years ago. Kids were dying in a war only the hawks and war corporations believed in. And for the first time we got to see real war right there in our living rooms. We were shocked. Until then the horrors of war were only chronicled in books and stories. A nation was stunned. And that fueled the angry fire.
I don't see the same kind of emotion with OWS as I did with Viet Nam. So maybe things have to get worse before they get better. Maybe having little chance at achieving the American Dream isn't as compelling as seeing kids your age on TV get their heads blown off.
We had Kent State. And things got even more real.
So what is there now to compare to that?
A recent article talked about the difference of net worth for the under 35 and over 65 and looked at it from 1980 to the present. In 1980 the net worth of 65 and over was said to be about 10 times that of the 35 and under. Of course, if you're 65 it's expected you will have a higher net worth. So 10 times isn't surprising.
Today that multiplier has risen to 47. Almost 5 times more than what it was 30 years ago.
Most of the net worth for the 65 and over crowd comes from home ownership. Today's kids can't even pay their school loans let alone support a mortgage. What lies for them in the future?
And maybe that's what has to be drilled into our heads. So many of us are somewhat apathetic to the OWS movement. The media, et al, has done a great job marginalizing OWS and painting them as hippies, losers and clowns. But these kids have it right. You can put away the sunglasses because the future doesn't look so bright.
Forty years ago, we had an advantage, our sheer numbers. We were the first generation to win the war against our parents because we simply outnumbered them. Now the baby boomer generation, the ones with the numbers, has forgotten why we fought back then, for our future, and we can't see or don't care about the future of our kids. That's something I just don't get.
The pie can't grow unless you add more ingredients to it and the ingredients have dried up. Herman Cain says if you can't find a job it's your fault. What he won't say is the "job creators" aren't making them like they used to. And many that do send the jobs overseas or across the boarder.
I got older but I never got old. You could see me at a Rush concert playing air guitar with Lifeson, pounding on the drums with Peart or singing along with Geddy, totally into it, right there with the youngest of them. And it's my inability to forget my youth that keeps me young and makes me feel a connection to what the kids today face.
It's real folks. And I fear for my kids and for the future of this country. And somewhere in the back of my mind echoes something I've heard many times over the years, no democracy has ever lasted more than 200 years. But then again, are we really today a democracy... or a plutocracy?
Cheer up folks.
Thank God we haven't gotten to the point of a Kent State II. Hopefully their will never again be a '68 DNC. Nor the assassinations of the '60's.
The wealth gap? Our country has gotten that much more prosperous. An under 35 year old is living better and healthier than their parent did in 1980.
College costs? I feel sorry for the chemical engineering grad who is swamped in debt. Not the art history or the dead languages major. Someone needs to force these kids into see a career counselor, before senior year. Preferably before sophomore year.
Social work and teaching are noble professions. But does someone need a small liberal arts school, with that debt load? How about a public school?
How about getting young people into the trades? We need welders, carpenters, mason etc etc over the next twenty years. How about air traffic controllers and nuclear power plant operators.
Those jobs sent overseas? In the next 5-10 years they will come back in a big way. Why? A rising tide lifts all boats. Costs in Asia plus transportation means manufacturing is to begin to return to the US. The car companies, both Asia and Europe are building models here, that sell here.
Immigration. On that the nativist element, partly tea party, can go straight to hell. We need immigrants. From a demographics there's several donut holes ahead. Mostly due to the Boomers retiring.
Are best days are still ahead of us.
Your drinking the Kool Aid
We're getting pretty close to using live rounds at some of these protests. The last two conventions didn't look like exercises in democracy at all, they looked - because they were - armed camps to keep the demonstrators away. Where do you think come summer the two big Occupy sites are going to be? I'll predict the two convention towns.
That prosperity (largely driven by gains in productively) has not been shared, in fact the direct opposite. Hence the protests.
Those jobs have gone away and are not coming back, it's a long, long way from the couple of buck a day they can pay people elsewhere, besides as the markets expand it only makes sense to make the stuff where it's being sold.
Where is the magic cheap energy that will propel all this expansion? It ain't. All energy from here on out will be ever more expensive to create, and will be being sold in a market where many more people will be bidding on it.
The jobs that are being created are not the jobs that create a rising middle class, but one that creates an ever more entrenched poverty cycle.
It's not that we're in a lull, it's that the entire course of the last 30 years went in another direction and that's a lot harder to change.
I still don't believe things are as bad as your making them our to be.
The groups at the conventions last time are in a large way the trouble makers at the OWS camps. The same group that for the past 15-20 years has shown up at every g20 type summit.
As far as civil unrest goes, were no where near the riots of the late 60's. Sorry, but society dosent seem to want a revolution, they want reform.
Quote from: tekla on November 06, 2011, 08:47:39 PM
And, (this is critical), they have to get the support of the Trade Union Movement who are the one group of people who actually have the power to pretty much Shut Down Everything.
Real revolution has not started, and from the looks of it as well as from American history, probably won't. I did say probably. But that is still highly unlikely because most Americans remain pretty much incapable of electing anything but another criminal, or in holding accountable any actual responsible party. Or even in agreeing who those responsible parties are.
Yesterday the trade unions were solidly behind voting against Ohio's Issue 2, a law that denied union workers the right of collective bargaining, among other anti-union measures. Issue 2 died by garnering only 38% of the vote. It was a huge defeat for Republican governor John Kasich, who has been a champion for anti-union laws in this country. In his "concession" speech he seemed to be trembling. I've never seen this normally cocky guy so humble.
Gov. Kasich Reacts To Issue 2 Defeat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkEU8H_m_RY#)
From what I saw last night, it looks like a few finally realized the power of the vote and how important it is to vote for that which you truly believe in rather than that which you've been told to support.
But on the other front, the vast majority of incumbents up for re-election kept their jobs. There's still a lot of work to be done.
Quote from: Michelle. on November 08, 2011, 09:17:56 PM
The groups at the conventions last time are in a large way the trouble makers at the OWS camps. The same group that for the past 15-20 years has shown up at every g20 type summit.
You have to remember, our founding fathers were once considered troublemakers. Every government of the people, by the people and for the people has to have a revolt once in a while. People attracted to power have an insatiable appetite. So when they get too big for their britches, we have to remind them we actually have the power. And while we will allow them to take a bigger piece of the pie, they have to remember we're gonna get pissed is they take too much. And, if allowed, they always do.
JM, two points.
1. In Ohio the opt out of "Obama Care" initiative passed by a margin similar to that of the union bill.
I think that translates to, all politics are local. That and the GOP really overreached with the union bill. That would have stripped even fire fighters and cops of bargaining rights.
2. I'd like to think that Jefferson wasn't being literal in regards to the "tree of liberty" quote.
Up here in Canada we have the same movement going on. Honestly, I don't know what they are protesting. If they want to enact real political change they should get involved in the political process. They should vote. Voter turnout has been abysmal in the last couple decades.
My problem is that people don't seem to see that there are two kinds of 'right and left'.
First is social 'left'. IMO most people are socially left wing. They believe in minority rights, and other socially left issues. On the socially right is the religious conservatives. These people are scary...
Second is the fiscal left and right. I have lived under a fiscal left wing party and watched the economy go into a recession when the rest of the world was having one of the largest economic booms in history. Those on the fiscal left are the socialists who believe that government should solve their problems. On the right is the 'less tax and smaller government' types. IMO most people lean towards the fiscally right. I'm not saying total capitalist anarchy... regulations still need to be in place.
The problem I see in the US is this...
Republicans : fiscally right wing, socially right wing
Democrats : fiscally left wing, socially left wing.
What the public wants is a party that is
socially left wing, fiscally right wing. Unfortunately such a party doesn't exist. The US elections are won/lost on what type of 'right/left' issue is given more prominence.. social or fiscal.
No extreme is good for the people in general. Balance is what is necessary. Reasonable. Common sense. Practical. You will find that mostly in Moderates. Both extremes have criticized Moderates. Rush Limbaugh says they can't make up their mind, as if being Republican or Democrat is all there is. Yet neither has all the answers. And why should they? They are on the two sides. It's in the middle you will find most people.
The problem is the extremes is where you will find the highly emotional people. And they are the ones who scream the loudest. Too often people need to get passionate about something, emotionally invested, before they will do anything. And the political puppet masters know this. And they know which string to pull and when.
Until the stable, reasonable, common sense people get vocal, I think we will continue to see the two sides duking it out and we'll be right there, in the middle, getting stepped on like a mat.
I seen through history of governments that when the extremes get in, human rights get trampled. These people get into power with a promise of more freedoms and better human rights. None of those have lived up to their promises. A few of those dictators were academics or have been advised by those who were academicians. All in moderation.
Joelene, a moderate
I am obliged to confess I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University. William F. Buckley Jr
RIP, WFBjr.
I'm sure that WFB didn't have the Tea Party in mind.
Heh
Save the Rich by Garfunkel and Oates (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_M8fOwHnwg0#)
I think we will continue to see the two sides duking it out
Which sucks, because no matter who wins, we all lose. Neither of the old line 'sides' really have any solution to the problems we are now facing. They are both 19th Century political thought applied (and found wanting) for the 21st Century.
And the voters are an integral part of keeping the two sides strong. It doesn't take a genius to deduce that the only thing a politician has to do well is get votes. And anyone paying attention sees that can be easily done with polarizing sound bites, clever slogans and promising everything.
Wise people learn from their mistakes, geniuses learn from the mistakes of others. The rest never learn.
What does that say about the voting public in general?
What's it say when the only person on the Republican Debate the other night who seemed sane and rational is the one in last place?
Quote from: tekla on November 10, 2011, 10:02:22 AM
What's it say when the only person on the Republican Debate the other night who seemed sane and rational is the one in last place?
My brother who has been a life long republican said to me the other day that the republican party is now the wacko party whereas it use to be the democrats. He is a college professor in mathmatics and has a law degree.
I think Bill Maher (though it could be any number of others) said that the Democrats moved to the right and became the Republicans, and the Republicans moved into the insane asylum and became the inmates.
Quote from: tekla on November 10, 2011, 10:58:31 AM
I think Bill Maher (though it could be any number of others) said that the Democrats moved to the right and became the Republicans, and the Republicans moved into the insane asylum and became the inmates.
I watch Maher every week (that he's on) but I missed that one. I'm not prone to sudden outbursts of laughter, but that one got me. Maybe it's because I watched the Republican debate last night and they all looked like asylum inmates... well...except Huntsman. He hasn't a chance. You gotta be the bull goose looney to win the GOP bid.
This is a clip from backstage just before the debate began last night.
One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest - The mental defective league (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnUG_8jQGvY#)
http://www.truth-out.org/time-economic-bill-rights/1320938466 (http://www.truth-out.org/time-economic-bill-rights/1320938466)
http://economics.arawakcity.org/node/674 (http://economics.arawakcity.org/node/674)
Now Is the Time for an Economic Bill of Rights
Friday 11 November 2011
by: Ellen Brown, Truthout | News Analysis
We are beginning to understand that our money is not created by the federal government, but by banks.
Henry Ford said, "It is well enough that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."
We are beginning to understand, and Occupy Wall Street looks like the beginning of the revolution.
We are beginning to understand that our money is created, not by the government, but by banks. Many authorities have confirmed this, including the Federal Reserve itself. The only money the government creates today are coins, which compose less than one ten-thousandth of the money supply. Federal Reserve Notes, or dollar bills, are issued by Federal Reserve banks, all 12 of which are owned by the private banks in their district. Most of our money comes into circulation as bank loans, and it comes with an interest charge attached.
According to Margrit Kennedy, a German researcher who has studied this issue extensively, interest now composes 40 percent of the cost of everything we buy. We don't see it on the sales slips, but interest is exacted at every stage of production. Suppliers need to take out loans to pay for labor and materials before they have a product to sell.
For government projects, Kennedy found that the average cost of interest is 50 percent. If the government owned the banks, it could keep the interest and get these projects at half price. That means governments - state and federal - could double the number of projects they could afford, without costing the taxpayers a single penny more than we are paying now.
This opens up exciting possibilities. Federal and state governments could fund all sorts of things we think we can't afford now, simply by owning their own banks. They could fund something Franklin D. Roosevelt and Martin Luther King dreamt of - an Economic Bill of Rights.
A Vision for Tomorrow
In his first inaugural address in 1933, Roosevelt criticized the sort of near-sighted Wall Street greed that precipitated the Great Depression. He said, "They only know the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision, and where there is no vision the people perish."
Roosevelt's own vision reached its sharpest focus in 1944, when he called for a Second Bill of Rights. He said:
This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights.... They were our rights to life and liberty.
As our nation has grown in size and stature, however - as our industrial economy expanded - these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.
He then enumerated the economic rights he thought needed to be added to the Bill of Rights. They included:
The right to a job;
The right to earn enough to pay for food and clothing;
The right of businessmen to be free of unfair competition and domination by monopolies;
The right to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
Times have changed since the first Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution in 1791. When the country was founded, people could stake out some land, build a house on it, farm it and be self-sufficient. The Great Depression saw people turned out of their homes and living in the streets - a phenomenon we are seeing again today. Few people now own their own homes. Even if you have signed a mortgage, you will be in debt peonage to the bank for 30 years or so before you can claim the home as your own.
Health needs have changed, too. In 1791, foods were natural and nutrient rich, and outdoor exercise was built into the lifestyle. Degenerative diseases such as cancer and heart disease were rare. Today, health insurance for some people can cost as much as rent.
Then there are college loans, which collectively now exceed a trillion dollars, more even than credit card debt. Students are coming out of universities not just without jobs, but carrying a debt of $20,000 or so on their backs. For medical students and other post-graduate students, it can be $100,000 or more. Again, that's as much as a mortgage, with no house to show for it. The justification for incurring these debts was supposed to be that the students would get better jobs when they graduated, but now jobs are scarce.
