Occupy Wall Street

[dogman_1234]

Gah! Damn it! Corrected.

 

[Reynod]

Reading Americans POV about Europe is sometimes bewildering...

i didn't want to interfere in this thread while it talks about wall street, but when i read remarks like "Greece bankrupt is because of it socialist policies", i want to tear my eyes with cockers and take Xanax (+/- 300mg)

I agree gropouce.

The US version of "socialism" is quite different to that of Europeans or even Australians.

Here a socialist is basically a labor party supporter who is a bit of a "lefty".

That same person would nt consider thmselves remotely into communist doctrine at all ... merely a humanitarian who wants to see the poor and disadvantaged taken care of by society.

I'd probably consider myself a bit of a central labor person ... but I am a bit of a soft ah heck when it comes to the poor, disabled and weak ...

I want an inclusive culture too ... i know many thinks multiculturalism is a bot of a failure but I know people from all sorts of different cultures and consider them my friends.

 

[dogman_1234]

Possibly a libby for me. Possibly more centrist. I'm confused as it is right now. Too many ideologies to follow. Just be an individual.

 

[dogman_1234]

We should also blame God, Satan, Buddha, The flying Spaghetti monster, Richard Dawkins, Peter Pan, Winnie the Pooh, Hitler, Lenin, and Snookie on the crisis as well. Occupy All of Them.

This is a movement, not a commitment. Think of it as going to the bathroom. Just movement...that is it. It is to remove all the crap that is still there.

 

[blackhawk1928]

We should also blame God, Satan, Buddha, The flying Spaghetti monster, Richard Dawkins, Peter Pan, Winnie the Pooh, Hitler, Lenin, and Snookie on the crisis as well. Occupy All of Them.

This is a movement, not a commitment. Think of it as going to the bathroom. Just movement...that is it. It is to remove all the crap that is still there.

http://www.youtube.com/user/drinkingwithbob#p/u/3/gkt5Nl8qCjE

^You must watch this video.

Please elaborate, gro.
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2011/11/07/111107taco_talk_hertzberg
This is fairly interesting, a discussion on a point that hasn't been brought up much in this thread.
It says that OWS is making a mistake by failing to concentrate on getting things done within our existing political system, as the Tea Party has done.
It also says that OWS may become more radical, and may lose potential for effectiveness, as winter comes on and the more moderate Occupiers leave, leaving "people for whom the problem is “capitalism” per se, as opposed to a political economy rigged to benefit the rich at the expense of the rest."

chunky, your first two points seem to make sense, but the third seems tautological to me. They have Social Democratic policies because their constitutions declare them to be social democracies? Sounds normal.

blackhawk. "It is not possible to do it right...if socialism "works" then it isn't fully socialism and/or corrupted yet."
Sounds fine. I'm for any system that works - if it's incomplete socialism, that's fine. Our government, and the governments of other countries, don't have to conform fully to the extremes of individual political theories.
"[T]he unemployment was caused by a recession which was caused directly by socialist agendas at work creating a huge housing market bubble and crash. "
Based on dogman's article (I'd never heard of these policies before now, so I'm still ignorant on this issue beyond the information on that piece), it seems that the policy was a misguided attempt at combating discrimination, not a "socialist agenda."

The policy has nothing to do with discrimination. And if they use that as an excuse for the failure then they are even more stupid. Banks do not care what the color of your skin is...this has nothing to do with race. Banks want profit...nothing more and nothing less. They were knowingly forced into providing loans that would NEVER be able to get payed back. Loaning $500,000 for a house to somebody who makes $25,000 annually is a loan that will never be payed back. If you cannot afford a house, the you have no right to live in it.

 

[dogman_1234]

http://www.youtube.com/user/drinkingwithbob#p/u/3/gkt5Nl8qCjE
.

Sorry, I do not like people who scream at me to make a point.

1) He is right. We need to clean up Washington. Lobbying should be criminal. Also, make sure there is more than just a separation of institution.

2) OWS and the Tea Party ARE movements. Any movement involves ideas and an act on which the group wants sen done. OWS is the more liberal version of the Tea Party...and more chaotic as well.

3) This is not a Robin Hood policy they want. What they are,( or need to make clear is,) that the movement is about complete greed by everyone in the country, not just corporations. I am against socialist ideas. I do, however, want to see this country progress further. What needs to be done is to create jobs here.

4) The reason they are sitting there and not getting a job is the fact that: There are no jobs. Also, if there were jobs, why aren't companies hiring? Double-dip fears, C'mon. That is fabricated MSM bullcrap to get everyone to jump ship. We do have money in the system,( about 14.6 trillion estimated.) We need to invest in jobs. Companies, both small, medium, and large must hire at least 1 person. And, no, taxes will not solve anything immediately. Just look at Obama.

