[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I’m not reading all of the garbage that’s posted here because I’m sure it’s mostly anti-protest… but these are truly beautiful things. They nearly bring tears to my eyes… I’ve been waiting so fucking long for this country to wake up, and the finally, they stir from slumber…
Of course, because having to deal with different and contrary opinions is, like, hard work and stuff. Better to stay insulated now and then whine later how all my opponents are “closed-minded”.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
A liberal friend of mine just sent me this. Perhaps it is appropriate:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/12/1025555/-Open-Letter-to-that-53-Guy[/quote]
Appropriate for what? The complaint of the OWD crowd is late by about 3 years. And it can be mad at Wall Street all it wants, but the fact that the OWS crowd - and this guy’s letter - whistles past the other accomplices in the financial meltdown only demonstrates that the OWS isn’t interested in being even-handed.
And, to note, this isn’t like the Tea Party movement. Like them or dislike them, they’re pretty consistent - they are equally mad at both Wall Street and Big Government for causing the mess. They warned against the bailouts long before it became the cause du jour among the OWS movement.
Contrast OWS - despite their animus toward Wall Street, I don’t see any OWS protests down at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, which currently houses a president who took more Wall Street money than any other candidate. I bet if the president were of a different party but that characteristic were true - most money every from Wall Street, etc. - we’d see crowds the day is long.
We don’t. And that tells you plenty about what we need to know about OWS.
Looks like bailout recipients Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are “platinum” and “gold” sponsors at the Mortgage Bankers Association gala:
[i]Nothing wrong with a bit of schmoozing. But it might seem jarring that Freddie, which was rescued by Washington and today exists at the pleasure of taxpayers, paid $80,000 to become a â??platinumâ?? sponsor of this shindig. Fannie Mae, that other ward of the state, paid $60,000 to become a â??goldâ?? sponsor.
Keep in mind that taxpayers bailed out Fannie and Freddie to the tune of about $150 billion. [/i]
Read the whole thing:
Now, here we have two corporate titans, recipients of bailouts, well-connected to politics (and politicians), not a one of whom has seen any of its bigwigs to jail for fraud or the like.
Quite odd - where are the OWC-equivalent at the addreses of Fannie and Freddie? Same big money, same privileged position, same cronyism - no protests.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Looks like bailout recipients Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are “platinum” and “gold” sponsors at the Mortgage Bankers Association gala:
[i]Nothing wrong with a bit of schmoozing. But it might seem jarring that Freddie, which was rescued by Washington and today exists at the pleasure of taxpayers, paid $80,000 to become a â??platinumâ?? sponsor of this shindig. Fannie Mae, that other ward of the state, paid $60,000 to become a â??goldâ?? sponsor.
Keep in mind that taxpayers bailed out Fannie and Freddie to the tune of about $150 billion. [/i]
Read the whole thing:
Now, here we have two corporate titans, recipients of bailouts, well-connected to politics (and politicians), not a one of whom has seen any of its bigwigs to jail for fraud or the like.
Quite odd - where are the OWC-equivalent at the addreses of Fannie and Freddie? Same big money, same privileged position, same cronyism - no protests.[/quote]
Regardless of how one feels about the big government housing lenders they completely morphed from their original intent of injecting needed liquidity into the housing market that is for sure.
But the protestors have to protest somewhere and not everywhere, and Wall street has symbolic value while there is only one national capital. Also certainly there are a bunch of dolts in every large group that can’t articulate what they want for lunch much less any talking points, but this is hardly unique to the OWS group in fact I think you cannot find one group without at least someone in it the group itself would love to disown. Usually some blowhard that gets plenty of airtime. Tell me most conservatives wouldn’t love for Glenn Beck to stfu for example.
Nazis and Communists Throw Their Support Behind Occupy Wall Street Movements (Updated) | The Gateway Pundit
Soooooo
where do I go to get all sides of what’s going on here? Little sick of watching videos of protests and having no idea what’s going on! Don’t wanna be the guy who doesn’t care at all <==
That is hard to do around here (or anywhere) Kc.
realclearpolitics.com tends to do a decent job of showing a lot of sides…but it is a LOT to go through sometimes. I assume they are covering this, but I haven’t checked.
not a scientific poll, but its still pretty funny/interesting
“Convinced the U.S. government is no better than, say, Al Qaeda (i.e., Noam Chomsky): 34%”
[quote]skaz05 wrote:
LOL!
Having seen videos and pics, it’s striking how many of these unemployed folks are tatted up --visible, even on the neck and face–are sporting mohawks, long hair, dreads, dyed, and other hippie/punk hairdos. Then there’s the ear plugs and facial piercings. How many of these folks have made themselves less employable from an relatively early age?
