Occupy Wall Street

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
545

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:
Sv( sosialistisk venstreparti ), has betrayed its anti-militarist origin and its socialist origin( they are practically liberals ), but I have never heard they have proposed military action against Israel, but rather a trade boicot. [/quote]

Always the excuse. And, whether you recall it or not, they threatened war on behalf of the arabs. It’s in the link.

[quote]
And I cant remember hearing or reading anything antisemittic here in norway. What I have read and heard is critique of the Israely occupation of Gaza, but havent seen any hate against Israel because its a country consisting of jews. [/quote]

Really, then how come calling someone a “Jew” is a grade-school insult in Norway?
How come Jews hide their identity in Norway?
How come Jewish cemetaries are torn up in Norway?

[quote]
If you want to call every critic of Israel antisemite, go right ahead, but in my book antisemitism isnt being against a nations military actions. [/quote]

Sure, but the absurdity of consitently taking the side of Hamas who:

(1) refuse a homeland if it requires them to not attack a Jewish neighbor (the 2-state solution – rejected by the arabs) and

(2) consistently show they are a violent people, both among themselves, but also participating in things like crossing the border, crawling through windows and slicing the neck of a 2 year old little girl so that she bleeds out holding her teddy bear.

shows that Norweigians are either: (A) stupid or (B) anti-semitic.

I happen to know you are not a stupid people.

And, IMHO, I don’t believe you are a naturally anti-semitic people.

Antisemitism is a by-product of socialism. Why? I have no idea. Perhaps because
the Judeo-Christian values of personal responsibility and hard work are antithetical to socialism.[/quote]

Hamas is a vial terrorist organization who want to run the streets red with the blood of Jews. Hamas doesn’t want the occupation to end because they would have no reason to exist. Any support of hamas is a horrendous injustice to man kind.

If these people really just wanted to have their own state and live in peace with their neighbors they could have had that decades ago. That has been and is still of the table. That’s not what they want they want to destroy Israel and if they could erraticate every Jew in it at the same time they would be way cool with that. They don’t want the land their on they want Israel and they want Jeruselem and they will not stop until they get that, which means they aren’t going to stop.
Even tacit support is complicity in murder and violence. Their is no room for hamas in a peaceful world.

I do agree Israel is not dealing with the OT territories correctly. They either need to take them over and make all of it just plain Israel, or they need to leave. If they take it over, people who like it should be made citizens and those who don’t get bussed to the nearest border. Members of hamas can either leave or go to prison for the rest of their lives.
If they leave, then Palestine can have peaceful relations with Israel if they renounce violence and acknowledge Israels existence. If not, finish the wall and bid them good luck.

546

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:
Sv( sosialistisk venstreparti ), has betrayed its anti-militarist origin and its socialist origin( they are practically liberals ), but I have never heard they have proposed military action against Israel, but rather a trade boicot. [/quote]

Well I check it out.

Thats probably correct, but whats the link to socialists? I am one and know plenty, but I dont know any one of them who uses jew as a insult, or tear up their cemetaries.

I have heard people using jew as a insult at high school, but those people didnt care about politics or they voted for frp( populist rightwingparty )

Are we talking about norwegian socialists or are we talking about just norwegians?

If its the latter, then yhea there is probably antisemites here in Norway. I can admit that we have a history full of racism towards: jews, sami( etnich group in northern norway ), gypsys and more resently arabs/muslims. In the case of the jews the most famous norwegian antisemitic acts are:

  1. After we separeted from denmark in 1814 we got our own constitusion and in that constituion it stood that jews, jesuits and I think gypsis where not allowed to get in to Norway.

  2. Under the WWII my country men where rather good at handing jews over to the Nazi`s.

So yes my country have a antisemitic and racist past and I am the first to admit that and
offcourse say that it is a shame, but I cant really see that the norwegian left have had so much to do with this. The constituion where created before any socialist movement where
created in my country. During the WWII the leftwing of my country where those who took a firmest stand against the fascists and probably where the ones who rescued jews from the fascists( again sad enough, to few where rescued ). And right after the war the norwegian labour movement where positiv towards Israel. One of the men at the top of this movement where given an honor citizenship by Israel for his support. So no the Norwegian left arent antisemitic, but in the latest decade they have gained sympathy with the struggling palestinian people based on humanitarianism not racism. Again the leftwing critique against Israel is not based on racism, we dont think you are a lowerlifeform than us, nor do we believe in those idiotic conspiracy theorys that says jews control the world in secret etc.