The question I have for you guys is: Do you want to have companies hire or let the government intervene. ( Think Barack Obama and George Bush jr.)

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Id add Clinton to that list, as well as Johnson

I think some here are "getting it", as OMG's link showed, a highly liberal site is no longer denying the truth, and since we all can agree, its down to our greed, all of our greed, that it wasnt just Wall Street, but, as Ive stated elsewheres, if the zoo keeper lets the tiger gate be left open, and the tigers devour several people, why should we believe the zoo keeper when he says, its the tigers fault, when the tiger is just being a tiger.
This also proves the so called unfairness, and Washingtons foolhardiness concerning the housing debacle.
Banks want profit, and no, they arent in business to resell houses, unless theyre made to make loans to those that are greedy, themselves (the buyers) knowing they cant afford a house, and then those on Wall street, and the banks, who then took those mortgages, resold them, they were hot potatos, to other dupes, who then sold them to others yet again, til no one wanted them at all, knowing just how bad they were, and then the money came due, the people who lived in the houses they couldnt afford didnt have the money, and out they went, feeling bewildered, and claiming its the man, the rich man, he did this to us.
Look no farther than Washington.
Theyre supposed to be our protectors, not bringers of great tidings, those are things we the people earn.
Some may not like it, but its the American way, always has been, always should be
I havnt even mentioned the other tigers, those that prey upon peoples minds and wills, while some exist in Washington, some also are walking along Wall Street, but arent entering any of the businesses there, except....maybe McDonalds

 

[kajabla]

I just found out OWS will be right next to my building on Monday the 7th.

Wonderful, just wonderful!


And, then there is this little gem:

How Did Occupy D.C. Protesters Respond to a Table Full of Job Applications?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/new-video-occupy-d-c-protesters-brush-off-job-applications/

4) The reason they are sitting there and not getting a job is the fact that: There are no jobs. Also, if there were jobs, why aren't companies hiring? Double-dip fears, C'mon. That is fabricated MSM bullcrap to get everyone to jump ship. We do have money in the system,( about 14.6 trillion estimated.) We need to invest in jobs. Companies, both small, medium, and large must hire at least 1 person. And, no, taxes will not solve anything immediately. Just look at Obama.

That's a depressing video.
It's possible to find jobs. They might not be well-paying jobs, but they will be jobs, and each one will get the economy moving a little more.

On that note, does anyone else find it a little ridiculous that the economic system of the entire world is based on, constant, permanent, unlimited growth? We only have one planet. What if we just stabilized, and "ECONOMIC GROWTH STAGNATES THIS QUARTER" wasn't taken as a horror story?

 

[blackhawk1928]

Sorry, I do not like people who scream at me to make a point.

1) He is right. We need to clean up Washington. Lobbying should be criminal. Also, make sure there is more than just a separation of institution.

2) OWS and the Tea Party ARE movements. Any movement involves ideas and an act on which the group wants sen done. OWS is the more liberal version of the Tea Party...and more chaotic as well.

3) This is not a Robin Hood policy they want. What they are,( or need to make clear is,) that the movement is about complete greed by everyone in the country, not just corporations. I am against socialist ideas. I do, however, want to see this country progress further. What needs to be done is to create jobs here.

4) The reason they are sitting there and not getting a job is the fact that: There are no jobs. Also, if there were jobs, why aren't companies hiring? Double-dip fears, C'mon. That is fabricated MSM bullcrap to get everyone to jump ship. We do have money in the system,( about 14.6 trillion estimated.) We need to invest in jobs. Companies, both small, medium, and large must hire at least 1 person. And, no, taxes will not solve anything immediately. Just look at Obama.

The question I have for you guys is: Do you want to have companies hire or let the government intervene. ( Think Barack Obama and George Bush jr.)

3/4) They don't want a robin hood policy?...did you see the video that JayDeeJohn or Gamer posted? The one with the people walking around wallstreet with job applications. They talked to like 40people and got only two job applications. One of the protestors was even stupid enough to fill out that application for solyndra...a company that no longer exists. After this you tell me they want jobs? These people think that they are entitled to come in a place and automatically get a job. If you work hard and look hard enough, you CAN get jobs.

And yes, companies aren't hiring due to double dip fears partially. The economy is in horrific shape. They keep saying its getting better, but it isn't. The debt is still climbing, unemployment is like 8-9%, companies are losing billions of dollars. When companies are allowed to expand, they do. When they don't...there is a problem, and it isn't them, its government.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Who are they? Those saying its getting better? The media?
Thats the problem, one side acts as if theyre totally non political, saying things like its getting better, all the while, tearing down the other side, who are saying it isnt.
I like alternatives of thought, thats how I learn, but I love the truth

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Who are they? Those saying its getting better? The media?
Thats the problem, one side acts as if theyre totally non political, saying things like its getting better, all the while, tearing down the other side, who are saying it isnt.
I like alternatives of thought, thats how I learn, but I love the truth

 

[chunkymonster]

I think some here are "getting it", as OMG's link showed, a highly liberal site is no longer denying the truth, and since we all can agree, its down to our greed, all of our greed, that it wasnt just Wall Street, but, as Ive stated elsewheres, if the zoo keeper lets the tiger gate be left open, and the tigers devour several people, why should we believe the zoo keeper when he says, its the tigers fault, when the tiger is just being a tiger.