After World War II, the GI Bill provided returning servicemen with free college tuition, as well as cheap home loans and business loans. It was called "the GI Bill of Rights." Studies have shown that the GI Bill paid for itself seven times over and is one of the most lucrative investments the government ever made.
The government could do that again - without increasing taxes or the federal debt. It could do it by recovering the power to create money from Wall Street and the financial services industry, which now claim a whopping 40 percent of everything we buy.
An Updated Constitution for a New Millennium
Banks acquired the power to create money by default when Congress declined to claim it at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. The Constitution says only that "Congress shall have the power to coin money [and] regulate the power thereof." The founders left out not just paper money, but checkbook money, credit card money, money market funds, and other forms of exchange that make up the money supply today. All of them are created by private financial institutions, and they all come into the economy as loans with interest attached.
Governments - state and federal - could bypass the interest tab by setting up their own publicly owned banks. Banking would become a public utility, a tool for promoting productivity and trade rather than for extracting wealth from the debtor class.
Congress could go further: it could reclaim the power to issue money from the banks and fund its budget directly. It could do this, in fact, without changing any laws. Congress is empowered to "coin money," and the Constitution sets no limit on the face amount of the coins. Congress could issue a few one-trillion dollar coins, deposit them in an account and start writing checks.
The Fed's own figures show that the money supply has shrunk by $3 trillion since 2008. That sum could be spent into the economy without inflating prices. Three trillion dollars could go a long way toward providing the jobs and social services necessary to fulfill an Economic Bill of Rights. Guaranteeing employment to anyone willing and able to work would increase gross domestic product, allowing the money supply to expand even further without inflating prices, since supply and demand would increase together.
Modernizing the Bill of Rights
As Bob Dylan said, "The times they are a-changin'." Revolutionary times call for revolutionary solutions and an updated social contract. Apple and Microsoft update their programs every year. We are trying to fit a highly complex, modern monetary scheme into a constitutional framework that is 200 years old.
After President Roosevelt died in 1945, his vision for an Economic Bill of Rights was kept alive by Martin Luther King. "True compassion," King declared, "is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring."
King, too, has now passed away, but his vision has been carried on by a variety of money reform groups. The government as "employer of last resort," guaranteeing a living wage to anyone who wants to work, is a basic platform of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). An MMT web site declares that by "[e]nding the enormous unearned profits acquired by the means of the privatization of our sovereign currency ... t is possible to have truly full employment without causing inflation."
What was sufficient for a simple agrarian economy does not provide an adequate framework for freedom and democracy today. We need an Economic Bill of Rights, and we need to end the privatization of the national currency. Only when the privilege of creating the national money supply is returned to the people can we have a government that is truly of the people, by the people and for the people.
Declaration of Corporate Dissolution
Whereas the incorporation, by Sovereign decree, of private entities proved so successful as a means to expand, by force, the commercial hegemony of European Empires, the US Constitution granted Congress the authority to grant Letters of Marque; and
Whereas Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution authorized Congress sole authority to grant Letters of Marque to incorporated private merchants in pursuit of foreign possessions, without specific reference to the capture by unfair financial advantage of domestic property, it is implied that that authority is likewise applicable to all corporations; and
Whereas the several States usurped that implied power to grant their own charters of incorporation for commercial purposes, said Constitutional ambiguity inadvertently created a loophole for the unofficial sanction of unlimited incorporation within the jurisdiction of a limited governmental corporation, as defined by the Constitution itself; and
Whereas the several States failed to exercise responsible sovereign authority over the terms and conditions of said corporations' charters, there has evolved an economic system that is dominated by sovereign corporate entities whose only claim to personhood is that of comprising a human collective; and
Whereas the personhood of thusly incorporated entities had no basis in logic or law, the creation of a fictitious person was instituted as a legal fiction to define their nature; and
Whereas fictitious persons didn't exist when the Constitution was written, they couldn't possibly have been implied by the Constitution as being natural persons; and
Whereas the Constitution applies only to natural persons, the terms and conditions of corporate charters are subject to Congressional authorization under the authority of Article I, Section 8; and
Whereas the unauthorized sovereignty of corporate entities has existed since the ratification of this Constitution and subsequent corporations have unduly profited therefrom, it is incumbent upon the US Treasury to dissolve any corporation deemed unnecessary to the function of a healthy economic system; and
Whereas corporations are as unique as the markets they serve, it is the duty of Congress to apportion such rights and obligations to corporate entities as the common good requires, according to the nature of their diverse enterprises; and
Whereas the re-structuring of a global economic system is at best a daunting task it is hereby demanded that the full resources of the Internal Revenue Service be re-directed to auditing and re-chartering such corporate entities; and
Whereas taxes will need to be collected, it is further demanded that a federal tax at the point of sale be instituted, to free aforementioned IRS personnel for this task; and
Whereas the transformation hereby enacted by this Amendment will take considerable time to implement, the urgency is such that Congress shall consider no other legislation until it is accomplished; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the legislatures of the 50 States, that We, The People call for an Article Five Constitutional Convention to pass the following Amendments:
Amendment XXVIII
"Only natural persons shall have the rights protected under the U.S. Constitution."
Amendment XXIX
"Incorporated entities shall be forbidden to interfere in any way with the conduct of government unless
specifically chartered to do so by the US Congress."
In support of this declaration I cite the following chronicle of corporate usurpation since the Constitution's ratification:
http://www.theusconstitution.o (http://www.theusconstitution.o)...
with an introduction by Molly Morgan:
http://www.wilpf.org/docs/ccp/... (http://www.wilpf.org/docs/ccp/...)
If #OWS could put aside its policy demands and focus on this one solitary systemic demand, the critic mass needed for an Article Five Constitutional Convention would appear over-night with the support of a very vocal "silent majority".
What Are We Capable Of - THIS IS ANONYMOUS! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP9q61Fjlqo&feature=youtu.be#)
http://www.whatis-theplan.org/ (http://www.whatis-theplan.org/)
spread the word wow its so great we have people who actually care and are doing something to stop the 1% / crooked goverment peeps
Join US . the plan to elect 870 delegates and the national general assembly in Philadelphia july 4th to 8th 2012. www.the99declaration.org (http://www.the99declaration.org)
At this point I'm not seeing a revolution on the horizon. The Occupy Movement has been effective in bringing about awareness of the substantial change in the transference of wealth to the already rich, what happens when you let businesses and financial institutions govern themselves and that providing tax deductions for corporations only increases their profit margin and does not create jobs. And the politicians are listening and reacting (I'm not suggesting they will really do anything). People don't mind seeing issue flipping from politicians when the flipping is to their side. All this is having a calming effect.
What I think most people still don't get is that:
- politicians pushed forth measures that resulted in the economic crisis we are presently in
- those politicians were largely influenced by people with deep pockets who contributed heavily to their political campaigns
- politicians have to pay back the people who helped get them elected and that means passing laws so the big contributors get a return on their investment
- and (and this is the big one that seems to always be missed) the people in this country, rich or poor, have the ability to control the direction this country goes, effect the types of laws passed and generally create a world that can affect their quality of life. All they have to do is educate themselves about the people they can vote for, choose the one who best fits their ideals and VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
But I just don't see that ever happening. If there's one thing I have learned during my time on this earth it's that most people don't want to be bothered or simply want someone to tell them how to think and act. They give up their individuality and their freedom and instead choose to march in lock step with the masses. I've never understood that and I never will.
also there is
http://www.facebook.com/americanselect (http://www.facebook.com/americanselect) which is also trying to get candidates at least for president.
http://www.americanselect.org/ (http://www.americanselect.org/)
I have joined both to be a part of anything better than the two parties we have now..
Julie, I believe something will happen within the next year, probably sooner. People are still losing their homes, jobs, pensions, etc. Greece is blowing up and Ireland is ready to.
The one group that is ignored and has no one representing them is the working poor. They armed, ticked off, and are ready. They are losing their homes and can't feed their families. They are tired of having dirt kicked in their faces by politicians, businesses, and law authorities. I pray that violence doesn't happen. If it does, don't be surprised by it. When people have nothing left to lose, they lose it.
also the solar burst coming from the sun are expected to be their worst in 2012 and well the internet was just barely started in the 11 yrs ago for most of the world and that is the cycle
iceland did it and came back ruled by the people = http://roarmag.org/2011/06/iceland-crowdsources-constitution-investors-spain-greece/ (http://roarmag.org/2011/06/iceland-crowdsources-constitution-investors-spain-greece/)
Quote from: gennee on November 12, 2011, 01:06:58 PM
When people have nothing left to lose, they lose it.
And when they are busy working a job that pays them what they are worth and provides for them and their families, you won't hear a peep from them.
Historically speaking, when people have nothing to lose lots and lots of other people start to lose what they have. It's a recipe for social disaster, general chaos, and systemic breakdown. The Romans understood this well and did the whole panem et circenses (Bread and Circuses, or as we understand it in the US, beer and football) to keep the people understanding that they did, in fact, did have something to lose.
Rolling Stone recently published an article titled
"How the GOP Became the Party of the Rich" (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-gop-became-the-party-of-the-rich-20111109) A picture tells a thousand words.
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rollingstone.com%2Fassets%2Fimages%2Fembedded%2Fb0f3e9dfc0950dde3fe40865c2f23b79b1862ce1.jpg&hash=453fae9fc4e40423a07da49cb16e04b143f7da03)
No one I know has seen an increase in their pay with practically no increase in their taxes. It's always been, the more you earn, the more taxes you pay. I guess that is unless you contribute heavily to the GOP.
We can't pay our bills, unemployment hangs around 9%, people have lost their homes, their life savings, income can't keep up with inflation....
Okay, so tell me again, why are people pissed?
We Are The Many - Makana (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq3BYw4xjxE&feature=player_embedded#)
Occupy With Aloha (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-M07v8N_eU&feature=youtu.be#)
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 12, 2011, 07:05:59 PM
And when they are busy working a job that pays them what they are worth and provides for them and their families, you won't hear a peep from them.
Very true. They are the ones who should be helping others. Unfortunately, that isn't happening.
The police came this morning and broke up the camp at Occupy Wall Street here in New York. I will continue to monitor the situation and get back to you.
:)
All is well in Dallas...for now.
https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,110346.msg834075.html#new (https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,110346.msg834075.html#new)
The tents are still up in SF.
Best thing I've read on this so far. Underlining/bold is mine.
Published on Tuesday, November 15, 2011 by TruthDig
This Is What Revolution Looks Like
by Chris Hedges
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/this_is_what_revolution_looks_like_20111115/?ln (http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/this_is_what_revolution_looks_like_20111115/?ln)
Welcome to the revolution. Our elites have exposed their hand. They have nothing to offer. They can destroy but they cannot build. They can repress but they cannot lead. They can steal but they cannot share. They can talk but they cannot speak. They are as dead and useless to us as the water-soaked books, tents, sleeping bags, suitcases, food boxes and clothes that were tossed by sanitation workers Tuesday morning into garbage trucks in New York City. They have no ideas, no plans and no vision for the future.
Our decaying corporate regime has strutted in Portland, Oakland and New York with their baton-wielding cops into a fool's paradise. They think they can clean up "the mess"—always employing the language of personal hygiene and public security—by making us disappear. They think we will all go home and accept their corporate nation, a nation where crime and government policy have become indistinguishable, where nothing in America, including the ordinary citizen, is deemed by those in power worth protecting or preserving, where corporate oligarchs awash in hundreds of millions of dollars are permitted to loot and pillage the last shreds of collective wealth, human capital and natural resources, a nation where the poor do not eat and workers do not work, a nation where the sick die and children go hungry, a nation where the consent of the governed and the voice of the people is a cruel joke.
Get back into your cages, they are telling us. Return to watching the lies, absurdities, trivia and celebrity gossip we feed you in 24-hour cycles on television.
I totally support it and i think it's great but the"1%" are well, the richest people. Why will a protest bother them? Unless it snowballs into some kind of Marie Antoinette situation. I don't know if I have the stomach for that.
:angel:
Can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs. But in the discontent, in the real first stages, it's the opposition that gets it. Sometimes as a form of sacrifice, as Mario Salvio once said: ""...But we're a bunch of raw materials that don't mean to be - have any process upon us. Don't mean to be made into any product! Don't mean - Don't mean to end up being bought by some clients of the University, be they the government, be they industry, be they organized labor, be they anyone! We're human beings!...There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious—makes you so sick at heart—that you can't take part. You can't even passively take part. And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all." Sproul Hall Steps, December 2, 1964. And we're fast getting to that initial point of throwing bodies on the gears - and the lines of riot cops - to slow it down and stop it. Myself, when they get to: by any means necessary, I'll start paying attention and join.
While the 1% may have 50% of the wealth, they still each only get one vote. Sure, they can sway voters with their high priced ads but that only lasts so long if they don't share the pie. Hungry people can't focus on slick ads because they are too busy looking for food.
Once a majority of the voters understand they really can make a difference with their vote, and once they start to educate themselves rather than believing the spin, then real change can come. Politicians only want to get elected. If they believe supporting the uber-rich will result in being voted out of office, they won't do it. Politicians always follow the votes. They have a nose for that. It's why they are politicians.
Maybe the Occupy Movement will become the Vote-Em-Out Movement.
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 16, 2011, 09:32:54 AM
While the 1% may have 50% of the wealth, they still each only get one vote. Sure, they can sway voters with their high priced ads but that only lasts so long if they don't share the pie. Hungry people can't focus on slick ads because they are too busy looking for food.