The Crusades? History fail. The crusades where fighting against muslims who and were coming to the defense of Jerusalem, not Jews.
The people by and large who hate Jews are atheist-socialists and muslims. Which is why, I suspect many athiest-socialists support islamic terrorism because they both hate jews.

547

[quote]florelius wrote:

Well I check it out.

[/quote]

Largest socialist party in your country wants to start a war with Israel. Yes check it out. Good idea.

548

I like this one if you haven’t seen it

549

Many on PWI have a hard-one for Ron Paul, so let’s see what he has to say about OWS:

550

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
I like this one if you haven’t seen it

Good one. It doesn’t get any plainer than that. We’re fucked.
We are back to the crux of the Tea Party movement.

551

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Wrong, wrong, wrong. And you were so close to getting away from that “damn kids these days and their entitlements!” mentality.[/quote]

Incorrect. I am basing my opinion on the interviews conducted with the crowd and the statements made by the proponents themselves. More and more it has become clear - the bulk of the protesters aren’t really after jobs - as in, if we returned to 5% unemployment tomorrow (considered “full” employment, roughly), there’s no reason to think they’d all be satisfied. They want something else - primarily some version of wealth redistribution. They’ve made that clear enough.

All they’ve done is present a message that they want more stuff and they want it paid for by others. I haven’t seen anyone refute that message on the street from the stuff I’ve seen.

[/quote]

So, wait - is it that they don’t want jobs, or they don’t want jobs where they work 60 hours a week for peanuts? You’re certainly making it sound like the protestors (at least, the ones who get attention, which, lets face it, will always be the loudest and stupidest) are just demanding that they be given things - which is a far cry from saying “We want jobs that aren’t absolute shit.”

Because they’re busy on the internet posting about everything wrong with the movement.

So direct the protests to Washington.

[quote]

Early on I noted my policy prescriptions for what I’d like to see done to improve the situation - how many of the OWC crowd would buy what I am selling? [/quote]

I don’t know. You’d have to talk to them.

552

My humble suggestions:

  1. Tax capital gains as income.
  2. Eliminate the Stafford Loan
  3. Strip coroporations of human rights
  4. Reform Social Security
  5. Reform tax codes, eliminating loopholes for corporations
  6. Pass 28th amendment (impossible, but would be nice)
553

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
Not trying to put the movement down at all, just wondering what the hell they want?? What is your purpose what are you trying to accomplish. Maybe because it’s the “Facebook/Twitter” generation they really don’t have a purpose. Yeah they can get a shit load of people to their location thanks to socail media but then what?
[/quote]

They are protesting against the fact that money can be used to buy influence over the government.

554

[quote]phaethon wrote:
They are protesting against the fact that money can be used to buy influence over the government.

[/quote]

Then they should be protesting at 1600 Penn Ave, as the current occupant of the big white house there is the biggest recepient of donations from Wall Street, bankers bailed out by TARP (Goldman Sachs, in particular), and other favored corporations like Apple, IBM, GM, GE, Dodge, credit card companies, Fannie Mae, Freddie, MAC ---- EVER.

The fact they are so stupid they think a progressive tax on INCOME (which generally taxes active workers, hitting people like doctors and small business owners the worst) will do anything about the perceived wrong of “wealth inequality” (as opposed to “income inequality” which has little to do with actual wealth), however, means they are too stupid to realize they are merely playing into the hands of the actual crony capitalists they hate.

555

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
Not trying to put the movement down at all, just wondering what the hell they want?? What is your purpose what are you trying to accomplish. Maybe because it’s the “Facebook/Twitter” generation they really don’t have a purpose. Yeah they can get a shit load of people to their location thanks to socail media but then what?
[/quote]

They are protesting against the fact that money can be used to buy influence over the government.

[/quote]

I wish that were the case. They would have my support then. But I won’t support anyone protesting that says I don’t have a right to private property.

556

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
This had been posted awhile back and I think it’s appropriate again. If there so into redistribution of wealth and land then why not their GPA?

If GPA were more like money then we would need to do something about it.

One primary difference is that having a high GPA doesn’t allow you to manipulate and gain control over the university system. Having a lot of money currently allows you to exert control over politicians etc.