Based on your comments, I think you might like an American Thinker article, Greedy Occupiers.

I have been interested in and amused by the Occupation Protesters. Does anyone else see the dichotomy of this phenomenon? I am still not sure of the total scope of their issues, but there is a common thread in most of the protests. They are against greed and the accumulation of wealth. There is a strong thread of animosity toward the free market and capitalism. It is there that the whole issue of projection amuses me.
One the one hand there is the presumed evil person or group of people (corporations), who evidence their evil by accumulating wealth, which is demonstrated against. The point: 'Share the evil with me!' Those who are against what they see as greed, seem to stand ready to alleviate the greed by their focus on it and willingness to spread the evil greed around. Is this greed over greed? Yes, I think I see some projection here.
Whether it is being prejudiced against prejudiced people or greedy toward greedy people, it is a double edged sword. It says far more about the protester than it does that which they protest against. Greed, in any form and at any level, is greed nonetheless.

This also proves the so called unfairness, and Washingtons foolhardiness concerning the housing debacle. Banks want profit, and no, they arent in business to resell houses, unless theyre made to make loans to those that are greedy, themselves (the buyers) knowing they cant afford a house, and then those on Wall street, and the banks, who then took those mortgages, resold them, they were hot potatos, to other dupes, who then sold them to others yet again, til no one wanted them at all, knowing just how bad they were, and then the money came due, the people who lived in the houses they couldnt afford didnt have the money, and out they went, feeling bewildered, and claiming its the man, the rich man, he did this to us. Look no farther than Washington. Theyre supposed to be our protectors, not bringers of great tidings, those are things we the people earn. Some may not like it, but its the American way, always has been, always should be

+1

On a side note, if OWS has any intentions of continuing their movement, now would be a good time to show themselves as an organization and present a statement. For the time being, OWS has America's attention, time to stand up, show you've got a pair and sound off. Any press I read, see, or hear is all negative, I get the fact that it's a protest; but directed where and at what? OWS is already starting to fade into the media background. Winter is coming, so are the Holidays, life in America will continue to drudge forward, where will Occupy be come February?

 

[kajabla]

On a side note, if OWS has any intentions of continuing their movement, now would be a good time to show themselves as an organization and present a statement. For the time being, OWS has America's attention, time to stand up, show you've got a pair and sound off. Any press I read, see, or hear is all negative, I get the fact that it's a protest; but directed where and at what? OWS is already starting to fade into the media background. Winter is coming, so are the Holidays, life in America will continue to drudge forward, where will Occupy be come February?

See the New Yorker article for dark thoughts on that (http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2011/11/07/111107taco_talk_hertzberg). They're not a party, though. They don't have leadership or organization. Many of them would like to sound off, I'm sure, but the opinions there are so diverse that it'd be next to impossible to get a unified message out of them.

 

[chunkymonster]

On that note, does anyone else find it a little ridiculous that the economic system of the entire world is based on, constant, permanent, unlimited growth? We only have one planet.

Nope, not all. It is human nature to engage in commerce. People want things, people have skills, things gotta be made from something. Can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs, gotta create a Replicator to stop that.

What if we just stabilized, and "ECONOMIC GROWTH STAGNATES THIS QUARTER" wasn't taken as a horror story?

So, no one spends money for a day? Not sure I get what you're saying. Besides, achieving a stable economy is as easy as OWS and the Tea Party to both demand a balance budget Amendment.

 

[kajabla]

No, you don't see what I'm saying. It's not commerce or industry that I'm talking about, but growth in the *amount* of commerce. Financial outlooks have a baseline of steady economic growth - people buying more things than before instead of the same amount. You can't maintain that forever. A stable economy currently means one that is slowly growing, not one that is remaining static.

 

[kajabla]

Decrease doesn't have to mean control. People can just choose to have one child. No American legislature will accept population control in the foreseeable future, but that doesn't mean our population has to keep growing.

 

[chunkymonster]

No, you don't see what I'm saying. It's not commerce or industry that I'm talking about, but growth in the *amount* of commerce. Financial outlooks have a baseline of steady economic growth - people buying more things than before instead of the same amount. You can't maintain that forever. A stable economy currently means one that is slowly growing, not one that is remaining static.

