Democrats & Liberals Archives

Occupying Wall Street

The discontent of the vast majority of Americans is finally making itself apparent. The immediate target of the movement seems to be Wall Street, but its broad focus encompasses more. “We are the 99%” placards appear over and over, indicating the discontent also aims at the grossly unfair situation that has developed over the past decades. While one percent of the population have grown wealthier and wealthier, the 99% majority of Americans have been left behind, and even slid backwards. Hard work used to lead to a better future. A college education used to open opportunities. Now, many Americans sense that is no longer true, and that has generated a mood of anger. How will this mood among the electoratate express itself in the coming election?

The progressive agenda is in synch with the agenda of the vast majority of Americans. This agenda includes the following: withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq; raise taxes on the wealthiest one percent; and establish universal health care. Polls consistently reflect the fact that the vast majority of Americans want to see this agenda enacted, yet neither the GOP nor the Democrats seem interested in following through on these basic, obvious actions.
Obama is attempting to harness the dissatisfaction of progressives by putting himself at the head of the Occupy Wall Street movement, demanding Congress pass job-related legislation. Of course, progressives realize Obama is attempting to push buttons in order to get re-elected. His interest in the progressive agenda during the past three years has been tempered by a readiness to compromise with the GOP, a readiness that has resulted in giveaways that should not have been necessary.
The GOP seems shockingly tone deaf to voter dissatisfaction. They denounce tax raises for the richest one percent as 'class warfare' and seem incapable of recognizing the increasingly desperate plight of many citizens, especially the younger ones who recently graduated, went into debt with college loans, and now cannot find work. The GOP seems incapable of recognizing that many citizens feel class warfare is being waged, not by them, but upon them.
In terms of presidential politics for the GOP candidates, this inability to recognize what is happening with voters spells trouble for their party. Mitt Romney continues to be the front runner, but his "corporations are people, my friend" formulation could not possibly run more counter to the electoral mood. His poll numbers continue to hover in the 20's, with little change even as the other candidate flavors of the month come and go. The latest flavor, Herman Cain, came out with this beauty: ""Don't blame Wall Street. Don't blame the big banks. If you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself." And that pretty well sums up the Republican attitude towards voter dissatisfaction. It may represent an honestly held belief, but it a belief which will not find much support among angry voters.

Posted by phx8 at October 6, 2011 11:22 PM
Comments
Comment #330154

When these idiots at the protests are asked why they are protesting; most of them either don’t have an answer or their answer is rediculous. Yes, obama has placed himself right in the midst of these mobs and it will do nothing but hurt him. You say the are the 99%; I say they are nothing more than the same fringe group of anti-war protestors that protested during the late 60% and early 70%. Most Americans look at them for what they are, kooks. Have you read their protest signs? The unions have paid their members to go protest in these rallys. Glenn Beck predicted (with evidence) these protest 2 years ago. And they have come to pass. These are not reactionary protests, they are planned protests by anti-American enemies bent on disrupting the country.

The problem is, as Obama has backed and even encouraged them, they will become violent and people will die and property will be destroyed. We have a president of the United States, who is promoting civil unrest.

Obama got a lot of election money in 2008 from these same WS people that are being protested against now. But the money has dried up and these same WS people are now financially supporting Romney. The reason: obama has no idea what he is doing.

The way things are going; America will look like some kind of 3rd world revolution before the 2012 election, and this is exactly what obama wants to happen.

I am not Herman Cain and I’m not running for office; but I agree with him. If a person wants to work, there is work to be had. But the mentality of the left is they want something for nothing. All of their demands relate to free education, free HC, and debt forgiveness. Unknown to the socialist left, there is nothing free. Someone has to pay for it.

Posted by: Mike at October 7, 2011 7:36 AM
Comment #330155

Phx8
The liberals, progressives and unions that this protest is drawing is far from showing the progressive agenda to now be in synch with the majority of Americans.
Ending long term war is not just a progressive idea. Soak the rich sentiment is hardly surprising during a recession. And less than half of those who “say” they support universal government run health care are willing to actually support it.
None of that shows Americans are now in line with the progressive agenda.

Even if they did though, all the other issues still prevent the majority of Americans from falling in line with the progressive agenda and being good little drones, and these protesters have included some of them into the protests. By doing this, they have taken a concern that all Americans may have had in common and turned this political.

“How will this mood among the electoratate express itself in the coming election?”