Another is that having a high GPA doesn’t give you an advantage over other students in future courses (usually). As such it is a fair representation of how well a student can do a particular course. On the other hand it is much easier to make money if you already have a lot of it.

Another is that because the GPA system is more tightly controlled and regulated it is already more fair. Hence there is less need to redistribute.

Finally, the consequences of getting a low GPA are nothing compared to the consequences of having no money and no support.

557

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]phaethon wrote:
They are protesting against the fact that money can be used to buy influence over the government.

[/quote]

Then they should be protesting at 1600 Penn Ave, as the current occupant of the big white house there is the biggest recepient of donations from Wall Street, bankers bailed out by TARP (Goldman Sachs, in particular), and other favored corporations like Apple, IBM, GM, GE, Dodge, credit card companies, Fannie Mae, Freddie, MAC ---- EVER.
[/quote]

It doesn’t have the same effect though. They want to change the perceptions of those in power. And protesting against them directly will only make them more defensive. Instead the protesters are saying “These actions are unacceptable”.

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
The fact they are so stupid they think a progressive tax on INCOME (which generally taxes active workers, hitting people like doctors and small business owners the worst) will do anything about the perceived wrong of “wealth inequality” (as opposed to “income inequality” which has little to do with actual wealth), however, means they are too stupid to realize they are merely playing into the hands of the actual crony capitalists they hate.[/quote]

Agreed. A tax on income will only consolidate the position of the very wealthy as they don’t tend to earn much money from income in any case. It would just destroy any potential up and comers (aka competition).

558

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
More and more it has become clear - the bulk of the protesters aren’t really after jobs - as in, if we returned to 5% unemployment tomorrow (considered “full” employment, roughly), there’s no reason to think they’d all be satisfied.
[/quote]

Of course not. It isn’t about jobs as such. Many of the protesters already have jobs. It is about corporations having far too much influence over the government.

It is also about allowing a poor regulatory environment where the common man can get pushed around and abused by corporations.

And also a problem with the financial system in general.

As an example of how rotten the financial system is: Basically Bank of America is in the process of moving dodgy derivatives over to a FDIC insured subsidiary. So that basically if the derivatives go belly up then the taxpayers will be on the line to pay for it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-18/bofa-said-to-split-regulators-over-moving-merrill-derivatives-to-bank-unit.html

559

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
This had been posted awhile back and I think it’s appropriate again. If there so into redistribution of wealth and land then why not their GPA?

If GPA were more like money then we would need to do something about it.

One primary difference is that having a high GPA doesn’t allow you to manipulate and gain control over the university system. Having a lot of money currently allows you to exert control over politicians etc.

Another is that having a high GPA doesn’t give you an advantage over other students in future courses (usually). As such it is a fair representation of how well a student can do a particular course. On the other hand it is much easier to make money if you already have a lot of it.

Another is that because the GPA system is more tightly controlled and regulated it is already more fair. Hence there is less need to redistribute.

Finally, the consequences of getting a low GPA are nothing compared to the consequences of having no money and no support.[/quote]

Really, maybe at the surface you might think you are right,

If you have a higher GPA it most certainly does give some pull with in the university system. I would know. IT gives you more influence with The Faculty and Administration and they take your addresses and concerns more seriously.

if you have a high GPA generally other professors know and it does make it easier, aside from the fact that means you are intelligent and should translate to other courses. Same with money, people who know how to make money make money.

Money is tightly controlled and regulated, which a problem.

having a low GPA can get you kicked out of school, with no ability to make the money to pay back the loans you have and no real room to grow.

It is a good analogy, liberal/progressives don’t like it because it proves a point.

560

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
More and more it has become clear - the bulk of the protesters aren’t really after jobs - as in, if we returned to 5% unemployment tomorrow (considered “full” employment, roughly), there’s no reason to think they’d all be satisfied.
[/quote]

Of course not. It isn’t about jobs as such. Many of the protesters already have jobs. It is about corporations having far too much influence over the government.

It is also about allowing a poor regulatory environment where the common man can get pushed around and abused by corporations.

And also a problem with the financial system in general.[/quote]

Agree in a sense, the problem is the corporatism of America. I disagree in that the way they hold their power is through regulations. We need to get rid of the regulations which corporations use to keep control.