Well, consumables and services inherently require a constant repurchasing, so some level of steady growth is expected; to believe otherwise is unrealistic. It would be pragmatically impossible to make the level of consumption a zero sum game with production. There is no business model and control system that could ever make it happen.

As far as the failing to achieve a static/stable economy, look no further than the 60 years of failed Keynesian economic policies, baseline congressional budgeting, and government's continued debt spending. Incidentally, the only time on the past 40 years America had a balanced budget was during the Clinton Administration, when there was a Republican controlled Congress.

Decrease doesn't have to mean control. People can just choose to have one child. No American legislature will accept population control in the foreseeable future, but that doesn't mean our population has to keep growing.

You're right, no American legislature will EVER accept population control because the thought of legislating population control in America is insanity! You wanna thin the herd, YOU are free to choose to not have any children. Population control as a means of managing the world's resources is just unthinkable and the epitome of class warfare. Please, just stop.

Here's something to consider, wanna know a reason why Libya accepted Sharia Law as the basis for their new government? To legally and morally sanction polygamy. Why would they implement polygamy? TO INCREASE THEIR POPULATION! This has been done throughout history and in many forms. Try selling population control to Libya, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, and Yemen. G'head, see what they say, let me know how that works out for you.

 

[chunkymonster]

See the New Yorker article for dark thoughts on that (http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2011/11/07/111107taco_talk_hertzberg). They're not a party, though. They don't have leadership or organization. Many of them would like to sound off, I'm sure, but the opinions there are so diverse that it'd be next to impossible to get a unified message out of them.

We may have to rethink OWS as an organized entity. Come to find out, back on 10/1/2011, without any fanfare, Occupy New York released a Declaration. You can read it here...

Declaration of the Occupation of New York City.

 

[chunkymonster]

Do not think it is inconceivable that population control by violent means can't happen here. It has happened before in other parts of the world.

I agree it's certainly possible, but do not believe its probable in America. Things would have be completely and totally FUBAR to reach that point. Even if OWS became violent, and started arming themselves, I don't see marshal law at the Federal level but more at the County/Municipal level.

There's not much that would make me take to the streets, but that level of oppression would compel me and my AR to meet them on the march. I might end up dead but not before thinning their ranks first.

Personally, I think the government has more to fear from an F-150 full of rednecks with AR's and shotguns than we have to fear from them.

Hypothetically speaking of course...

 

[jsc]

Here's something to consider, wanna know a reason why Libya accepted Sharia Law as the basis for their new government? To legally and morally sanction polygamy. Why would they implement polygamy? TO INCREASE THEIR POPULATION! This has been done throughout history and in many forms. Try selling population control to Libya, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, and Yemen. G'head, see what they say, let me know how that works out for you.

Me: "What about children?"
Saudi coworker: "Children are a blessing from Allah."
Me: "What happens if you have more than you can support?"
Saudi coworker: "Allah will provide."

The above is practically direct quotes from several of my Saudi coworkers.

 

[kajabla]

You're right, no American legislature will EVER accept population control because the thought of legislating population control in America is insanity! You wanna thin the herd, YOU are free to choose to not have any children. Population control as a means of managing the world's resources is just unthinkable and the epitome of class warfare. Please, just stop.

...that's what I said. I'm against control, the same as you. We can't make people decrease the population, so whoever thinks it's a good idea should just do it. I don't plan to have children. I may end up being convinced into one, but not more than one.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

So, if its not a big thing getting rid of the anarchists/bigots/commies and haters, then itll be the OWS' doom.
Burning in the streets wont gain sympathy, only withdrawl

 

[mjmjpfaff]

violence in oakland- http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/11/occupy_protesters_disavow_oakl.html . raiders fans . The mayor of oakland should have expected this to happen when she took police out of their encampments- http://www.chrissstreetandcompany.com/2011/11/oakland-mayor-pays-public-employees-to-join-ows-general-strik/ but to her they are just peaceful protesters (somehow anarchists can be peaceful...)

 

[dogman_1234]

Will happen. Revolution is bound to happen. This occurs in any country. We are not immune.

 

[kajabla]

violence in oakland- http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/11/occupy_protesters_disavow_oakl.html . raiders fans . The mayor of oakland should have expected this to happen when she took police out of their encampments- http://www.chrissstreetandcompany.com/2011/11/oakland-mayor-pays-public-employees-to-join-ows-general-strik/ but to her they are just peaceful protesters (somehow anarchists can be peaceful...)

By the wording of the Times's reporting on the issue discussed in that second article, it seemed that she gave employees permission to use their normal time off to participate, not that she paid people to strike. "[C]ity administrators said city workers could request time off to participate in the strike."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/us/Oakland-Protests-Test-Mayor-Jean-Quan-Activist-Background.html?scp=1&sq=quan%20oakland&st=cse