Once a majority of the voters understand they really can make a difference with their vote, and once they start to educate themselves rather than believing the spin, then real change can come. Politicians only want to get elected. If they believe supporting the uber-rich will result in being voted out of office, they won't do it. Politicians always follow the votes. They have a nose for that. It's why they are politicians.
Maybe the Occupy Movement will become the Vote-Em-Out Movement.
Well we need our own party because even when we have voted them out in the past they had others in line to take their place.. www.the99declaration.org (http://www.the99declaration.org)
There is a very high degree of 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss' going around.
Has a Harvard Professor Mapped Out the Next Step for Occupy Wall Street?
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/11/has-a-harvard-professor-mapped-out-the-next-step-for-occupy-wall-street/247561/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/11/has-a-harvard-professor-mapped-out-the-next-step-for-occupy-wall-street/247561/)
MORE WRITTEN HERE BUT BELOW IS COPIED FOR YOU TO BRIEF::
So how do we begin a popular movement that might end with states petitioning for a convention? Lessig calls for mock conventions to happen all across the land: assemblies of regular people to think of these, and other, problems, and come up with solutions that might work. Not only would these conventions come up with a spectrum of solutions which could be evaluated and selected from, but they'd build national support for the idea that a convention like this could work.
It sounds unlikely to happen. But this is where Occupy Wall Street comes in. Properly leveraging its support, it could generate enough energy to do what Lessig, while writing this book, couldn't quite picture. In fact, the original call for Occupy Wall Street, from Adbusters, called on president Obama to "ordain a Presidential Commission tasked with ending the influence money has over our representatives in Washington." Already, "The 99 Percent Declaration www.the99declaration.org " is calling for "a NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY beginning on July 4, 2012 in the City Of Philadelphia" to address the influence of money in politics and other issues.
Properly presented, the strategies and aims of Lessig's book could make it the handbook the protesters have been looking for -- and provide a pathway for them to ride out the winter ahead.
I'm thinking power needs to be decentralized. Instead of one president, there should be a council that is always an odd number. Divide the nation into its natural geographical parts and each section elects one council member.
Congress wouldn't be able to know that their one party jerk will rubberstamp their nonsense.
Otherwise, a serious restructuring of the present mess might do okay.
Obviously, I'm okay with excessive changes. ;D
Quote from: Rebis on November 16, 2011, 03:23:50 PM
Obviously, I'm okay with excessive changes. ;D
Yeah, but there's a whole bunch of people out there who get their shorts in a bind when someone tries to change something. Like the world is going to end.
The reality is a country this size has to change slowly because there isn't a structure in place than can step up and keep things rolling. And that need for slow change allows the status quo time to regroup and create a new model. On the surface it will look different but under that it will be the same old thing.
Protesters Have the Right to Protest ... and to Resist Unlawful Arrest
Posted on November 13, 2011 by WashingtonsBlog
Top Military Commander and Courts Support Right to Protest
In response to comments from those supporting the police crackdowns on peaceful protesters exercising their constitutional rights but violating local ordinances (see comments here), reader Purplemuse writes:
The Constitution supersedes local ordinances that are being used to OBSTRUCT 1st Amendment Rights. The camping ITSELF is in order to MAKE A STATEMENT – a First Amendment Right. Protesters are not camping because it is fun to expose yourself to the elements and hardship and you want to roast wienies and marshmallows and drink beer while swapping ghost stories.
Would you listen to Colin Powell, retired four-star general in the United States Army, Powell also served as National Security Advisor (1987–1989), as Commander of the U.S. Army Forces Command (1989) and as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1989–1993) when he says, "It isn't enough just to scream at the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations. We need our political system to start reflecting this anger back into, 'How do we fix it? How do we get the economy going again?'" He also states that the Occupy Wall Street Protests are "As American as Apple Pie."
Does he go on to qualify his statement by saying, "as long as they obey local (misdemeanor) ordinances. No, he does not. He actually goes on to say that he "gets" it.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/11/protesters-have-the-right-to-protest.html (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/11/protesters-have-the-right-to-protest.html)
REMINDER FROM THE NEWS STAFF OF SUSAN"S PLACE TRANSGENDER RESOURCES
When posting posting Articles, please adhere to the following policy and guidelines:
Posting requirementsWhen you post news articles please do not post the entire article. Please include proper attribution as to the source with one or more links back to the article in question on the publisher's web site. Only post full articles when you have the explicit permission of the author or they indicate it is ok to do so in the article it's self.
Quoting guidelinesBasically if it is a long article (3,000 words or more), no more than 200 words should be used in the excerpt/quote. If the article is a short one then you should quote much less and never the entire article, try to aim for less than 10%. I will be watching the threads a bit more closely on this matter.
What you should do:
When replying to a part of the article, do not quote the article directly. You can reference a line in another way but please do not quote anything that does not already appear in the initial posting.
Why?
This should definitely keep us within the fair use guidelines and limit the possibility of news agencies objecting to their material being presented on this site. In the past a few websites who quote news articles have been slapped with cease and desist letters and a few have been taken to court. The biggest case of this that I found actually concerns the ultra conservative site, Free Republic.
Copyright violationsIf you own the copyright to an article referenced here on this site and object to it's presence, feel free to contact Susan in regards to it at susan@susans.org, or use the report to moderator option at the bottom of the message in question. If the posting exceeds allowable fair use then the staff will happily edit or remove it totally based on their judgement.
The staff asks everyone to follow these guidelines when posting news articles here or quoting from them. With blogs and press releases there is more latitude but in an effort to keep everything uniform, I will ask that these guidelines be followed for them as well.
If you have any questions regarding these guidelines, please contact the NEWS Staff and Administrator.
https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,13102.0.html (https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,13102.0.html)
SandraJane, NEWS Staff
You know I thought of that. Then I thought that a huge part of what's actually going down and how it's going down is being done by bypassing the traditional media outlets and sharing through the web. But just to make sure I wrote to TruthDig and asked them, because I was interested in making sure that the real important stuff - the stuff you cut - about the convergence of several different things namely:
- discontent that affects nearly all social classes,
- widespread feelings of entrapment and despair,
- unfulfilled expectations,
- a unified solidarity in opposition to a tiny power elite,
- a refusal by scholars and thinkers to continue to defend the actions of the ruling class,
- an inability of government to respond to the basic needs of citizens,
- a steady loss of will within the power elite itself and defections from the inner circle,
- a crippling isolation that leaves the power elite without any allies or outside support
- and, finally, a financial crisis
are the real harbinger of approaching radical social and cultural change.
It's important, because forward is forearmed. Make no mistake, if the ->-bleeped-<- really hits the fan a lot of people reading this will not live through it.
Anyway TruthDig told me that as long as no money was involved (as was the case in Freeper crap, they were stealing material and using it to solicit donations) and the intent was to spread the message then that's exactly what were doing and how we're getting it done. So I did it.
I mean part of the reason that this is going down now is that the internet has made it a lot harder to control the flow of information to the citizenry, and as a result it's become a lot harder to hide the crap. Really Bill Clinton was the first victim of it. It was the net that would not let up on the story and eventually it got through. The mainstream media - bought and paid for - would never have said anything, just like they covered up (by not reporting or even hinting) that Jack Kennedy was ->-bleeped-<-ing everything with a skirt and was so horny that the crack of dawn wasn't safe around him. He got the pass, even though among the babes he hosed were a) a mistress of a leading Mafia boss, and b) an agent of the East German Secret Police, and c) a famous sex queen just a few weeks before her 'apperent - yet never quite proven -suicide.'
But OK
Sex Queen? Is that position still available?
I would think that passing along the message is more important than controlling the sharing of the message, except in the case where money is made. People deserve to be paid for their work.
Whatever happens this year, there has got to be a break in how things have been done. Civil disobedience has made a comeback.
Quote from: tekla on November 17, 2011, 12:31:24 AM
Anyway TruthDig told me that as long as no money was involved (as was the case in Freeper crap, they were stealing material and using it to solicit donations) and the intent was to spread the message then that's exactly what were doing and how we're getting it done. So I did it.
Tekla,
Since you got permission from TruthDig, you could repost the full article if you wish, with quoted permission from TruthDig. The article posting guidelines are in place to protect all of us from legal actions.
Z
When the Mob Squad moved in to "clean up" Zuchotti Park, I thought there would be some minor repercussions. But when they closed the park I thought, "Uh oh."
Now things have escalated and the protesters are pissed. I think we've seen the end of peaceable demonstrations. Welcome in a return to the Viet Nam days.
I was reading an article on CBS News about the recent incidents. They spoke to a bond trader who said he empathized with the demonstrators. Then he said, "They have a point in a lot of ways. "The fact of the matter is, there is a schism between the rich and the poor and it's getting wider."
He doesn't seem to get it. This is not about the schism between the rich and the poor, it's about a schism that has been created between the rich and the next guy down the ladder, who used to be right behind but is now way behind.
Quote from: SandraJane on November 16, 2011, 11:26:27 PM
REMINDER FROM THE NEWS STAFF OF SUSAN"S PLACE TRANSGENDER RESOURCES
When posting posting Articles, please adhere to the following policy and guidelines:
Posting requirements
When you post news articles please do not post the entire article. Please include proper attribution as to the source with one or more links back to the article in question on the publisher's web site. Only post full articles when you have the explicit permission of the author or they indicate it is ok to do so in the article it's self.
If you have any questions regarding these guidelines, please contact the NEWS Staff and Administrator.
https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,13102.0.html (https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,13102.0.html)
SandraJane, NEWS Staff
Yikes you edited out the references to case law that allowed people to fight back if they are being stopped from protesting..
People please go to the site and see the case laws .. which will blow your mind.. .. it did mine..
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 17, 2011, 09:33:22 AM
When the Mob Squad moved in to "clean up" Zuchotti Park, I thought there would be some minor repercussions. But when they closed the park I thought, "Uh oh."
Now things have escalated and the protesters are pissed. I think we've seen the end of peaceable demonstrations. Welcome in a return to the Viet Nam days.
I was reading an article on CBS News about the recent incidents. They spoke to a bond trader who said he empathized with the demonstrators. Then he said, "They have a point in a lot of ways. "The fact of the matter is, there is a schism between the rich and the poor and it's getting wider."
He doesn't seem to get it. This is not about the schism between the rich and the poor, it's about a schism that has been created between the rich and the next guy down the ladder, who used to be right behind but is now way behind.
Today, they are having protests in all five boroughs of the city. There will be a mass march later today. So far the atmosphere has been peaceful for the most part. If anything, the breakup has emboldened the protesters.
This is a very well written response to the person now called "that 53% guy" (pictured below)
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages1.dailykos.com%2Fi%2Fuser%2F3%2F53percent_guy.jpg&hash=9d95cf920be20f6b87cfe34af72b12a6c0b10957)
The note the guy is holding up is self explanatory. Some other guy, who defines himself as a liberal, wrote a letter in response to the picture and the guy in the photo. He titled it
"Open Letter To That 53% Guy" (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/12/1025555/-Open-Letter-to-that-53-Guy). Anyone wanting to really understand what has happened to this country over the past 30 years should read this. It's long but worth reading. Some excerpts:
For a time I worked at two hotels at once, but I don't think I ever worked 60 hours in a week, and certainly not 70. I think I maxed out at 56. And that wasn't something I could sustain for long, not while going to school. The problem was that I never got much sleep, and sleep deprivation would take its toll. I can't imagine putting in 70 hours in a week while going to college at the same time. That's impressive._____________________________________
I understand your pride in what you've accomplished, but I want to ask you something.
Do you really want the bar set this high? Do you really want to live in a society where just getting by requires a person to hold down two jobs and work 60 to 70 hours a week? Is that your idea of the American Dream?
Do you really want to spend the rest of your life working two jobs and 60 to 70 hours a week? Do you think you can? Because, let me tell you, kid, that's not going to be as easy when you're 50 as it was when you were 20.When I read this, it struck me that's now the new standard Wall Street, the banks, the corporations and many Republicans are trying to set. "Work your ass off for us, make us rich, and we'll give you a hearty handshake and a pat on the back, but don't expect anything else."
Read it:
"Open Letter To That 53% Guy" (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/12/1025555/-Open-Letter-to-that-53-Guy)
It's worth it.
I'm sure mister 53% hates unions too. The trouble with the Founding Fathers notions of 'enlightened self-interest' is that many people strive to keep from being enlightened (look at all the attacks from the right wing on schools and teachers) and have failed to realize what is in their self-interest.
He would be praised by some, particularly the right, but ask the family values crowd what this guy's family would look like with a totally absent dad. Here's a guy who if he was raising children would never see them. He would not have the time to be their Little League coach, to participate in their schooling or go to PTA meetings. He doesn't have the time to take them camping on the weekends, or even take them to church. He has no time to participate in community activities that make where he lives a better place. If where he lived used a volunteer fire department (as many places do) then you'll just have to get used to a lot of buildings burning to the ground because he doesn't have the time to answer the call.
Do I have to say that undoubtedly several times a month he's driving and while he's behind the wheel he's so tired that he might as well be drunk?
Ask where in that kind of week does he cross the line and it begins to affect his judgement on the job? When does he start to miss things he should have caught, or begin to make errors in judgement that a person with proper rest would not make?
Any of the real students in here can look at that and know that he's not getting the maximum amount of education out of his classes because he flat-out does not have enough time to put into them.
And while he seems quite proud of himself, the winner of a race to the bottom is not winning very much at all.
Personally I don't believe he worked 60-70 hours for 8 straight years while attending college. If you put yourself on a 4-year-to-graduate program, there isn't a lot of time left after eating and sleeping. And even less if you allow yourself some time to decompress. Even cutting his school load in half, he'd have little time to do anything else with that work schedule. I've worked that kind of schedule, 10 hours a day, 7 days a week. After a couple of months, I was a zombie. And I wasn't even going to school. And yeah, my spouse & kids complained they never saw me.