Can’t but think that even in a good economy, many of these folks wouldn’t be impressing anyone in a job interview. A lot of them give off the impression that they desire some kind of subsidized, “I’m a creative and free spirited soul artist,” lifestyle. Or, as if they got caught off guard, and, hey there’s not a whole lot of positions open for professional grievance-activists.
[quote]ReignIB wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]ReignIB wrote:
“99% vs 1%” is BS.
why not 90% vs. 10% or 80% vs. 20% ? etc etc.
now when you get down to the middle of the pack is where the real division is - 55% or so who pay fed. income taxes vs. 45% who don’t.
[/quote]
What about all the other taxes, such as sales tax and property tax? Are you trying to pick out one tax that people (who can afford it) pay that some others (who don’t have the money) don’t… and try to say it means 55% or so are carrying the country on their backs?[/quote]
yes, I’m picking the tax that is a) Federal; and b) progressive by definition; so it’s easier to see the skewed distribution. as for the sales, property, inheritance etc taxes - I have no doubt that those who make more money pay more in those since they spend more, have more expensive properties etc.
as for the “carrying the country on their backs” - that might be a stretch, all I’m pointing out is that the “1% vs 99%” slogan fleabaggers are running around with is complete BS.
speaking of 1% if you insist - top 1% while making 20% in pre-tax income is paying 40% of all income taxes. so I wonder with all this “tax the rich” nonsense what would be the figure fleabaggers would be comfortable with ?
[/quote]
only one problem with this assumption, near us there are a couple school districts literally forcing people out of their homes because of how they have raised the property taxes. The schools are in areas where gang banger welfare abusers have moved into the districts, and the taxes have gone up to cover them. The schools have also become much more progressive.
We are lucky, or school is an old country conservative school.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Having seen videos and pics, it’s striking how many of these unemployed folks are tatted up --visible, even on the neck and face–are sporting mohawks, long hair, dreads, dyed, and other hippie/punk hairdos. Then there’s the ear plugs and facial piercings. How many of these folks have made themselves less employable from an relatively early age?
Can’t but think that even in a good economy, many of these folks wouldn’t be impressing anyone in a job interview. A lot of them give off the impression that they desire some kind of subsidized, “I’m a creative and free spirited soul artist,” lifestyle. Or, as if they got caught off guard, and, hey there’s not a whole lot of positions open for professional grievance-activists.[/quote]
Yes.
And the more I hear, the more the message has crystallized that the protesters don’t want work, they want the material benefits that work provides.
The more you peel back the layers, the more you realize this has very little to do with frustration over not being able to find work. “Work” is not what they want.
Which actually explains why they are protesting Wall Street, which, as an institution, can do very little if nothing about improving the actual unemployment rate - i.e., creating “jobs” - but can resdistribute its wealth so that many others may enjoy the material benefits that those jobs would provide.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I’m not reading all of the garbage that’s posted here because I’m sure it’s mostly anti-protest… but these are truly beautiful things. They nearly bring tears to my eyes… I’ve been waiting so fucking long for this country to wake up, and the finally, they stir from slumber…
[/quote]
Yeah, party like it’s 1939!
Mark Twain said that “history doesn’t repeat, but sometimes it rhymes.” Well, it’s rhyming. Get a nasty nadir of an economic downturn going, rile up a bunch of socialist freeloaders who want to blame someone besides themselves, and go start some wars. It’s the socialist way.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Yeah, party like it’s 1939!
[/quote]
The Joooos! Got to watch those Russian “obligarchs” too.
I haven’t been paying much attention to the media lately, so I was really surprised when this OWS thing came out. I thought it was just some folks in NYC. As it exploded, I began receiving e-mails/facebook messages and the like from both conservative and liberal friends.
Something that is striking to me as an “outsider” to all of this is the way both this movement and the tea party movement had segments of the media try to make them into caricatures. Another thing that is striking is the vitriol to which both groups are dealt with by the “other side” and how “their side” overlooks the negative aspects of the groups.
Just some observations.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
[quote]ReignIB wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]ReignIB wrote:
“99% vs 1%” is BS.
why not 90% vs. 10% or 80% vs. 20% ? etc etc.
now when you get down to the middle of the pack is where the real division is - 55% or so who pay fed. income taxes vs. 45% who don’t.