561

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
If you have a higher GPA it most certainly does give some pull with in the university system. I would know. IT gives you more influence with The Faculty and Administration and they take your addresses and concerns more seriously.
[/quote]

To the same extent that money gives you influence over the government? No. The day that people with high GPAs start being told what is on the tests is the day you might have a point. And then they didn’t really earn their high GPA.

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
if you have a high GPA generally other professors know and it does make it easier
[/quote]

How does it make it easier? At my university all exams were de-identified.

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
Same with money, people who know how to make money make money.
[/quote]

But it isn’t the same with money. Not at all. The more money you have the easier it is to make money. It is not true at all that the higher your GPA the less effort you need to put in.

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
having a low GPA can get you kicked out of school, with no ability to make the money to pay back the loans you have and no real room to grow.
[/quote]

It is quite difficult to get kicked out of university. Nor is university the only option of making money.

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
It is a good analogy, liberal/progressives don’t like it because it proves a point. [/quote]

I’m neither liberal nor progressive. I don’t like it because there are significant differences between GPA and money. Redistributing GPA serves no real purpose. The same cannot be said of redistributing money.

If you could be handed a high GPA from your father and it only took minimal effort for you to maintain that high GPA…and you could then hand it down etc then I think we would need to do something to make the GPA system more fair. Such that the brightest and hardest working made it to the top.

562

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

Agree in a sense, the problem is the corporatism of America. I disagree in that the way they hold their power is through regulations. We need to get rid of the regulations which corporations use to keep control.
[/quote]

Precisely - for those that are worried about big corporations’ influence over government, never do they quite realize that the more expanisive government is, the more big entities (Big Oil, Wall Street, Big Labor, whatever) can influence it.

You want to decrease the influence of these Big Whatevers? Decrease the size and scope of government. And I’m not calling for some brand of anarchism - just take away the means by which they exercise their influence over the LIttle Guy.

And more besides, they need to think this through - this notion that corporations shouldn’t be able to influence the very rules and regulations that these corporations have to live under is, frankly, pretty creepy in practice and completely contary to the point of democratic government. Look, I don’t like their overszied influence over the process as much as the next guy, but if the government is going to exercise power over a concern, that concern has to have a right to have its voice heard on the matter. I don’t want to live in a nation where it doesn’t.

The oversized influence in government of Big Whatever is a problem in society, and is in need of being addressed - but not through a process of stripping these concerns of having their say over the laws being passed that affect them.

And, as a quick aside, big corporations love a massive regulatory regime - it acts as a economic barrier to entry for smaller concerns.

563

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
Agree in a sense, the problem is the corporatism of America. I disagree in that the way they hold their power is through regulations. We need to get rid of the regulations which corporations use to keep control.
[/quote]

Our entire society is built upon trust. There needs to be a significant punishment for those who violate this trust through shady practices. One solution is regulation. Another is through the courts.

Many on the right think the courts should handle it…but I have seen enough contract cases to know that unless you have bucket loads of money and time then you won’t get anywhere. I know of many contract violation court cases that have been going on for 10+ years. Can you pay for a lawyer for 10 years? How about even for a single year?

564

[quote]phaethon wrote:

I’m neither liberal nor progressive. I don’t like it because there are significant differences between GPA and money. Redistributing GPA serves no real purpose. The same cannot be said of redistributing money.

If you could be handed a high GPA from your father and it only took minimal effort for you to maintain that high GPA…and you could then hand it down etc then I think we would need to do something to make the GPA system more fair. Such that the brightest and hardest working made it to the top.[/quote]

But that’s just it, intelligence is very genetic/hereditary in nature. So there is an inequality from the start, and many people no matter how hard they work will never reach the same levels of intelligence of some who are blessed with it.

I could argue redistribution of money serves no real purpose, you are just making a slave/serf class dependent on someone else, while at the same time demotivating others.

Life is not fair, life is not equal. The only role of the government is to ensure our individual and personal liberties. Not to give us handouts at the expense of others. I work hard to ensure my children have what they need going forward, who the hell are you or some government entity to take it away. America is not about the collective, it is about the preservation of individual rights. IT is not a mob rule democracy, because that mob would quickly strip you of your property and rights to satisfy itself.

Do we need to end the greed and corruption, yes, but that is much different then forced redistribution of wealth. End the corporate stranglehold on America by removing the regulations that cause it, prosecute the ones who were involved criminally, re-evaluate the idea lobbying and monetary support of politicians to help ensure this doesn’t happen again.