But there's another problem. He says he's a former marine. I thought if you served your time for this country they helped pay your college. Why would he have to work 60-70 hours a week just to put himself through college? Or did he refuse the financial assistance?
The author calls him a kid. Understandably so. With age comes wisdom and this guy has a lot to learn.
Speaking of age and wisdom...
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmsnbcmedia4.msn.com%2Fj%2FMSNBC%2FComponents%2FPhoto%2F_new%2F111118-frances-goldin-hmed-515a.grid-6x2.jpg&hash=714511dd818fcb18a37193a20b7672f42931f9da)
Frances Goldin: 87-Year-Old Protester and Proud of It (http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Frances-Goldin-Elderly-Protester-Tries-Arrested-Activist-134095788.html)
She tried but couldn't get herself arrested on Occupy Wall Street's Day of Action
Among the hordes of Occupy Wall Street protesters, Frances Goldin stands out: the 87-year-old literary agent and activist has a tuft of purple hair and carries a sign that reads, "I'm 87 and mad as hell."
She may not look like the typical Zuccotti Park demonstrator, but she believes in the mission to close the income equality gap and to promote social justice. For decades, Goldin has demonstrated and stood for the rights of the disenfranchised.
"I've been arrested nine times for civil disobedience; I want to be arrested 12 times," Goldin told NBC New York. "And I was sure I'd be arrested today, but the cops were determined because of the bad publicity for them, to not arrest an 87-year-old woman."
Quote from: gennee on November 17, 2011, 02:17:24 PM
Today, they are having protests in all five boroughs of the city. There will be a mass march later today. So far the atmosphere has been peaceful for the most part. If anything, the breakup has emboldened the protesters.
That's what I expected. The people in the streets are serious. There are probably hundreds of thousands who agree with them. This movement has only one way to move - forward. There is just too much wrong on so many levels with the current system.
Look at all the pictures from the protests and ask yourself which group came ready for a riot?
Interesting picture, I can relate somewhat
- In my last job I worked for a union. Terrible, I would decertify if given a vote to. All the union did was protect the very lazy people and did nothing for peoples work conditions or get livable wages.
- I use to work 50-60 hours, go to night school (taking 3-4 courses / week) and run a small farm.
- Couldn't afford the 'free' canadian health care (note that some provinces make you pay for the 'free' health care)
- didn't take a holiday for 15 years. Worked most stat holidays and usually one day on the weekend. For certain busy times of the year I would do double shifts.
- did some military service in the Canadian Infantry reserves.
So I can relate to this guy. When things are tough, you need to work hard. From what I see (and the 87 year old lady shows) is that the 'usual suspects' are just at it again. They are the professional protesters. You will see the same crowd at every protest. These people have no solutions to the problems except more government and slogans such as 'tax the rich'. Until they come up with viable solutions they are just noise.
I worked for a union for 34 years. They provided great health care. I got days off. They provided a pension for us. They also created an annuity for us. If we worked over 8 hours in a day we'd get overtime pay. If we worked Sundays or holidays we'd get double time.
Sure there were some slugs. It's no different than what I've seen with nepotism, favoritism or that cake job created by some politician to pay back campaign supporters. If you want to see the definition of lazy, that's the place to look.
The people who are protesting aren't professional protesters. They are people who are pissed off Wall Street committed crimes and never got charged. They are pissed political campaign contributions bought politicians and got them to rescind laws protecting the citizens of this country. They are pissed the bottom 90% has seen virtually no increase in income for over 10 years while the top 10%, the same people buying politicians, have seen their income triple. They are pissed their hard earned tax dollars bailed out criminals and people who were reckless with our money and caused our retirement savings to practically vanish. And they are people who want a decent job with decent pay and are willing to work for it.
I know, I'm one of them.
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 19, 2011, 04:25:46 PM
I worked for a union for 34 years. They provided great health care. I got days off. They provided a pension for us. They also created an annuity for us. If we worked over 8 hours in a day we'd get overtime pay. If we worked Sundays or holidays we'd get double time.
Not my experience in a union. Not all unions are the same, some unions are just as greedy as the businesses they are trying to protect the workers from.
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 19, 2011, 04:25:46 PM
Sure there were some slugs. It's no different than what I've seen with nepotism, favoritism or that cake job created by some politician to pay back campaign supporters. If you want to see the definition of lazy, that's the place to look.
There were several people in my last union job that I would have fired for laziness in all of my other non union jobs. Even the management wanted him gone. But they couldn't... because the union protected them. It was a joke and it would never be tolerated in a non union job.
as for your example of lazy, that is a strawperson argument. Look at almost all non union jobs and the workers are far more productive.
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 19, 2011, 04:25:46 PM
The people who are protesting aren't professional protesters. They are people who are pissed off Wall Street committed crimes and never got charged. They are pissed political campaign contributions bought politicians and got them to rescind laws protecting the citizens of this country. They are pissed the bottom 90% has seen virtually no increase in income for over 10 years while the top 10%, the same people buying politicians, have seen their income triple. They are pissed their hard earned tax dollars bailed out criminals and people who were reckless with our money and caused our retirement savings to practically vanish. And they are people who want a decent job with decent pay and are willing to work for it.
I know, I'm one of them.
The 87 year old lady is a professional protester. You can tell by the amount of times she brags about being arrested. There was a lady like that in the last province I worked in and the authorities finally got annoyed and gave her some jail time. Many of these same people will be at every protest... Thats why I call them professional protesters.
Retirement funds are disappearing because almost every retirement fund is based off stock dividends. Look at most pension plans... they are usually conservatively invested in large corporations and bonds. The smaller the profit of these large companies, the smaller the payout to pension funds. I believe I read that between 75-85% of stockholders are actually pension and mutual funds. Pensions are getting hit because a large percentage of the population is retiring and profits are falling.
My challenge still stands, when this protest comes up with actual workable solutions instead of the same tired chants and slogans... then and only then will people see them as more than just noise.
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 18, 2011, 04:53:37 PM
Personally I don't believe he worked 60-70 hours for 8 straight years while attending college. If you put yourself on a 4-year-to-graduate program, there isn't a lot of time left after eating and sleeping. And even less if you allow yourself some time to decompress. Even cutting his school load in half, he'd have little time to do anything else with that work schedule. I've worked that kind of schedule, 10 hours a day, 7 days a week. After a couple of months, I was a zombie. And I wasn't even going to school. And yeah, my spouse & kids complained they never saw me.
I was thinking about that, too. Even with taking minimum hours in college, or close to minimum hours, university is a lot of work. I had at least two classes a day (usually more) plus labs, which usually are longer than normal classes. If you were to do a 4-year program, you would be adding a class or two to what I was already doing.
Once I got a job (which could in no way even be considered close to being full-time) I found that it was very difficult to maintain what little social life I had. Job started really early in the night. I get off job, barely have time to even eat a banana, and go to early class which I usually can't stay awake in. Get out of early class (if I even was awake enough to go to class at all), sleep for an hour or two in library until next class. After that class, I do homework in the library, eat a sandwich, then go to the last class. After last class, it is already late in the afternoon. I go home, eat supper. The rest of the day is either for homework, sleeping, or playing games with friends. Then, I get up really early that night and do it all again. Every day was like this except weekends (no class) and days where I didn't have the early class.
Basically, my only real free time was between 4:00 in the afternoon and 1:00 in the morning. Some of that "free time" was taken up by supper, breakfast (usually bananas), sleep, and supposedly homework. And, I wasn't going to be completing any degrees in 4 years based on the number of class hours I was taking. A lot of people had a heavier school load than I did. Keep in mind that the hours I was working for my job almost never met the requirements for being full-time.
Assuming that Mr. 53% was working on a "real" degree and not some watered down free piece of nothing that some colleges offer, I find it highly unlikely that his claims are true. Going to university is like a full-time job in itself. You're basically doing 40 hours a week (more, if you want to finish your degree early) between getting to and from class, attending class, and doing all of the workload.
If he was really working 60-70 hours a week, that means that he was actually "working" 100-110 hours a week assuming he was working on a "real" degree where he actually had to study and learn something in order to pass his exams. There are only 168 hours in a week. This means that he should have had approximately 70 hours at most between eating, sleeping, and doing anything other than work or school. Assuming he ate really quick foods or saved time by always eating while reading his textbooks simultaneously, this leaves 70 hours for sleeping and doing everything else other than work or school. Assuming that he slept eight hours on average each day, this leaves fourteen hours a week for him to do anything that was not directly related to helping him complete work or school. This means that he only had two hours a day, at most, to do something that was not directly related to work or school. Keep in mind that I only considered sleeping, and I didn't include "relaxation" as a necessary activity to maintain his energy or motivation for work and school.
Basically, he would have had two hours a day at most to socialize, relax, or engage in leisure activities. Keep in mind that "two hours" is a very conservative estimate based on the number of hours he claimed to work.
My conclusion is that this guy is either greatly exaggerating, or he had a small degree program which he managed to stretch out to 8 years so he had enough time to work overtime while still being able to stay awake during class. At the university I went to, there's no way anyone would be able to work 60 hours a week while attending college full-time unless they were getting less than 4 hours of sleep a day, or they had absolutely NO social lives and did nothing but work and school all day long.
It has been said that while in college you can sleep, you can party, or you can study: but you can't do all three. I found this to be very true even while working part-time and taking minimum course hours at my university. I often gave up sleep to have time to socialize with friends.
Quote from: Zaria on November 20, 2011, 12:15:54 AM
The 87 year old lady is a professional protester. You can tell by the amount of times she brags about being arrested. There was a lady like that in the last province I worked in and the authorities finally got annoyed and gave her some jail time. Many of these same people will be at every protest... Thats why I call them professional protesters.
My challenge still stands, when this protest comes up with actual workable solutions instead of the same tired chants and slogans... then and only then will people see them as more than just noise.
I think its wonderful she has been protesting ever since she RETIRED from work
and if you got involved you would know that there are others doing things to make changes www.the99declaration.org (http://www.the99declaration.org)
www.the99declaration.org (http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=PnNazuRXoEc#)
Quote from: VeryGnawty on November 20, 2011, 01:56:18 AM
If he was really working 60-70 hours a week, that means that he was actually "working" 100-110 hours a week assuming he was working on a "real" degree where he actually had to study and learn something in order to pass his exams.
Don't forget traveling time. You have to allow time to get to work and school. For me, an eight hour day at work adds up to about 10 hours, when you consider the time I leave the house until the time I arrive back home. There's also unpaid breaks. In Illinois, state law requires an employer to give you 20 minutes unpaid break if you work more than five straight hours (bastards! ::) ) So that 60-70 hour work week really consumes about 70-90 hours, depending on how many days he's actually working.
For school, you have to add in the traveling time too. And college is not like grade school, where you arrive in the morning then have a full day of continuous classes. You might have a class at 8AM, one at 11AM and one at 1PM.
But let's say the guy went to school at night (less flexibility in class selection then but we'll give a best case scenario.)
If he left the house for work day 5AM and worked 10 hours, he could be at school by around 5PM. Not a lot of classes available during dinner time, but let's say he managed to get two classes a night, one at 6PM and one at 8PM. He'd be leaving campus between 9 and 10PM, unless it was a lab or something like that. If he lived close by he'd be home between 9:30 and 10:30.
Then he needs to grab a bite to eat. That takes up 30 minutes, because he cleaned up his mess too. So he's sitting down to study around 10 or 11 at night. He studies only one hour because he's just trying to get by, not get decent grades. Then he washed up (hopefully takes a shower), brushes his teeth, gets ready for bed and his head hits the pillow around midnight, or later.
Since he has to leave the house by 5AM to get to work on time, he wakes up at 4:30AM, enough time to get dressed, eat a quick breakfast and brush his teeth (we hope). So he gets about 4 hours of sleep a night. And he has zero social time. If he has a girlfriend, too bad.
And that's if he was working six days a week and only 10 hours a day. As for those 70 hour work weeks...
Yeah, he's full of it. I can't wait until he has a family and little kids running around the house. Maybe his wife will have to work 60-70 hours a week too, just to get buy. Ahhhh, the New American Dream! Where do I sign up?
Quote from: Zaria on November 20, 2011, 12:15:54 AM
There were several people in my last union job that I would have fired for laziness in all of my other non union jobs. Even the management wanted him gone. But they couldn't... because the union protected them. It was a joke and it would never be tolerated in a non union job.
I worked non-union jobs and saw lazy, worthless people keep their jobs while hard working people got laid off. It's called favoritism and it happens on every job, union or not. Some people are masters at sucking up to the boss, and keeping their jobs.
Quoteas for your example of lazy, that is a strawperson argument. Look at almost all non union jobs and the workers are far more productive.
Not from what I've seen. But I gauge productivity by looking not only at the amount of work completed but also at the quality of the work. And quality is important to the consumer.
I've seen the work of non-union electricians. Some is good but some could start a house fire. They have no schooling and learn everything on the job from people who learned the same way. The business owner may be happy but he/she will be selling the customer an inferior product. And, from what I've seen, non-union built houses sell for just as much as union built houses. So who pockets the money? Certainly not the non-union employees. That's why greedy business owners hate unions. Their existence makes them share the wealth.
But don't forget the 40 hour work week. If not for unions, we'd all be working 60-70 hours a week while putting ourselves through college or raising a family. And the only people who would benefit from that is the business owners.
No thanks, even considering the negative aspects of unions, overall I still think they are good for the helping achieve the American Dream, the real version, not the one Mr. 53% is trying to create.