No idea. But I believe it could possibly be the election that defines the future of our country.
If progressives are right and the vast majority of Americans agree with them, they will win the election with 80+% of the vote and we can continue the progressive wish of leaving the United States behind and becoming like any other European country.
If Republicans win, they will continue to fight against doing that.

Posted by: kctim at October 7, 2011 9:20 AM
Comment #330160

Raising taxes less then 4% is hardly “SOAKING THE RICH” easy on the hyperbole. Calling them idiots just shows a profound lack of understanding of the protest. Will there be violence I hope not but you gather that many people in one place there are bound to be some bad people. But so far there have been no Nazi signs or signs depicting the Potus as a witch doctor and no guns to try and intimidate people.

Posted by: Jeff at October 7, 2011 11:48 AM
Comment #330162

Jeff

How can you tell who is and who isn’t packin’ heat? If your method is tried and true I am sure the government has a place for you in their scheme of things.

The mob should be carrying signs IDing themselves. Something like “Anarchists -101 for 2011 and Beyond”.

One gal interviewed on the street claimed she quit her job just to come and be part of this mini-revolt. Asked if she were going back to her job, she sternly replied she wasn’t. So that is one of the unemployed on the streets. She must be wealthy to quit her job and join the anarchists display of Un-American, Anti-American performance.

If there is any number of college grads in this display, that tells me more of what they did not learn as to how much they did learn and what they did learn was typical leftist pap from higher education which should be called lower education.

And finally, the rich fat-cats that financed this display are not mentioned as to how they should be taxed. Oh, they don’t count? The anarchists are displaying that they cannot count.

One observation. When the anarchists open their mouth they are putting on public display the image of their IQ; zero.

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at October 7, 2011 12:22 PM
Comment #330163

TH I expected nothing less then the ignorance that is displayed in your post.

Posted by: Jeff at October 7, 2011 12:47 PM
Comment #330164

Malice is even worse than ignorance. This new movement badly scares those who support the mega-rich, “corporate personhood”, bizarrely unequal pay, lowering taxes on the already-wealthy, and all the social ills which become apparent when the above listed materialize. The funniest thing is how the masters have trained their dogs bark against their own best interests. Greed and self-interest are always short-sighted, and NOT what America was meant to be. Talk about the tail wagging the dog!!! None of those who rail against “redistributing the wealth” said a single word when that’s what was happening for 30, 40 years. Now that the shoe is trying to switch feet, they are raising the great cry: Communism!! Socialists!! Malcontents!! Anarchists!!!

It’s just the rest of us, really. Your neighbors, fellow workers, family. We who have finally seen through the patina of our consumerist society, and have found that we traded our very souls for fast internet, new cars, and the rat race.

I can’t wait to go and join the protest; let ‘em arrest me!! I’ll go back again, donate money, write letters…..whatever. I think that there are more like me than you might imagine. I am not poor, have almost no debt. I just hate unfairness; the deck being stacked in favor of wealth. The rich and corporations have access the rest of us don’t. Are listened to…..can give unlimited, anonymous political contributions, influence the laws in their favor, have been amassing unprecedented wealth, at an unprecedented rate. While millions are out of work, losing their homes, their right to bargain collectively…………….ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: steve miller at October 7, 2011 1:53 PM
Comment #330165

Jeff

Since in your opinion I am ignorant, explain to me the ignorance of my post.

What I understand is that when someone just wants to say something they just spew some words that don’t make sense.

That was not the case in my article. I attempted to use reason.

I’m not even sorry you see it different. That is the way the world turns.

Ignorance is a lack of knowledge. I did not display that function.

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at October 7, 2011 2:03 PM
Comment #330166

Steve miller,
Well said!

kctim,
“Ending long term war is not just a progressive idea.”
True. It reflects the opinion of around 3/4 of all Americans, depending on what poll you want to use.

“Soak the rich sentiment is hardly surprising during a recession.”
Soak? Raising taxes back to the rates of the Clinton era, back when we enjoyed a healthy economy and budget surpluses, hardly seems like a case of soaking the rich. It may not be surprising during a recession, but I think it would be fair to say that the current economic downturn is the worst most of us have seen in our lifetime, and there is a fundamental sense that what has happened to the citizenry has been unfair and unjust, particularly in terms of what happened to Main Street v Wall Street. Hence, Occupy Wall Street.

Obama is playing a smart political game. He’s attempting to identify with the discontent, rather than being on the receiving end of blame, and aim the movement at Congress, especially the House Republicans. It’s the right move. If he succeeds, he can claim to represent the 99%, Main Street, even if the Legislative Branch fails to pass any legislation. It also ratchets up the pressure on legislators, which again, is smart, since the House GOP has absolutely no intention of passing anything which might help the economy and the country, since that could be construed as helping the re-election chances of Obama.