[/quote]
What about all the other taxes, such as sales tax and property tax? Are you trying to pick out one tax that people (who can afford it) pay that some others (who don’t have the money) don’t… and try to say it means 55% or so are carrying the country on their backs?[/quote]
yes, I’m picking the tax that is a) Federal; and b) progressive by definition; so it’s easier to see the skewed distribution. as for the sales, property, inheritance etc taxes - I have no doubt that those who make more money pay more in those since they spend more, have more expensive properties etc.
as for the “carrying the country on their backs” - that might be a stretch, all I’m pointing out is that the “1% vs 99%” slogan fleabaggers are running around with is complete BS.
speaking of 1% if you insist - top 1% while making 20% in pre-tax income is paying 40% of all income taxes. so I wonder with all this “tax the rich” nonsense what would be the figure fleabaggers would be comfortable with ?
[/quote]
only one problem with this assumption, near us there are a couple school districts literally forcing people out of their homes because of how they have raised the property taxes. The schools are in areas where gang banger welfare abusers have moved into the districts, and the taxes have gone up to cover them. The schools have also become much more progressive.
We are lucky, or school is an old country conservative school.
[/quote]
no assumption is 100% correct of course, I’m sure there’s folks in the top income bracket who are flat out evading taxes for example, so they are not contributing to the whooping 40% of that bracket’s income tax contribution.
still though, if the school district you’re talking about would’ve raised taxes to the levels of what they are paying in the Hamptons then my assumption would be problematic, but they didn’t lol.
Some perspective? Careful in tinkering around with a system that gives you a situation where the bottom 5% are richer than 68% of the world.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/the-haves-and-the-have-nots/
These protests would make more sense if I knew what they were protesting. I guess it’s greed, but when your demanding people share the money they earned, then that’s pretty fucking greedy too.
The best way to fight greed is to take care of your own shit and don’t be greedy. If you can camp out for 6 weeks, still eat and be taken care of, I pretty sure you got nothing to bitch about.
It’s all bandwagoning. I am going to react as I have the whole time. I’ll ignore it.
Protesting something that doesn’t rely on public opinion seems kind of stupid to me…Don’t like a company? Don’t do business with it. That’s the best kind of protest, protest with your wallet.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Some perspective? Careful in tinkering around with a system that gives you a situation where the bottom 5% are richer than 68% of the world.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/the-haves-and-the-have-nots/[/quote]
Good find…that is an eye opener.
FWIW, here is the demand from the self-appointed OWS crowd:
We demand the union of all free social people in the world on the basis of the principle of self-determination of all peoples.
We demand that the downtrodden people have rights equal to those of other classes; and that treaties, laws, and regulations that oppose such rights in favor of corporations and banks shall be abrogated.
We demand land and housing. Large landowners and landlord holdings must be broken up and distributed to the underprivileged.
All peoples of the world may become citizens, but only those who agree to redistribution can become citizens. No capitalist may be a citizen.
Those who are not citizens may live in the USA as foreigners and must be subject to the law of aliens.
The right to choose the government and determine the laws of the State shall belong only to citizens. We therefore demand that no public office, of whatever nature, whether in the central government, the province, or the municipality, shall be held by anyone who is not a citizen.
We wage war against the corrupt parliamentary administration whereby men are appointed to posts by favor of the party without regard to character and fitness.
We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled.
All citizens must possess equal rights and duties.
The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.
Therefore we demand:
That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.
Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
We demand the nationalization of all trusts.
We demand profit-sharing in large industries.
We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions and pensions for the unemployed.
We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.
We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.
We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished, regardless of creed or race.
We demand that capitalistic system, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by a modern a living law.
In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious citizen to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of underprivileged parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.
The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.
We demand the abolition of the regular military and the military-industrial complex and the creation of a people?s army.
We demand that there be a legal campaign against those
who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the press. In order to make possible the creation of a free press:
(a) Al editors and their assistants on news stations or sources published in USA (including web sites) shall be citizens.
(b) All financial interests in or in any way affecting USA news sources shall be forbidden to non-citizens by law, and we demand that the punishment for transgressing this law be the immediate suppression of the newspaper and the expulsion of trangressors.
We demand legal action against those tendencies in art and literature that have a disruptive influence upon the life of our folk, and that any organizations that offend against the foregoing demands shall be dissolved.
We demand freedom for all religious faiths in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of the modern citizen, but we must fight against the Judeo-Christian materialist spirit within and without, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our folk can only come about from within on the principle:
COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD
In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.
The formation of professional committees and of committees representing the several estates of the realm, to ensure that the laws promulgated by the central authority shall be carried out by the several states.
The leaders of the party undertake to promote the execution of the foregoing points at all costs.