>> Not from what I've seen. But I gauge productivity by looking not only at the amount of work completed but also at the quality of the work. And quality is important to the consumer. <<
A prime example of this in Canada is automakers... GM is union... Toyota isn't... guess which car is better built? certainly not the bailout buggy.
>> I've seen the work of non-union electricians. Some is good but some could start a house fire. They have no schooling and learn everything on the job from people who learned the same way. The business owner may be happy but he/she will be selling the customer an inferior product. And, from what I've seen, non-union built houses sell for just as much as union built houses. So who pockets the money? Certainly not the non-union employees. That's why greedy business owners hate unions. Their existence makes them share the wealth <<
Here in Canada the government regulates those who can do electrical work. Unions are unnecessary with proper regulations.
>> But don't forget the 40 hour work week. If not for unions, we'd all be working 60-70 hours a week while putting ourselves through college or raising a family. And the only people who would benefit from that is the business owners. <<
Yes there once was a time and place for unions, but this happened YEARS ago. What have unions done since other than protect lazy workers?
>> I think its wonderful she has been protesting ever since she RETIRED from work <<
she just changed professions.
I also get annoyed by people who say they are representing me when I think they are spouting nonsense... the 99% movement doesn't even closely hold my views... or many if not most of the people I know. Reminds me of our local socialist party who keeps talking about representing 'average working people' when most average working people I know and work with can't stand them. What they should really say is that they represent 'union and government workers'... at least that would be honest.
The "99%movement" declaration has some good ideas... but then again they tend to blame corporations for everything. As I pointed out earlier the vast majority of stocks are held by pension and mutual retirement funds. If you wish to 'progressively' tax corporations you will only make things much worse for the current retired generation. If you think pensions are falling now... tax those dividends even more and watch pensions fall to unprecedented lows.
There was once a time when a single wage-earner could support a family of four with a house, at least one car, and a family vacation every year.
That has not been true in my lifetime.
What seems commonplace these days, based on my friends, family, and co-workers, is to have two wage-earners working three jobs between them to support a family of 3.5 with a rented apartment, one car and a bus pass, and about three days off each year after using up vacation time to handle medical emergencies, car repairs, and whatever else.
I have worked for a single employer for over ten years. I sat down and did some calculating and found that my annual raises have not kept pace with inflation. I always get "exceeds expectations" or better pay raises, yet I lose spending power with every passing year. (This is with a company whose pay scales are very competitive within the industry.)
When inflation numbers are reported, they normally report inflation WITHOUT food and energy factored in, yet those are the items most critical to households and are also the items experiencing the most inflation. When unemployment numbers are reported, there are entire classes on nonworking potential workers who are not included for various reasons, effectively cutting the figures by as much as 50%.
As a society, we bail out the banks, then pass regulations that reward them for not lending money to businesses and individuals. Then we tell the banks to make more loans to needy borrowers and get upset when the number of bad loans on their books goes up. We tell businesses to hire more people if they can and to pay employees more if they can, then pass regulations that reward them for moving jobs out of the country and keeping their profits overseas. We tell our CEOs to cut costs, then give them huge bonuses for laying off workers. We demand universal healthcare, then structure it in a way that encourages medical professionals to leave the field entirely. We demand competent representatives, then elect the same old people for fear of "the other guy" winning or because "the other guy" doesn't seem to stand a chance... if we even vote at all. We protest big banks, then deposit our protest funds into accounts in big banks. We applaud increased productivity in the economy, then complain about working harder for less money - almost the definition of "productivity".
We say we want change, but down in the weeds where it really matters, we don't act like we want change.
Something is very broken.
Something is not getting fixed.
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 20, 2011, 10:49:38 AM
For school, you have to add in the traveling time too. And college is not like grade school, where you arrive in the morning then have a full day of continuous classes. You might have a class at 8AM, one at 11AM and one at 1PM.
This is one of the main reasons I doubt this guy is serious. If his college schedule was anything like mine, it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for him to work 70 hours a week. Most of my classes were staggered. I rarely had classes back-to-back. I had anywhere from 1-3 hours after a class, and then I had another class. That's the reason I tried to get all of my homework done in the library. If I would have taken the bus home, I would have had about fifteen minutes before I would have had to take the bus back to campus. There was no point in leaving campus. I stayed there all day unless the break between classes was three hours or more.
Being at school for me was an all-day affair, because with an hour or two break inbetween classes it was impossible to make it back to my apartment and have any time to actually do anything before having to go back to campus. I fail to see how this guy could work sixty hour weeks unless all of his classes were in consecutive blocks, which was almost IMPOSSIBLE to set up at my university because it was so difficult to get classes at the times you preferred. I hated morning classes with a passion, and I still had to take a couple of them because all of the afternoon classes were full already.
Quote from: Dana_H on November 20, 2011, 05:52:49 PM
Something is very broken.
Something is not getting fixed.
That's why people are protesting.
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 20, 2011, 07:14:11 PM
That's why people are protesting.
So, JM, after all the posts and media report, what is the prognosis ? Will they stick ?
Jen61
I guess the most interesting question would be: would they make a difference ? Congress does not seem to give a rat a.. Super committe is death ! Tomorrow is going to be a day of recon for the marks, a new downgrade, Dow looses 500 points, Fed and contractor jobs will be cut by the ten of thousands thought 2012 ! Really doom and gloom IMO
Perhaps Nostradamus and the Mayans are right,
Hope I am wrong !
I believe it will continue to grow. I attended an Occupy your State Capitol event last month, and from that various regional Occupy movements and actions have grown into existence. For those who think it's just young hippies, go to an Occupy event. You will see and talk to, as I did: young people, students, middle aged people, construction workers, middle class professionals, ministers, unemployed, employed, retired people, including two WWII vets. Some democrats, some republicans, some independents. Some queer, some straight. All united in the knowledge that the system isn't working for most of us. All aware that we have a government by, of and for the corporate interests. The agenda, the mission, is set by everyone. By consensus.
Z
Quote from: Zaria on November 20, 2011, 05:49:57 PM
I also get annoyed by people who say they are representing me when I think they are spouting nonsense... the 99% movement doesn't even closely hold my views... or many if not most of the people I know. Reminds me of our local socialist party who keeps talking about representing 'average working people' when most average working people I know and work with can't stand them.
Well here at this thread you seem to be in the 1% with your views..
Quote from: Jen61 on November 20, 2011, 07:24:45 PM
So, JM, after all the posts and media report, what is the prognosis ? Will they stick ?
Jen61
Yes. This isn't going away. The fact the media has glommed on to it guarantees it will be put to the forefront of the minds of the people. The media loves it because there's always something to report and there's always people watching their reporting. If the media dropped it, OWS would struggle to stay alive. Sadly, we are a TV nation.
But on the plus side, I'm seeing more and more information coming to the surface that is exposing the reality of life in Washington. Anyone using more than a few brain cells can figure out who is really pulling the strings there and why.
Occupy DC? If you guys promise to stay there, I'll get the "Koch Brothers" to cover your expenses.
I'll also personally go to Rush's studio and ensure air time for "the cause".
I think the hardcore OWS supporters need to realize that your your own 1%. As in 1% of the US population would agree with your solutions to the current economic difficulties the world faces.
Case in point. Spain just threw out their Socialist Party, which was a real Capital S Party, for a conservative government. In a landslide.
What a gigantic can of pepper spray cannot do, old man winter will do. That is unless you occuppy Miami or Tijuana :laugh:
Jesus was meeting with other protesters and guess what happened?(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flatimesblogs.latimes.com%2F.a%2F6a00d8341c630a53ef015437338dc3970c-600wi&hash=d316b803a1622900e23165450c66664b586d0922)
Quote from: Jen61 on November 21, 2011, 04:08:22 PM
What a gigantic can of pepper spray cannot do, old man winter will do. That is unless you occuppy Miami or Tijuana :laugh:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Concepcion-Picciotto-24-Hour-Peace-Vigil-Since-1981/269336512824 (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Concepcion-Picciotto-24-Hour-Peace-Vigil-Since-1981/269336512824)
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Falt.coxnewsweb.com%2Fcnishared%2Ftools%2Fshared%2Fmediahub%2F07%2F83%2F46%2Fslideshow_1468379_192434_Winter_Weather_WHCD1.JPG&hash=2db4fcc96aebc8a51d178992193ec2a454ba1d9b)
"The Doctrine of Fascism" by Benito "Il Duce" Mussolini. In his 72 page manifesto, "The Chief" defines pure fascism as a merger of the state with corporate power. Not nationalization or a take over corporations by the state like in communism. Rather he describes what we have today; a merger of power where the corporations are free to earn profits for a small group of people in and out of government. 94% of elections are won by the candidate with the most money. This is how a congress with a 9% approval rating stays in power.
Quote from: Michelle. on November 21, 2011, 03:30:16 PM
Occupy DC? If you guys promise to stay there, I'll get the "Koch Brothers" to cover your expenses.
I'll also personally go to Rush's studio and ensure air time for "the cause".
I think the hardcore OWS supporters need to realize that your your own 1%. As in 1% of the US population would agree with your solutions to the current economic difficulties the world faces.
Case in point. Spain just threw out their Socialist Party, which was a real Capital S Party, for a conservative government. In a landslide.
Ok, we get it, you love big business and corporatism, and think they're the answer to the mess they got everyone into in the first place. But please, please, stop with making stuff up to try and emphasise your point. If you think the PSOE are a socialist party with a 'Capital S', then you don't know what the word means. Really, I'm not trying to be flippant here; they are a moderate centre-left party whatever you personal pet definitions might be. Also, if you believe the electoral hammering they just got was only due to economics, then you have a profoundly skewed interpretation of Spanish politics, that is if you know anything about them at all beyond a CNN soundbyte.
I don't mean this to be a personal attack, as much as it probably seems like one. Honestly. There is just no justification in fact for links you're trying to draw between things, and I'm calling you on it.
You who gloat and laugh better be hoping that the winter of discontent does not get made glorious summer by things out of anyone's control. Wouldn't be the first time a small fall problem became a huge spring problem.
I don't think the entire Occupy deal is TV dependent to the degree that everything once was as little as 20 years ago. That was really the Clinton lesson, he was brought down by the internet more than the massmedia, who were totally willing to give him a Free Kennedy and let it pass. It was Drudge and a few other who kept the heat up and eventually made it a real story. Same here, more and more is happening outside the carefully prescribed boundaries of TV news and opinion and the flow of information has become harder and harder for the people in power to control.
Just like the cop in Davis found out. Now that cameras are not only the province of Big Brother and Big Sister, but also part of the tool bag of Little Brother and Little Sister - you don't have to have a TV camera there to be the film at 11 anymore. And just because the TV stations refuse to cover it - like the Chancellor of UC Davis doing that awesome walk of shame - no longer means that no one else will see it. And like the use of Georges Seurat'A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte with the pepper-spraying cop photoshoped into it, that fact that some image does not get wide-spread mass media coverage no longer means it does not reach a mass audience just the same.
Now, as most of the occupy sites are dismantled - one way or the other - its' time to take a look at what just went down and what it might mean. Regardless of who's side your on, this much is pretty obvious.
First - There can be little doubt that there is a deep undercurrent of dissatisfaction.
Second - given that there were over 170 such sites set up in sympathy, that dissatisfaction is widespread and not just a local phonomnia.
NOW - and again, no matter which side you are on - widespread dissatisfaction is not a positive thing in any society. The greater the number of people you have in your society who have nothing to lose the more tenuousness the basic cohesion of that society becomes - to no one's advantage.
And...Third - It's pretty obvious, no matter where you look and no matter how you look at it, the two old systems of political thought/ideals/vision, the Liberals and the Conservatives have had their run, done their good (and bad) and are now out of gas, out of ideas, out of vision - indeed in some ways they are even out of their minds. We need to begin to build a new politics capable of responding to current problems.
Steps/further actions will center around puting together a list of those grievances that have the most traction and that have real political solutions such as:
- Corporate Person-hood
- Debt Loads
- The mind-blowing rise in Higher Education Costs while the actual value and content of said educations have both lagged
- Banking Shananagains
- Tax rates and structures that are Alice in Wonderland absurd
- Expansion of basic rights (due process, equal protection) to gays, lesbians and transgendered persons
- The role of money and lobbyists in the process of government
- Anti-war
- Anti-drug war
- Green/eco/alternative environmental people
REAL POLITICAL ACTIONS LIKE:
* Taking back one of the political parties
* Demand public investigations with full legal standing in a wide varriarty of jurisdictions to investigate, criminally charge and prosecute to the full extent of the law the Wall Street firms and managers and the Banks and their managers and their actions over the last 10 years
* Demand an immediate reinstatement of the Glass-Segal Act
* Moratorium on overseas wars/drug wars
* Moratorium on home repossessions by banks.
* Demand that all personal income be taxed, and taxed at the same rate.
* Find someone who is willing to take leadership on the debt issue and take real steps to meet it
* End any and all tax incentives for moving jobs offshore.
* Find candidate who have experience solving problems and elect them
* I believe that nothing will change in this country until common justice comes regularly and faithfully to those who currently consider themselves above it. To that end we need to start to really hold people accountable and put under judgement.
* Put a public face on it. Call out some of the most grievous examples, (GE, BofA) and organize economic boycotts. Call out the people responsible for those decisions and protest at their house, their country clubs, where they park their car - until they get hounded out of existence, and then go on to the next target. Decisions like GE shutting down the manufacture of X-ray equipment in the US and moving it to China should be easy to target. Who got the biggest bonuses on Wall Street? Start with that guy.
*Direction, planning and strategic thinking. Occupy got people's attention, some of it good, lots of it bad. How about everyone picking the same place? How about Charlotte this summer? How do we build a year-round presence that begins to put real pressure on the system.