The GOP, on the other hand, is falling on their face, at least in political terms.

Mike,
Herman Cain misses the point. For many, there is no work to be had. For others, there is work, but ratcheting down a lifestyle from a $40k income to minimum wage means the utter destruction of their hopes and dreams. In other words, for far too manyh people, hard work is not paying off. Remember, most people did not quit their jobs- they were fired, or laid off, or the company they gave their labor to collapsed.

It seems unfair and unjust, because Wall Street continues to prosper, even though they own a large part of the blame. The people who lost trillions in mortgage derivatives did not lose their jobs and their homes and their dreams. Not one of them went to jail, even as some ordinary people underwent foreclosure on their home. Hence, Occupy Wall Street.

Posted by: phx8 at October 7, 2011 2:21 PM
Comment #330167

Steve

“The funniest thing is how the masters have trained their dogs bark against their own best interests”

IF you or any of the protesters had any idea of what is in MY or any others best interest, you would understand why your statement is so laughable.

People who have a master do not tell their master to leave them alone, they ask and beg them for more and more.

Posted by: kctim at October 7, 2011 2:30 PM
Comment #330168

Phx8
You know darn well that the progressive protesters would not be satisfied and go home if taxes on wealth just went up 4 or 5%. They want them to pay a whole lot more than that, a cap on how much an individual can earn, to pay for everybody elses health care, to pay for our energy problems etc…
The progressive protesters do not want a 4% hike, they want a 50+% hike.

Yes, the Obama is playing it smart, but IMO, he had better be careful. The protests do NOT represent 99% of us, let alone Main Street, so while falsely claiming it does and giving his support to the OWS crowd may fire up his progressive support, it may not have the same effect on moderates or independents.

I have no idea if 2012 will be our next step to becoming just another boring European country or not, but I do know it will be a very interesting year that could lead to a much more divided and fragile nation.

Posted by: kctim at October 7, 2011 2:46 PM
Comment #330170

TH I did not mean to imply that you are personally ignorant I believe you are a reasonably intelligent person it’s your post that displays some ignorance. You profess to know the motivation behind the protest and paint them as degenerates of society. I have a friend that had all that anger you display he got some help and now he no longer hates blacks Jews women etc.

Posted by: Jeff at October 7, 2011 3:33 PM
Comment #330171
Raising taxes back to the rates of the Clinton era, back when we enjoyed a healthy economy and budget surpluses, hardly seems like a case of soaking the rich.

Not if you put the exemptions, loopholes and tax shelters back in, it wouldn’t. If you don’t then comparing the rates with the current offsets to the rates then with those offsets is comparing apples to oranges.

Oh, and don’t forget the recession we entered into as Clinton left office either… So many people want to sweep that bit under the rug.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 7, 2011 3:38 PM
Comment #330172

BTW, the only proposed list of demands that I’ve come across is here:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-for-occupy-wall-st-moveme/

Are you suggesting that 99% of the people in the US want these demands?

I’ll admit, many may WANT this to happen, but do you think the majority of people think it is a good idea? Most of the demonstrators are younger people because those of us with any sense and history of the real world know better…

Here is a particularly humorous one.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the “Books.” World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the “Books.” And I don’t mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.
Posted by: Rhinehold at October 7, 2011 3:42 PM
Comment #330173

Rhinehold good to see you commenting again. From your link-

Admin note: This is not an official list of demands. This is a forum post submitted by a single user and hyped by irresponsible news/commentary agencies like Fox News and Mises.org. This content was not published by the OccupyWallSt.org collective, nor was it ever proposed or agreed to on a consensus basis with the NYC General Assembly. There is NO official list of demands.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 7, 2011 4:19 PM
Comment #330174

Rhinehold,
From your link:
“Admin note: This is not an official list of demands. This is a forum post submitted by a single user and hyped by irresponsible news/commentary agencies like Fox News and Mises.org. This content was not published by the OccupyWallSt.org collective, nor was it ever proposed or agreed to on a consensus basis with the NYC General Assembly. There is NO official list of demands.”

Tsk tsk, Rhinehold.

The movement is leaderless. It is a truly grass roots, democratic protest movement. In general, it protests the influence of Wall Street money on our politicians as well as corporate greed. Currently, Occupy Wall Street remains amorphous. It uses spectacle to vent anger over the state of affairs.

To me, that means the leadership is up for grabs, and so is the agenda. A political opportunity is there for the taking. It is also a strong possibility that the movement of dissatisfaction will fizzle out. There are organizers, but no centralized organization. Ron Paul supports it. Unions have also climbed aboard, which some people think does more harm than good.

This is a rare opportunity to see true democracy in action, at its very beginning. Right now, it continues to grow, but whether it merely results in inaction remains to be seen.


Posted by: phx8 at October 7, 2011 4:20 PM
Comment #330175

Rhinehold

there’s nothing unreasonable about that demand? that is if you have no concept of personal responsibility. the rest of us see it for what it truely is, a push by a bunch of brainwashed little communists who feel the world owes them something, i mean other than the freedom to persue thier own fame and fortune with the sweat of thier own brow.

BTW, good to hear from you again, i was wondering when you’de be back.

Posted by: dbs at October 7, 2011 4:28 PM
Comment #330176

Jeff

“You profess to know the motivation behind the protest and paint them as degenerates of society.”

You are painting with a broom, not a brush.

Where did I say anything close to what you claim I said?

Here is the answer. Nowhere.

Printing that someone said something that does not resemble anything close to what was actually said, has a lot a labels that would be true. I will stick with this one. You lied.

The people who are “protesting” in many cases are being paid out of organized labor funds. Organized labor takes members dollars as well as government dollars to conduct this activity. They are not serving their members very well, spending their hard earned dollars on some anarchist activity against the fat cats who doled to Obama and his comrades millions of dollars. They want free education. They want more taxes on the rich, who they do not define. They want their bills payed for, including their mortgage if they have one. They all qualify under Dodd-Frank and Freddie and Fannie. They want cradle to the grave entitlement to anything they want and want others to pay for it.

Rich people are the sponsors of this anarchist party. What is the difference between their wealth and other wealth? It is all wealth. Organized labor scratched and clawed the workers back to amass the millions they are playing with.

Obama’s work bill was attempted to put to a vote in the Senate, but who stopped it? Senator Reid. The top dog for Obama won’t let it come to a vote ant the same time Obama is accusing republicans of holding it up. Who is wagging what dogs tail? Democrats can’t even get on the same page. And who do they blame? The republicans. They should change from Jack Daniels to Jim Beam or to Wild Irish Rose

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at October 7, 2011 4:37 PM
Comment #330177

RH
They have ‘declarations’ that are pretty much as one-sided and have nothing to do with Wall Street, as that demands link you posted.

BTW, if you go to their occupywallstreet sites and read the forums, you will see that despite the ‘Admins’ attempt at damage control, those demands aren’t too far off the mark of what the protesters want.

Posted by: kctim at October 7, 2011 4:47 PM
Comment #330178
Tsk tsk, Rhinehold.

Hmmm, not sure why the ‘tsk tsk’, I never said they were the official list of demands, what I said was they were “the only proposed list of demands that I’ve come across”.

The movement is leaderless. It is a truly grass roots, democratic protest movement.

Uh huh, that is why union leaderships supporting their unions to go to those ‘events’? It’s as much a grass roots movement as the Tea Party was (in the beginning the Tea Party events were very grass roots, but were coopted when their power started to grow, just as is happening to this one). When do we get to call them ‘astroturfed’?

In general, it protests the influence of Wall Street money on our politicians as well as corporate greed. Currently, Occupy Wall Street remains amorphous. It uses spectacle to vent anger over the state of affairs.

Gee, where have I heard that before… 2009 perhaps?

This is a rare opportunity to see true democracy in action, at its very beginning. Right now, it continues to grow, but whether it merely results in inaction remains to be seen.

Is that what ‘true democracy’ is? I am not a fan of ‘true democracy’ since I actually support the rights of the minority, like Jefferson and Adams, and I’ve seen what ‘true democracy’ can do…

Besides, what I’ve seen most of are anarchists running around with socialists left-libertarains. I don’t see this being ‘democracy’ in any way.

What I see now are a bunch of spoiled uninformed brats that think they know what is going on in the world and that they know what is best for everyone else, who want something for nothing and resent anyone who has earned their way. They have a right to their little protests and I will support them having it, obviously, but in no way do I share what they are doing.

Basically the same group of people that have protested the G-20 summits, for much the same reason, only they have tricked a number of other people to join the cause (like the Paulites), which will fizzle the second they start saying what they are actually protesting for.