Other odds and ends:
* It's not going to take the National Guard to have a Kent State moment. The serious and massive militarization of our domestic police forces is pretty amazing. Most of that was accomplished with DoD money as part of their 'dual-use technologies' program. Never doubt your own government views you as no less an enemy just because you are a citizen.
* Tragic the way the powers that be seem to enforce park regulations with far more rigor than the banking laws.
Damn tekla now your saying it in a powerful way .. and no one has been powerful / sexy to me in over 14 yrs ... I love your input
Thanks for letting me know what the mindest is back west .. as i am out here in the dol-drums .. which surely is a safe place to be but what your talking about has me wanting to take a drive west .. 8)
Quote from: Amazon D on November 22, 2011, 11:01:53 AM
"The Doctrine of Fascism" by Benito "Il Duce" Mussolini. In his 72 page manifesto, "The Chief" defines pure fascism as a merger of the state with corporate power. Not nationalization or a take over corporations by the state like in communism. Rather he describes what we have today; a merger of power where the corporations are free to earn profits for a small group of people in and out of government. 94% of elections are won by the candidate with the most money. This is how a congress with a 9% approval rating stays in power.
Very true. Sadly, it has been my hard earned experience that most people do not want to hear this particular truth. I have been called a "crazy conspiracy-theory wingnut" on more than a few occasions for trying to make the point. Most people in my area would rather believe that the system is somewhat corrupt, but still fundamentally sound.
While I may not agree with everything the Occupiers have been doing, at least they are awake to the fact that business and government have gotten in bed together and no longer have any reason to care what the public wants except to the increasingly minor degree to which public opinion affects the outcomes of elections.
Kat, I agree with you in part or in whole on all but one point - one tax rate for all. It won't work.
At the bottom end of earnings, people are having a hard time paying for the basics - food, clothing and shelter. Taxing them would only further increase their hardship and ensure many of them will never escape poverty. Plus those on the bottom and low middle rungs spend everything they earn. Not so with the wealthy. A healthy economy needs a healthy influx of cash to keep it going. We need to keep money in the hands of people who will spend.
Like it or not, a graduated tax rate does more than increase the tax revenue this country needs to operate. It also is an equalizer. Rob from the rich, pay to the poor. And as noted above, that's good for the economy.
Not every poor person is lazy and good for nothing. Most of them would gladly take a job if it gave them even a sliver of satisfaction and paid them enough to get buy and maybe have a little fun too. Until we figure out a way not to penalize the poor, we have to have an imbalance in tax rates.
And along with this we have to put an end to politicians using tax revenue to pay back their campaign supporters.
There's something I would like to add to your list - we need to put an end to the belief social security, medicare and medicaid are entitlements. Yes, they are not entitlements nor are they social programs.
From the very first day we begin to earn an income, the government is taking money out of our earnings and putting it aside for our retirement. (That's what I was told back in 1968, when I saw the deductions on my first paycheck.) In the private sector its called an IRA or a pension or an annuity. Not only do we contribute but our employers do too. And employers know they have to pay this and deduct that when they figure how much they can afford to pay us. In other words, it's all our money.
Same with medicare and medicaid.
I ran the numbers. If I took what my employers and I have contributed over the years and just figured minimal interest, what a low risk CD would generate. I could buy myself an annuity today that would give me more than what SS will pay me when I retire plus have another $600/mo to put towards health insurance premiums.
What no one will admit is the SS fund was completely solvent back in the 80's and could support itself forever. And then our politicians started "borrowing" from it and they never paid it back. Now they tell us it was a broken system. BULL!
I want my money back!
I'm really opposed to people who work paying a higher rate of taxes than people who clip coupons or make cap gains.
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 22, 2011, 10:16:54 PM
Kat, I agree with you in part or in whole on all but one point - one tax rate for all. It won't work.
At the bottom end of earnings, people are having a hard time paying for the basics - food, clothing and shelter. Taxing them would only further increase their hardship and ensure many of them will never escape poverty. Plus those on the bottom and low middle rungs spend everything they earn. Not so with the wealthy. A healthy economy needs a healthy influx of cash to keep it going. We need to keep money in the hands of people who will spend.
Honestly, I'm not entirely convinced that an Income Tax is the best way to fund the government anyhow, but I could see exempting the first $xxx of personal income where $xxx is some value a bit higher than poverty level wages plus an allowance for entertainment and savings (the exact amount is open for debate, but should be indexed to inflation). I also agree that the obscenely wealthy do not pay their fair share of taxes, but that is largely due to loopholes and exemptions. Then there are those rich people who say they want to pay more, but don't write a check for more than is due (legal) and don't even pay the taxes they are liable for. Take those "workarounds" away and government income from taxation would dramatically increase, even on a flat tax basis. The problem with a progressive tax rate is that if you raise the upper rates high enough to actually pay for the kind of spending our government has become accustomed to, the rich start selling off businesses, laying off workers, and pulling in investments with the attitude of "if all this income is going to get sucked off by taxes, why bother?"
Quote
Like it or not, a graduated tax rate does more than increase the tax revenue this country needs to operate. It also is an equalizer. Rob from the rich, pay to the poor. And as noted above, that's good for the economy.
I would argue that job creation is even better for the economy. Poor people don't create jobs. Rich people who start businesses, invest in businesses, and pump money into expanding existing businesses are the job creators. If you simply take money from the rich, you provide a disincentive against creating jobs. If you give that money to the poor, it gets spent on today's necessities and is gone tomorrow, whereas a job would feed the family today
and tomorrow.
Quote
Not every poor person is lazy and good for nothing. Most of them would gladly take a job if it gave them even a sliver of satisfaction and paid them enough to get buy and maybe have a little fun too. Until we figure out a way not to penalize the poor, we have to have an imbalance in tax rates.
Today especially, I think there are plenty of poor people who are hard-working honest people who have fallen on hard times and just need a little help. No argument there. I deeply sympathize. I've been there.
However, I do know from personal experience, having been a poor person living in several different poor neighborhoods for a while, that there are also plenty of poor people who complain about not having work but then turn down a job when offered because the government handouts are easier. I have known these people. I've talked with them. I've lived next to them. I've heard them talk
openly (they just assumed I was like-minded since I lived there) of ways to scam the system for more free money and benefits. Heck, there used to be a burrito van about a mile from my current neighborhood that sold fake IDs, including drivers' licenses and social security cards. They periodically got shut down by the authorities, but would be back a week or two later, run by a relative or friend of the previous owner. I haven't seen it for a while now, so they may have run out of unjailed friends and family members.
These are the poor for whom I can find little compassion in my heart. I can't imagine actually
wanting to live that way, but there are people who will go to almost
any length to avoid real work.
Quote
And along with this we have to put an end to politicians using tax revenue to pay back their campaign supporters.
Absolutely! The coziness between government and business
needs to be ended. It only damages the nation.
Quote
There's something I would like to add to your list - we need to put an end to the belief social security, medicare and medicaid are entitlements. Yes, they are not entitlements nor are they social programs.
From the very first day we begin to earn an income, the government is taking money out of our earnings and putting it aside for our retirement. (That's what I was told back in 1968, when I saw the deductions on my first paycheck.) In the private sector its called an IRA or a pension or an annuity. Not only do we contribute but our employers do too. And employers know they have to pay this and deduct that when they figure how much they can afford to pay us. In other words, it's all our money.
Same with medicare and medicaid.
I ran the numbers. If I took what my employers and I have contributed over the years and just figured minimal interest, what a low risk CD would generate. I could buy myself an annuity today that would give me more than what SS will pay me when I retire plus have another $600/mo to put towards health insurance premiums.
What no one will admit is the SS fund was completely solvent back in the 80's and could support itself forever. And then our politicians started "borrowing" from it and they never paid it back. Now they tell us it was a broken system. BULL!
I want my money back!
We definitely need to find a way to keep government fingers out of the SS/Medicare/Medicaid funds (I would go to prison for engaging in such tactics in my fledgling small business but it is legal for the government to do - that really burns me up). To the extent that we pay in money, I would call these "entitlements"; we are entitled to receive the benefits of our own money.
I would argue that any fund where all contributions go into a common pool from which expenses are paid without regard to percentage contributed per participant is a social program. If someone pays in $1000 and gets only $1000 of benefit, not a social program... if someone pays in $1000 and can get $4000 of benefit while someone else paid $3000 and claimed no benefits but cannot ever get that money back, social program. Also, if government contributes funds on a general basis (as opposed to "per contributor" basis) to caver payout overruns, social program.
The issue I have with SS specifically (besides it being nothing but a box of IOUs right now) is that it was set up so that one generation pays for the next generation's retirement. At least, that's what we were taught in the 80s in high school when studying FDR and his New Deal programs - I am prepared to reconsider if presented with scholarly evidence to the contrary.
With that in mind... Technically, that money you are paying in is no longer yours; it belongs to your children (abstractly speaking). It's fine as long as the pool of donors is expanding, but really sucks when the pool shrinks. This is mighty similar to how a pyramid scheme is set up. I would much rather see my paycheck contributions go into a fund managed by a financial manager of my designation and escrowed so that the only people who can touch it are me, my spouse, my heirs, and my designated medical/retirement providers. The government wouldn't even need to be involved except to mandate that it happen. We do it for 401k accounts, why not medical payments and disability/retirement funds?
I think it was in the late 90's I was sitting in the office of my investment guy. I was looking at rolling over some money from my union into a self directed IRA. He pulls out this graph. It was one of those ones that has clear overlays.
He said, "After studying trends for decades, it became clear that by watching those who spend the most, we can better predict the future of the US economy. Money spent creates jobs, creating more spending, creating more jobs, etc."
He pulls out this book and opens it up. "This graph shows the S&P 500 from 1900 to date."
Then he lifts the clear overlay page. "This graph represents the numbers of those in the 44-46 year age group. That group was chosen because that's the time in one's life one typically spends more than at any other time in their life. Their income is higher, they have a bigger house, nicer cars, kids in college. And we know when there is lots of money in the economy, the economy thrives."
He then laid that graph over the S&P 500 graph. They were virtually identical.
He then pointed out, "We don't have a graph showing the future of the S&P but we do of the 44-46 year olds." And he pointed to their numbers peaking in 2004 and declining for years after that. Then he added, "Before we hit that peak, we're going to take your money and invest it overseas, where we know economies are in the upswing."
Of course what that graph can never predict is the crime that took place in the corporations, Wall Street and banking industry. But what that graph does show is spending creates jobs. Businesses have already shown that giving them a tax break only succeeded in boosting their profits. The job creation promise never materialized. 2010, a year when unemployment hovered around 9%, was a record setting year for corporate profits. CORPORATE TAX BREAKS DON'T CREATE JOBS! Not anymore. Greed has taken over.
I don't like the graduated tax system any more than anyone paying taxes. We just haven't come up with a better plan to keep this country running.
What we should do is write into law politicians cannot use tax money to pay back their campaign supporters. No special tax breaks or funding for the businesses or people who poured big money into the elected official's campaign chest. We should also separate defense spending from offense spending. Defense would be defined as protecting our borders. Offense is outside our borders. And when we make cuts, we cut offense spending. Maybe that way we can go back to being a sleeping giant.
There's a whole lot more we can do to fix this country. But we have to fix the corruption in politics first. And that will always be our biggest problem.
The computer age and age of statistics and graphs surely has changed how people calculate doing business. Its a shame we are so precise because our precision means we have to value every last fraction of a cent which leaves no room for extra in case we were wrong or extra to share around for those in need. The stock markets and traders now use the most elaborate systems to figure out every last possible variation so they always win, even if they are winning on a fraction of a cent from a milion investors they make fortunes. Oh i long for the good old days of the abacuss and when the king only wanted 10% of the peasants crops versus today where the banks want at least 15% interest and more if your new or young.
I just got back to finish reading your post...
QuoteThe issue I have with SS specifically (besides it being nothing but a box of IOUs right now) is that it was set up so that one generation pays for the next generation's retirement. At least, that's what we were taught in the 80s in high school when studying FDR and his New Deal programs - I am prepared to reconsider if presented with scholarly evidence to the contrary.
That doesn't make sense because how would the first people who paid into the SS system ever get SS when they retire? There would be no one before them that had paid into the system. The truth is, when the Social Security System was originally set up, they paid you a lump sum check when you retired. That was in place from 1937 to 1939. Here's the other facts: http://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html (http://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html)
No doubt some politician came up with the idea of monthly payments because he hated seeing that big stash of money constantly depleted. There's nothing like a hugs stash of cash to make a politician drool.
I think it was in the late 70's or early 80's that I read an article from some financial guru. He had just done a study on the Social Security System and declared that what was in the fund at the time, if invested wisely and we never put another penny into the fund, it could fund itself forever. That's how much money there was in it back then. If remember correctly, there was a lot of debate not too long after that where some politicians wanted to borrow from SS to pay for other things. There was a huge uproar because everyone who had paid into it saw that money as theirs and they knew what politicians do after they "borrow" money.
They promised to pay it all back, with interest. Even with all the screaming and yelling, they were allowed to dip into the SS fund. You only have to look at the state it's in today to see what happened.
They blamed the baby boomers retiring for the cash deficiency yet failed to explain where all that money that the baby boomers paid into it went. After all, there were so many of them they had to be putting in substantially more than what was being taken out. And the percent the baby boomers were paying were the highest in SS history, at that point. What happened to all that cash?
If you want to see the tables here's a link: http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2010/2a1-2a7.html#table2.a3 (http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2010/2a1-2a7.html#table2.a3)
I created an Excel spreadsheet and ran the numbers myself. All you need to do is plug in the numbers from the report you get from SS. And if the money that each person paid into the system was used to buy safe investment vehicles like CDs or something like that, each one of us would have a nice retirement waiting for us. And if the Medicare/Medicaid monies were also safely invested, we could all buy our own health insurance when we retire.