As long as they can say ‘we have no real agenda, we’re just angry’ they will stay a large enough group to get attention, just as the TEA Party did. Once they start talking policy…? It’ll be regulated to what it truly is, just as the TEA party was.

The idea that this is going to change anything is laughable to anyone who has seen this group come and go several times over their lifetime.

BTW, thanks for welcoming me back, I am glad that the site is operating well and that some positive changes have been made, it looks like good things are on the horizon!

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 7, 2011 5:22 PM
Comment #330180

Phx8 said:

“Soak? Raising taxes back to the rates of the Clinton era, back when we enjoyed a healthy economy and budget surpluses,”

So are you giving the credit of a healthy economy to Clinton? If I understand you correct, you believe Clinton was on top of the economy.

“Obama is playing a smart political game. He’s attempting to identify with the discontent, rather than being on the receiving end of blame, and aim the movement at Congress, especially the House Republicans. It’s the right move. If he succeeds, he can claim to represent the 99%, Main Street, even if the Legislative Branch fails to pass any legislation. It also ratchets up the pressure on legislators, which again, is smart, since the House GOP has absolutely no intention of passing anything which might help the economy and the country, since that could be construed as helping the re-election chances of Obama”

No, obama is playing a dangerous game. If this becomes violent, and it will, obama will be blamed and he will cost the Democratic Party many congressional seats.

“Mike,
Herman Cain misses the point.”

The problem with Herman Cain is that he is a conservative black man. Which makes the left racists for attacking him. One commentator wanted to know why Can was not involved in the civil rights marches, and since he was not, then he had no right being a black man. In the eyes of the left, Cain is an Oreo, an Uncle Tom, and not really black. I will go so far as to say, every person that attacks Cain is doing so purely for race reasons.

Pertaining to the protestors: they are paid to protest, the Hispanics can’t even read what their signs say, their grips are a potpourri of crazy complaints, they are beginning to become violent, and most of all, they exist only because the left is so jealous Tea Party. Over 700 have been arrested and yet not one TP activist at any single rally was ever arrested.

Posted by: Mike at October 7, 2011 6:04 PM
Comment #330182

We see the rioters in Greece also are unenthusiastic about cuts.

Isn’t it usually true that people like to get stuff free and that almost nobody thinks that his problems are mostly his own fault?

Even the biggest loser is sure that he is just a victim of circumstances. ESPECIALLY the biggest loser thinks he is just a victim of circumstances. It is usually more fun to protest than to work hard to achieve your goals.

This is the fundamental strength of the so-called progressives. They appeal to the darker side. Yes, blame others. If you took out a mortgage you cannot pay, it is the fault of the person who sold you the house. If you ran your credit card up to the limit, it is the fault of the person dumb enough to give you credit. If they won’t give you credit, it is because they are racists/elitist/rich …

Anybody can have bad luck and this economy is hard. Obama’s stimulus has kept unemployment at 9.1%. But indeed, if you were poor before the current recession, it is probably your fault or at least there is probably some aspect of your behavior you might change.

Remember this - the only common factor in all your successes or failures is you.

Posted by: C&J at October 7, 2011 6:19 PM
Comment #330183

Rhinehold,

Debt restructuring is not an absurd concept under the circumstances. Many responsible economists feel that is the only real option. Total debt forgiveness may be too extreme. However, thus far, the world has been scrambling to make good all bad bank loans by socializing that debt. This is what a respected market analyst, John Hussman, recently had to say about the issue:

“The global economy is at a crossroad that demands a decision - whom will our leaders defend? One choice is to defend bondholders - existing owners of mismanaged banks, unserviceable peripheral European debt, and lenders who misallocated capital by reaching for yield and fees by making mortgage loans to anyone with a pulse. Defending bondholders will require forced austerity in government spending of already depressed economies, continued monetary distortions, and the use of public funds to recapitalize poor stewards of capital. It will do nothing for job creation, foreclosure reduction, or economic recovery.”

“The alternative is to defend the public by focusing on the reduction of unserviceable debt burdens by restructuring mortgages and peripheral sovereign debt, recognizing that most financial institutions have more than enough shareholder capital and debt to their own bondholders to absorb losses without hurting customers or counterparties - but also recognizing that properly restructuring debt will wipe out many existing holders of mismanaged financials and will require a transfer of ownership and recapitalization by better stewards. That alternative also requires fiscal policy that couples the willingness to accept larger deficits in the near term with significant changes in the trajectory of long-term spending.”

Posted by: Rich at October 7, 2011 6:41 PM
Comment #330184

When I graduated from HS in 1965, I attended Miami University in Ohio. The tuition cost was $600.00 a year. Today the in state tuition for MU is $12,325.00 per year. That is a 2100% increase in tuition. This is compared to a 610% increase in COLA for the same time span.

Question: why aren’t these protestors (many of the students or past students wanting debt forgivness) protesting the high cost of education. Are these evil universities gouging Americans? Or are we only concerned about banks and corporations?

Posted by: justcurious at October 7, 2011 7:16 PM
Comment #330186

justcurious,
Student protestors do protest rising tuition costs.

Many are more concerned about banks and corporations because those entities have undue influence over the political system. Universities are generally either private or run by states, and do not participate in politics on a national level.

Posted by: phx8 at October 7, 2011 7:31 PM
Comment #330188

Rhinehold and C&J,

Progressives are simply pleading with the public to look at reality and the big picture.

The reality is that those who took out a mortgage too big for their pocketbook have already lost. Those that took out too much equity from their homes have already lost. They have been or are being foreclosed upon. The rest of us, who did neither, have also lost. Our home equity has been destroyed by the irresponsible financial speculation fueling an extraordinary housing bubble in the 2000s.

On the other hand, the reality is that those who issued the loans, traded in derivatives related to the loans and provided investment capital to fund the loans did not lose. They have been saved by our government and other governments worldwide with literally trillions of dollars of public taxpayer dollars. Too Big To Fail is a fact.

The reality is that the “sophisticated” investors, investment banks and insurers of those high risk loans did not lose. They were saved by the government and the general taxpayer. It was the unsophisticated borrower and the general public that has lost.

The reality of what has happened and is happening raises the simple question: Why should those that issued and funded loans for worthless investments be saved at the expensive of the general taxpayer while the borrowers and main street are thrown to the wolves?

Think about it! Who has been punished for the irresponsible mortgages and their derivatives? It certainly hasn’t been the TBTF banks. They are still in business. The Fed has actually bought a huge chunk of their toxic assets to provide a market for them. Governments worldwide have socialized their debt. Look at what has happened to Ireland. It went from a public surplus to a huge deficit commitment to saving its private sector banks at the expensive of public programs.

Posted by: Rich at October 7, 2011 7:50 PM
Comment #330192
Progressives are simply pleading with the public to look at reality and the big picture.

LOL, yeah, that’s all they’re doing, right…

Our home equity has been destroyed by the irresponsible financial speculation fueling an extraordinary housing bubble in the 2000s.

No, your IMAGINED equity that you believed to be there because of the bubble was lost. It was an inflated value that did not match reality. Now, it matches reality and you are upset about losing thousands of imaginary dollars…?

On the other hand, the reality is that those who issued the loans, traded in derivatives related to the loans and provided investment capital to fund the loans did not lose.

If you believe that they ‘did not lose’ then you are not dealing in reality, sorry.

Too Big To Fail is a fact.

No, Too Big To Fail is an invented mindset that progressives have made up because they can’t stand the idea that people can, will and should lose.

Why should those that issued and funded loans for worthless investments be saved at the expensive of the general taxpayer while the borrowers and main street are thrown to the wolves?

They shouldn’t. Everyone who made a bad decision should pay for that decision. Don’t yell at the people who were AGAINST the bailouts that since there were bailouts for the banks (needed because of a congress not acting to temporarily end mark-to-market accounting because they wanted to win an election) that since those bailouts happened we need to bail EVERYONE ELSE out as well.

The ‘bailouts’ come from the Forgotten Man, the middle class person who didn’t made bad decision, who didn’t invest unwisely, who didn’t do all of the wrong things to now have to help those who did by force… It’s time the true Forgotten Man (not the people in the TEA Party, not the people in Occupy WallStreet) but the real people that are being expected to pay the price for OTHER’S bad decisions to say NO.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 7, 2011 11:05 PM
Comment #330195


The progressive movement of old passed no legislation, no laws, no regulations. What the movement did was protest the economic injustice that they were enduring, taking their demands to the street.

The changes came from the general population at large who where swayed by the arguments of the progressives. Not all of the demands were acceptable to the population as a whole, but many were and the people elected representatives that would enact the acceptable changes into law. It wasn’t easy, many of the changes were fought bitterly by wealth and it’s supporters. Nothing has changed in that regard, because they have been fighting to dismantle the progressive era, and later changes, every since they were enacted.