Take that back to your high school teacher and see how he or she responds.
I agree 100% with your post Julie. I don't feel bad at all taking my SS (I'm 67), I (and my employers) paid in plenty during my years of working.
The Occupy Protests actually began almost 30 years ago...
crimson permanent assurance.wmv (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=errwLVgHpXY#)
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 23, 2011, 11:54:43 AM
I just got back to finish reading your post...
That doesn't make sense because how would the first people who paid into the SS system ever get SS when they retire? There would be no one before them that had paid into the system. The truth is, when the Social Security System was originally set up, they paid you a lump sum check when you retired. That was in place from 1937 to 1939. Here's the other facts: http://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html (http://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html)
After reviewing the link you provided, I couldn't help but notice this bit: (emphasis mine)
QuoteTaxes were collected for the first time in January 1937 and the first one-time, lump-sum payments were made that same month.
So it would seem that either the first batch of payees got more money than they paid in somehow (such as from a non-existent previous generation of payers...or Trust Fund loans from the govt to be repaid as the SS pot grew bigger), or they just got back as much as or less than what they had paid in...which seems kind of pointless unless part of that money got used for the next round of retirees.
But then, I suppose that might explain this other bit:
QuoteA fellow named Ernest Ackerman got a payment for 17 cents in January 1937.
Even at 1937 prices, 17 cents isn't much of a retirement plan. $1 in Jan 1937 would be worth $15.62 in Jan 2011...if you believe the BLS CPI-U calculations. Some economic experts put the amount at almost $50 after accounting for certain CPI calculation changes that were instituted during the Clinton years. Either way, it would buy you anywhere from some bread, eggs, and milk, to a few bags of groceries and that's about it. It would really suck to be a member of that first generation of retirees.
I do love the video post. ;D
I think the guy who got the 17 cents had paid in only one month before he retired. I figured he paid in about 17 cents and at the end of the month, when he retired, he got the 17 cents back, as there wasn't much time for interest to accumulate. It would be like your company instituting a new retirement program one month before you retire. You wouldn't see much of a benefit from that. But for the employee just beginning their working career, it would mean a lot.
That Monty Python video is something I saw in the mid 80's ('84-'85 maybe?). We just had cable installed and I had just purchased our first VCR. I turned on the TV and HBO was doing one of those freebie sessions. They announced Ghostbusters was the featured movie, the kids went nuts, I hurriedly opened the new package of blank VHS tapes and put one in the recorder, fumbling around until I got it to record. Then this strange screen pops up with "Our Short Feature Presentation" (that part was cut from the video above) and then the Crimson Assurance video starts. The kids were freaking, thinking they were being cheated out of seeing Ghostbusters. I thought HBO screwed up. But the video really had me laughing. After that, Ghostbusters started and sanity in our home was restored.
Julie had some video playing the other day that reminded me of the Python clip. I Googled it and there it was. I hadn't seen it in a very long time. ::) As I was watching it, I was surprised how relevant it was to the Occupy Movement. And around the time it was made is about the same time the whole shift in wealth began. Leave it to the Python boys.
This is the full version but the quality is poor
The Crimson Permanent Assurance (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2498206364209961454)
Sea's of Accounting....its a bitch!
Brazil (Terry Gilliam, 1985) - Ministry of Information (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xNnRBksvOU&feature=player_detailpage#)
The "Suits"....
Ann Coulter... She's something else. Recently she was on a radio talk show. She was talking about the Occupy Movement and her book. But I kind of found this disturbing, more so than I usually do when words leave her lips...
COULTER: It was so easy for the liberals to control a large part of the country. I mean you always did have the silent majority as Nixon called it, but I just think it's easy for the silent -- easier for the silent majority to communicate with one another now. And thus, for example, instead of speaking in abstract terms, with the Occupy Wall Street, I mean I'm sure you've been online. All these kids with flipcams are out there filming the Occupy Wall Street, Occupy Oakland, and I'm sure occupy -- I bet I can find a video of what you were just describing, which sounds horrible, and I'm sorry about your bank by the way, and people can see for themselves and get the news they want themselves.
So at the moment anyway, I mean I don't know what's going to happen in New York today, but at the moment I'm not really worried of a movement like SDS which really swept a lot of the college campuses --
SUSSMAN: Yes.
COULTER: -- taking over. Of course if it does, just remember the lesson from my book: it just took a few shootings at Kent State to shut that down for good. And despite the Neil Young song --
I'm sure she wasn't meaning to say we ought to shoot the Occupy protesters, at least I hope not. She can get out there on the fringe and doesn't hesitate to do so if she feels she's right, which she usually does.
Anyway, if you're interested in hearing the audio or reading the text, here it is: http://mediamatters.org/blog/201111260001?frontpage (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201111260001?frontpage)
I'm sure she wasn't meaning to say we ought to shoot the Occupy protesters,
Hard to read that any other way.
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 26, 2011, 02:26:00 PM
COULTER: -- taking over. Of course if it does, just remember the lesson from my book: it just took a few shootings at Kent State to shut that down for good. And despite the Neil Young song --[/font][/size]
I'm sure she wasn't meaning to say we ought to shoot the Occupy protesters, at least I hope not. She can get out there on the fringe and doesn't hesitate to do so if she feels she's right, which she usually does.
She clearly advocates violence, and that it would shut down the OWS.
Z
The violent police assaults across the US are no coincidence. Occupy has touched the third rail of our political class's venality
US citizens of all political persuasions are still reeling from images of unparallelled police brutality in a coordinated crackdown against peaceful OWS protesters in cities across the nation this past week. An elderly woman was pepper-sprayed in the face; the scene of unresisting, supine students at UC Davis being pepper-sprayed by phalanxes of riot police went viral online; images proliferated of young women – targeted seemingly for their gender – screaming, dragged by the hair by police in riot gear; and the pictures of a young man, stunned and bleeding profusely from the head, emerged in the record of the middle-of-the-night clearing of Zuccotti Park.
But just when Americans thought we had the picture – was this crazy police and mayoral overkill, on a municipal level, in many different cities? – the picture darkened. FULL STORY (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/25/shocking-truth-about-crackdown-occupy?fb=optOut)
The article is certainly shocking. But it doesn't surprise me. Occupy is exposing, among other things, the massive shift in wealth that began in the 80's and the political corruption that is fueled by this wealth. The rich and the politicians do not like these kinds of things present and in the forefront of the mind of the public.
There were things I suspected were going on, basically closed meetings between politicians and big money people discussing how to put an end to the Occupy Movement, seeing as they are the ones who have the most to lose. But to read in print "the Mayor of Oakland acknowledged that the Department of Homeland Security had participated in an 18-city mayor conference call advising mayors on "how to suppress" Occupy protests" and to read the linked article, was pretty disturbing. Maybe Coulter's comment was something she heard buzzing around the extreme right camp and there has really been talk about allowing law enforcement to use any means necessary to quell the uprising. And here I was giving Coulter a pass because I wanted to believe in the inherent goodness of the human animal.
I guess things like allowing overnight camping out to purchase tickets for a show or event but cracking down on Occupy protesters camping out shouldn't surprise me. Capitalism, 1; Freedom of Speech, 0
That is, until I found out what it was that OWS actually wanted.
The mainstream media was declaring continually "OWS has no message". Frustrated, I simply asked them. I began soliciting online "What is it you want?" answers from Occupy. In the first 15 minutes, I received 100 answers. These were truly eye-opening.
The No 1 agenda item: get the money out of politics. Most often cited was legislation to blunt the effect of the Citizens United ruling, which lets boundless sums enter the campaign process. No 2: reform the banking system to prevent fraud and manipulation, with the most frequent item being to restore the Glass-Steagall Act – the Depression-era law, done away with by President Clinton, that separates investment banks from commercial banks. This law would correct the conditions for the recent crisis, as investment banks could not take risks for profit that create kale derivatives out of thin air, and wipe out the commercial and savings banks.
No 3 was the most clarifying: draft laws against the little-known loophole that currently allows members of Congress to pass legislation affecting Delaware-based corporations in which they themselves are investors.
When I saw this list – and especially the last agenda item – the scales fell from my eyes. Of course, these unarmed people would be having the ->-bleeped-<- kicked out of them.[/b]
Back when I started really paying attention to politics, I saw candidates take substantial amounts of their own money and pour it into their campaigns. When I would discuss this with friends, I would say the only reason they would do this is because they knew they would get a return on their investment. And that return must be pretty substantial because they need to get elected if they ever expect their investment to pay off.
Almost 100% of the time the response I would get would be something like, "No. The pay politicians get can't possibly make up for the millions some of these people are putting in."
"But there are 'perks' and that's where they really make their money" I would say.
"If they did that, then it would be illegal and they could lose their job or get thrown in jail."
"But they make the laws. They have enormous power. And they control the government."
I really can't recall a single time when anyone would reach that point where they saw my position as even a possibility. It was just unfathomable our trusted elected officials would ever take advantage of their position. But if they did, we had the media hound dogs keeping them in check.
My eyes were opened about 35 years ago. A friend of mine was talking when he ran for Chicago alderman and lost by three votes. He said that was the best thing that could have happened to him, "because I would be in jail by now." He went on to explain that what he had learned from that time on, by staying politically connected (he was friends with many Chicago powerhouse politicians), was that there was so much money flashed in the face of politicians it would have been impossible for him to resist. The reason he would be thrown in jail and the rest of the politicians aren't is that he isn't a lawyer. "As a lawyer, I could have taken bribes and called it a legal consultation fee. I would report it and pay taxes." I wasn't naive, and I knew my friend didn't bull->-bleeped-<-. But it was then I knew at least one way politicians were able to commit a crime and walk away scot-free.
As this article points out, politics is now one of those professions where you will walk away much richer than what you walked in with. Yet I can't remember a time in my life when I haven't heard family, friends, the media, whatever, talk about how important it is to keep money out of politics. Look where we are now.
Politicians used to pass laws protecting the citizens. Then they took the bribes and started rescinding those laws which opened the floodgates of greed. The OWS protesters are our soldiers, fighting on the front lines against the armed militia of the rich, paid for through our tax dollars. We should be screaming through the rooftops. Yet there is an apathy, a disbelief, a head-in-the-sand attitude that is so prevalent it makes me wonder if the average citizen wants to hand their freedom to anyone willing to take it.
We talk about the US as the Land Of The Free. And freedom is always in jeopardy of being lost if you don't protect it and fight those who want to take it away. Our military is fighting the villains overseas. Our government is focusing on the wrong villain
>> COULTER: -- taking over. Of course if it does, just remember the lesson from my book: it just took a few shootings at Kent State to shut that down for good. And despite the Neil Young song -- <<
Coulter is an extremist. Even as a fiscal conservative, I can't stand her. She makes Rush look centrist.
I just saw a piece on 60 Minutes about the growing number of homeless kids in America today, "The Hard Times Generation". One statistic said that number is nearing 25%, more than any time since the Great Depression. 60 Minutes did an earlier piece on homeless kids that is on YouTube now. The second piece should appear there later.
Hard times generation: homeless kids (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK_RnxYdrqU#)
Then Julie sends me this article (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/business/estee-lauder-heirs-tax-strategies-typify-advantages-for-wealthy.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1) about Ronald S. Lauder, heir to the Estée Lauder fortune. It's hard to read the article after seeing the two pieces by 60 Minutes. When will these uber-wealthy have enough money? At what point will they see that all the influence they have used to muscle legislation favoring their growing wealth is hurting today's kids? When will their piece of the pie be big enough to satisfy them?
And what will it take for the general public to realize it's time to make some dramatic changes in the people we elect to govern this country and act in the interest of all the citizens, and not just the chosen?
Quote from: Julie Marie on November 27, 2011, 08:37:06 PM
I just saw a piece on 60 Minutes about the growing number of homeless kids in America today, "The Hard Times Generation". One statistic said that number is nearing 25%, more than any time since the Great Depression.
Currently, the highest level of unemployment is for people under 25 yr old, with college degrees. Coincidentally, I posted two articles on homeless trans kids today.
Z
Well as soon as israel attacks Iran the american economy will pick back up hiring many youth / draft and those who won't fight will be put in internment camps run by FEMA.. The super rich kids will still get their college deferments though because they can afford the loans or cost at any price..
yea sick huh.. seems kinda obvious though.. and we the people think we have any ability to make changes by voting for either democrats or republicans.. Just like the egyptians think they will get who they want in todays vote yes right hah.. :'(
Israel PM 'wants to strike Iran'
(UKPA) – Nov 2, 2011
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to persuade his cabinet to authorise a military strike against Iran's suspected nuclear weapons programme - a discussion that comes as Israel successfully tests a missile believed capable of carrying a nuclear warhead to Iran, an official said.
It remained unclear whether Israel was genuinely poised to strike or if it was sabre-rattling to prod the international community into taking a tougher line on Iran.
Israeli leaders have long hinted at a military option, but they always seemed mindful of the practical difficulties, the likelihood of a furious counter-strike and the risk of regional mayhem.
The developments unfolded as the International Atomic Energy Agency is due to focus on the Iranian programme at a meeting later this month. The West wants to set a deadline for Iran to start co-operating with an agency probe of suspicions that Tehran is secretly experimenting with components of a weapons programme.
Israeli leaders have said they favour a diplomatic solution, but recent days have seen a spate of Israeli media reports on a possible strike, accompanied by veiled threats from top politicians.
In a speech to parliament this week, Mr Netanyahu said a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a "dire threat" to the world and "a grave, direct threat on us, too". His hawkish foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, was dismissive of the reports but added: "We are keeping all the options on the table."