This movement today is attempting to tap into the general populations view that the country is headed in the wrong direction. Many people do feel short changed and lied to by their government. They were promised protections from the detrimental effects that globalization has had on our economy and especially our job market. They were promised new high tech, higher paying jobs and the training to perform them. Instead, the only ones who received protections were the banks and the corporations, while millions of former middle class workers have been relegated to low paying service jobs or shoved out of the job market completely. Millions more have suffered decades of stagnant wages while inflation has lowered their standard of living.

I have every confidence that given a fair hearing, not all, but several of the demands of the protesters will be supported by the general population. Just as the tea party made demands and forced Republican politicians to make promises to support and promote their demands, so to will the general population make demands of politicians for change.

The tea party ignited a spark and gained support until the band took the stage and Eric Cantor and the Individualists began performing their act.

Now the other side has ignited a spark and will get their opportunity to present their side of the argument for consideration by the public as a whole.

Like those dull European countries? Depends on which country.

Germany is a country where government, business and labor have a working relationship. They did not outsource their manufacturing base. Instead they modernized and trained their workforce while at the same time their businesses invested in overseas opportunities as well. In addition, Germany has become a the leader in the conversion to wind and solar power. As a result, Germany has weathered the current economic crisis much better than many other countries and they are in a good position to do well in the global economy of the future. The average middle class German worker enjoys a higher standard of living than his American counterpart while shouldering a tax burden that is significantly higher.

Then there is Greece, a country who’s people wanted a higher standard of living but have refused to pay their taxes to support it. A country where government corruption is among the highest in the world.

Posted by: jlw at October 8, 2011 2:01 AM
Comment #330198

Jlw said

“Then there is Greece, a country who’s people wanted a higher standard of living but have refused to pay their taxes to support it.”

How can you expect a higher standard of living when most of the population is on the government dole? And how can you expect a small % of the population who is still productive and produces wealth to pay for majority on government welfare?

Almost 10% of the Geek population of 11 million is on government payroll. These states were taken almost 2 years ago and the states are even worse now:

“Greece is a good example of a country whose labor laws and social policies are at odds with its population trends. Yes, a series of Greek governments have been profligate, running up debt and financing the welfare state with long-term borrowing. But they’ve been doing this precisely because they are trying to swim against long-term demographic trends that are inexorable. Greece has one of the lowest fertility rates of any country in Europe, just 1.3 children per woman, nearly a full child below what’s considered replacement rate. Moreover, this rate has been falling for decades, so that Greece’s 65-and-over population has soared from just 11 percent of the country in 1970 to 24 percent today, and is projected to grow to one-third of the population by 2050. By contrast, Greece’s working age population (defined as those ages 15-to-64) has reached its peak and is projected to decline 20 percent over the next 40 years.

Given these demographics, Greece has exactly the wrong labor and retirement policies in place. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Greece has among the most liberal pension systems, with generous payouts to encourage workers to retire early, including whole categories of workers in jobs deemed “arduous.” Incentives matter, of course, so that even while Greece needs to be encouraging more of its citizens to work longer, they are doing the opposite: Only 42 percent of Greece’s population aged 55-to-65 are employed, compared to 52 percent of the OECD on average and 62 percent in the United States.

Greece suffers not only from the lost national productivity of a shrinking workforce, but from the cost of high retirement payouts. Greece spends nearly 12 percent of its gross domestic product on pensions-compared to 6 percent in the United States. To support that burden Greece has among the highest rate of taxes on the average worker in Europe, 42 percent of income earned, compared to 37 percent in the OECD on average and 30 percent in the United States. No wonder so many Greek workers find it more profitable to retire or to evade taxes, another of Greece’s problems.”

http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2010/02/17/the_demise_of_the_european_welfare_nation_98348.html

The problem with Greece is simptomatic of all Europe: a socialist welfare state. The same direction the dems and obama are trying to take us now.

The banks of Greece have lost 40% of their value; which goes hand in hand with what the protestors of WS want to do to the banks in the US.

Posted by: Mike at October 8, 2011 11:12 AM
Comment #330200


Mike, how many of the robots on GM’s assembly line are earning a wage, have a home mortgage, a car payment, two kids in college and have just purchased an I Pad?

The first totally automated McDonald’s is not to distant in the future. Robots that can clean bathrooms, Motel rooms, and make beds are right around the corner.

The changes brought on by technology in the last century will likely be dwarfed by the changes of this century. In the not to distant future, everyone may be implant hard wired for the Internet. We really don’t know how this technology will effect our future social and economic structures. But, we do know that the Internet has been contributing to a lot of trouble for powerful people who feel that they have the right to rule in accordance with their on priorities.