The government official confirmed a report in the Haaretz daily that Mr Netanyahu and defence minister Ehud Barak both favour an attack, but do not yet have the support of a majority of cabinet ministers. The official also said Israel's top security chiefs, including the heads of the military and Mossad spy agency, oppose military action.
It is generally understood that such a momentous decision would require a cabinet decision. Israel's 1981 destruction of Iraq's nuclear reactor was preceded by a cabinet vote.
Mr Netanyahu's spokesman Mark Regev refused to comment on the issue but did say there is a "decision-making process which has stood the test of time... There have been precedents, and the process works".
etc
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5i-EtGObmDAatSrF-TbAapA-S95mA?doc (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5i-EtGObmDAatSrF-TbAapA-S95mA?doc)
It looks like at least one mayor decided not to use military force in an attempt to discourage the Occupy Movement.
LOS ANGELES — It had all the makings of a showdown: shouting protesters, police officers in riot gear, with batons drawn as they pushed forward to disperse the crowd. But in the end, as the deadline for Occupy Los Angeles protesters to clear their tents from City Hall passed early Monday morning, there was hardly a commotion. FULL STORY (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/us/occupy-philadelphia-and-occupy-la-face-eviction.html)
But I'm not expecting this to start a wave of tolerance...
One point to remember about Ann Coulter is that she likes to stir up controversy. What she said was calculated. When some fool(s) actually carry out violent acts, she casually excuse herself, saying that she had nothing to do with the acts. I have a saying that an instigator is just as guilty as the person who commits the crimes. That's what Ann Coulter is, an instigator.
It seems the Occupy Movement has fallen off the front page of the news. Even though the battle still wages on, the media seems less interested in focusing on it than it previously was. There's a possibility that big money has pressured them, directly or indirectly, but odds are the public isn't buying up the stories like they once did.
It was a long time ago so I can't say my memory is 100% accurate, but I don't remember the anti-Viet Nam protests losing steam or even leveling out. It just seemed to keep escalating. And when Kent State happened, contrary to Coulter's recollection, outrage fueled the fires.
Today I see this article:
Occupy faces unknown future
After facing eviction from its home at Dilworth Plaza, occupiers contemplate the future of the movement
Occupy Philadelphia's eviction from Dilworth Plaza Wednesday morning has sparked a question central to its future — can the movement be sustained now that it no longer has a physical place to occupy?
FULL STORY (http://thedp.com/index.php/article/2011/12/occupy_faces_unknown_future)
The Occupy people said the movement isn't dying, which you'd expect them to say, but for those who support it but aren't active participants, there does seem to be a certain level of success by local authorities in keeping the movement from growing. And when a movement stops gaining momentum, that typically spells the death of the movement, or at least relegating it to the back burners.
When I started this thread, I wondered if the Occupy Movement had what it takes to impact history. I believe it does. But, unlike former movements that we now read about in history books, there doesn't seem to be sufficient fire under it to counter the resistance. Maybe the fact that the Baby Boomers, who by their vast numbers became the first generation to win the war against their parents, are now in control and their numbers are still great. Whatever, I'm seeing the police riot squads, supported by the Homeland Security forces and armaments, winning this one, even if by a small margin.
Does anyone see it otherwise?
If you check you'll find that the major anti-war actions happened in the fall and spring.
Quote from: Julie Marie on December 02, 2011, 08:00:02 AM
And when Kent State happened, contrary to Coulter's recollection, outrage fueled the fires.
Yes. As a young Wisconsin kid at the time I recall this incident which happened in nearby Ohio increased awareness about the Vietnam war and helped to add steam to the anti-war movement in my community.
Jennifer
Quote from: Jennifer on December 02, 2011, 12:07:46 PM
Yes. As a young Wisconsin kid at the time I recall this incident which happened in nearby Ohio increased awareness about the Vietnam war and helped to add steam to the anti-war movement in my community.
Jennifer
You're absolutely right on, Jennifer. People were tired of seeing their friends and family members coming home maimed, injured, or dead. It was the people who ended the Vietnam war.
The Occupy Movement may not be on the front pages but it's still going. Tactics may have to change. The problem is that most Americans still get their news and information from mainstream media. Mainstream is owned by the corporations the protesters are rebeling against. Alternative media is doing an adequate job but most folks don't read them.
Fukushima fell off the front pages but it's worse than ever. Folks in Japan are protesting;something that is taboo in that culture. Haiti still has problems almost two years after the massive earthquake. It's not in the mainstream media but it's still a big issue.
Fukushima fell off the front pages but it's worse than ever.
It's going to hit the water table in the next year or so. And it's water table is the ocean. Uncharted waters anyone?
David Rothchilds wants to force the world to use less energy etc 500 trillion$
500 trillions dollars in worth = half of the planets money controlled by the rothchilds = The Rothschilds 500 TRILLION DOLLARS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym4TTmOJ4I8&feature=endscreen&NR=1#) .............................
......................................... .................................................... ....................................
David de Rothschild Answers Alex Jones (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b77baa3VdhM&feature=related#) = David Rothchilds is going to force the world to stop consuming stuff because he wants to save the planet.
..................................... ................................................. ............................................
.
Get ready for the slow down and be able to survive without thinking all will be the same.. I have been trying to tell you this for yrs.. that's why i have done what i have done.. don't plan on spending and consuming like normal.. The money is being extracted from the people to force us to use less.. your home will only be worth very little but people who have land to grow food will have value... sell your city / suburban houses asap and buy farm land with a structure...
On The Daily Show last night, he interviewed Lawrence Lessig. Lessig has written a book called "Republic, Lost" and in it he cites the fact that .05% of campaign contributors max their donations and those donations represent a staggeringly high percentage of total donations. Maybe Occupy is really the 99.95%...
Most of us know our angelic politicians would never be swayed by money so campaign contributions have no effect whatsoever on how they will vote. ::)
Lessig talked about things we can do to stop the influence of big money in politics and get the influence back in the hands of the people. Obviously, we don't need any acts of Congress to make those changes, all we need to do is vote out those who don't truly represent us. But most of us are too lazy to research those for whom we cast a vote.
Henry David Thoreau wrote, "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." In his book, Lessig talks about how we can strike at the roots of corruption in our government. You can see him talk about that in part 2 of the Daily Show video.
There is already a web organization called Rootstrikers (http://www.rootstrikers.org/). Will the Occupy people move indoors and take up residence there?
Yeah, Halliburton paid Dick Cheney over $20 million, but I'm sure it never affected his judgement.
What I do is research candidates backgrounds. Criteria are their voting record, funding, where they get their funding from, etc . I found out by research that while Michelle Bachmann was railing against big governement, her husband borrowed 140 thousand dollars of government money for reparative therapy on gay and lesbian people.
I will be visiting Occupy Wall Street on Saturday. They are preparing to occupy another site. I will fill you in on what happened in the next few days.
Quote from: gennee on December 15, 2011, 11:48:33 AM
... while Michelle Bachmann was railing against big governement, her husband borrowed 140 thousand dollars of government money for reparative therapy on gay and lesbian people.
font]
How interesting, do you have a web site or reference
Quote from: Jen61 on December 15, 2011, 02:39:40 PM
How interesting, do you have a web site or reference
QuoteThe $161,000 in payments from the Minnesota Department of Human Services to her husband's clinic appear to contradict some of Michelle Bachmann's public accounts this week when she was first asked about the extent to which her family has benefited from government aid. Contacted this afternoon, Alice Stewart, a spokeswoman for Bachmann, said the congresswoman was doing campaign events and was not immediately available for comment.
QuoteBut an investigation earlier this month by Truth Wins Out1 exposed that this hateful practice is used by the "quality Christian counseling clinic" owned by Michele Bachmann and her husband -- a clinic which was recently discovered to have received over $137,000 in federal Medicaid funds, in addition to $24,000 in other state and federal funds.But an investigation earlier this month by Truth Wins Out1 exposed that this hateful practice is used by the "quality Christian counseling clinic" owned by Michele Bachmann and her husband -- a clinic which was recently discovered to have received over $137,000 in federal Medicaid funds, in addition to $24,000 in other state and federal funds.
Google it if you want the websites. That's how I found the above.
The 99% Declaration Redux (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RMN8TmDXd8&feature=related#)
Thankfully, I think Bachmann is too controversial to take the Republican nomination. Right now, it looks like a tight race between Gingrich and Romney with Ron Paul in third place but slowly and steadily catching up in the polls. (Some polls have even placed Paul as second ahead of Romney in Iowa.) I think Perry has bungled enough that he is no longer a realistic contender.
Since Obama most likely has a lock on the Democrat nomination (the incumbent usually takes it for their party), it will probably come down to Obama vs Gingrich/Romney/Paul by November.
On the Republican side, Paul is the one least likely to try to pass some new form of DOMA. Take that for what you will.
(FWIW, I have no loyalties for either of those two parties. Just summarizing what I see.)
Ron Paul is the only candidate who has it right.
If Romney isn't the Pubs choice to go up against Obama I'll be shocked. I know they have a serious aversion to Romney but their other choices are either too controversial or just not in line with the Tea Party/Norquist/Billionaire Boys ideals. Gingrich's "the poor public schools are failing so let's teach the poor kids how to be good janitors" kind of mentality won't hold up with the general public. And he won't be the flavor of the week for very long. The Pubs will have to take Romney because the party won't accept anyone anymore left than him.
As for Occupy, maybe it's time to start getting signatures to make changes in how we do business. Change the election process by dramatically reducing campaign donations. Put an end to lobbying and corporate personhood. Make Constitutional changes that even the Supreme Court can't skirt around. And do this by creating referendums and such that only require voter signatures and not having to rely on our politicians to take action.
Quote from: gennee on December 16, 2011, 02:21:47 PM
Ron Paul is the only candidate who has it right.
Please enlight me. Are you saying he is going to bring the 1% back in line !
Quote from: Jen61 on December 15, 2011, 02:39:40 PM
How interesting, do you have a web site or reference
I googled her name and followed some of the websites.
Quote from: Jen61 on December 17, 2011, 03:30:10 PM
Please enlight me. Are you saying he is going to bring the 1% back in line !
Ron Paul is the only one who would get rid of the Federal Reserve which fund all these unnecessary wars. There are some issues that I don't agree with him on but he's the only candidate that is not a corporatist.
I went down to Occupy Wall Street on Saturday. The site is smaller but seems to be building back up. The property their on belongs to a church. They are in negotiation with the church about the site. The media isn't covering the Occupy movement like before but they are still there. They still have meetings and are working on a different strategy.
It sounds like they aren't disrupting the Wall Streeters where they are now. Would you say that's true Gennee?
I would, Julie. I'm going to find out about what their plans are. They need to go after some targets, I agree.
If you aren't disrupting the people who fund the politicians you aren't going to get noticed.
MY LETTER TO OWS::
http://www.nycga.net/groups/the-99-declaration-working-group/forum/topic/respectfully-some-suggestions/?topic_page=4&num=15#post-15124 (http://www.nycga.net/groups/the-99-declaration-working-group/forum/topic/respectfully-some-suggestions/?topic_page=4&num=15#post-15124)
I am a part of the 99% of the USA population because i am a poor vietnam veteran living in a house without plumbing and barely surviving. I have not been to any occupy ralleys because i am my moms caregiver. I have been happy to see the attention gotten by the encapments but it has become a problem in that it has caused small businesses to suffer near these encapments. It has also gotten people to take sides due to the wild actions forcing police actions against you all. Now i am one who has had an encapment. However, i did it at the US Capital by the reflecting pool for 23 days + NIGHTS. Yes i slept in my tent overnight next to the reflecting pool in may 2002. So i know all about protesting. My permit didn't allow for over night but then again i wasn't causing a issue for any local businesses or police. I actuall had their support for my cause. I also found online the 99declaration group and was wary at first. I thought they didn't represent most at the encapments. However, i have been a homeless person many times in my life and as time went by i saw how many homeless gathered at these occupy encapments and well they can be some pretty powerful voices. They are use to running any encapments where people gather. Its their lifestyle. To many of them its their THING and these encapments are a THING for them to try and control. They are especially interested in the Donations coming in. I have looked at both sides and i haven't joined either side but I DECLARE I SUPPORT THE http://WWW.THE99DECLARATION.ORG (http://www.the99declaration.org) / GROUP. I hope that the people here will support them and also see how at many encampments you have people who are professional homeless who can become major players in your initial protest and can be swaying your movement, because they don't want to see your movement ever end so they get to be players in a group that never ends and gets donations. These professional homeless do not want to get jobs and go back to work. I know them as i lived with them all over the USA over the last 40 yrs off and on but i left to move to the country to help farmers because i know we have to work and work is good and healthy for all people. I hope you will choose what i have chosen.
SIGNED
Danie Clarke a vietnam veteran transgender who has been an activist all my life. I even joined the USMC to tell them i won't kill anybody. So i know your side. I also have had a small business as a furniture mover and builder.
Quote from: Julie Marie on December 22, 2011, 10:02:33 PM
If you aren't disrupting the people who fund the politicians you aren't going to get noticed.
Very true. That's why I want to see what they next move will be. They need to be in the street and focus on the people who caused this mess.
Quote from: gennee on December 29, 2011, 11:48:56 AM
Very true. That's why I want to see what they next move will be. They need to be in the street and focus on the people who caused this mess.
And the banks and financial offices too. Imagine all the people who ended up underwater on their mortgages all going into their local banks and applying for refinancing, again and again and again. Or the people who saw their retirement investments shrink or vanish going into their local broker's office and seeing how best to invest the $100 from their piggy bank. There's more than one way to get noticed.
Your right about that, Julie. Many minorities here were affected by both. My bank won't approve loans unless you have a secured account.