You people on the right should have bumped Gore off before he could invent the thing.

My guess is that you will loose your bet if you bet against the social welfare state. Who knows if, in a hundred years from now, we will all be living off the dole of the dividends.

Your link is just another in the thousands of right wing predictions of the demise of the European social welfare state that I have heard over the last fifty years. The Europeans have weathered worse economic situations than this. I think it is rather comically pathetic how our stock market is up or down almost on a daily basis over the European situation.

All that time spent on Greece, a country with an economy the size of Mississippi, and not a word about how Germany is doing with it’s unions and socialized medicine.

Posted by: jlw at October 8, 2011 3:33 PM
Comment #330204

This knuckle-scraping drivel in the streets is starting to cramp my style. My Bentley may have to be fitted with a plow so my driver can take out this this waste of humanity. Now PLEASE pass the Grey Poupon.

Posted by: c. moneybags at October 8, 2011 5:17 PM
Comment #330205

Mike-

These are not reactionary protests, they are planned protests by anti-American enemies bent on disrupting the country.

Good to know you’re rolling out all the old dismissals.

You’re peddling all the same old fears, but I want you to notice something here: with Three weeks of protests and growing, the expected chaos and mayhem hasn’t shown up.

What will you start saying in a couple weaks when these non-violent protests fail to take the dark direction you so fearfully predict? Are you going to be like Wayne LaPierre, who said that the fact that Obama’s pushed practically no gun control laws is just a sign that he’s in a conspiracy to take all the guns?

I’ve got a better founded set of fears for you: that Wall Street will repeat its errors, and we’re going find ourselves in another crisis like the last one. That we’re going to be stuck in this high unemployment situation for years to come, with all the consequences of that. That the American dream is dead in this country, and that the same sort of ossified class systems going to develop as in other countries, that birth is once again going to be destiny.

As for Herman Cain? His politics are his problem with Democrats. If we choose a Liberal black guy, and reject a conservative black guy, then what we’re doing is called partisanship, not racism. You may talk about electing black people to office, but Democrats so far more often. We don’t elect conservative black men because we don’t elect conservatives as much as Republicans do, a funny little quirk of my party to be sure.

Of course, it’s useful, politically speaking, for you to make Democrats look bad, so you’re going to make the most caustic charges you can, aren’t you? Herman Cain is the victime of racism, rather than being disliked for his rather extreme politics.

Let’s all vote for Herman Cain to prove we’re not racists, right? If you guys had a long enough memory to recall that you were accusing us of playing this race card on Obama’s behalf a while back, this might actually be offensive!

As for your comment about hispanics being unable to read their own signs, I’ll just let that comment stand, and speak for itself. You defeat yourself with it, and should be ashamed of writing it.

As for Greece? Germany and many of the healthier economies of the north have practiced socialism for quite some time, and are in much better shape. The primary issue is paying for things. Greece’s problem is more corruption, and a problem that might be familiar to Republicans: keeping taxes low, but doing a lot of spending despite that, hiding problems with budget gimmicks (like Bush did with the Wars).

If we had kept to Clinton’s fiscal course, Greece would have little in common with us fiscally. We’d have been paying off much of our debts by this point. It was a fiscal and economic policy promoted by a Republican President with a Republican Congress that got us into this mess. Republicans want to pretend that the magic market fairy will come down from heaven and sprinkle pixie dust on supply side economics, but despite Bush’s strict adherence to saying no to tax increases, the economy did not take off.

Last, let me make something clear: the austerity measures that they’ve imposed there, and in other countries have not gotten the results you folks said they would. Confidence has not returned to those countries, and their economies are worse than before.

It’s time to admit that your theories didn’t pan out.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 8, 2011 5:39 PM
Comment #330206

jlw states:

All that time spent on Greece, a country with an economy the size of Mississippi, and not a word about how Germany is doing with it’s unions and socialized medicine.

Reading a bit more about Germany. Sounds like a really horrible place to live. lol


Some German facts:

Affluence for everybody and social justice: In the late 1950s that was the goal the then Federal Minister of Economics Ludwig Erhard had in mind when he introduced the social market economy in Germany. The “German model” proved to be a success story and became an archetype for several other countries. One of the pillars of this success was the extensive German welfare system. Today, Germany boasts one of the most comprehensive welfare systems: 26.7 percent of the country’s gross domestic product is channeled into public welfare spending. In comparison, the USA invests 15.9 percent, while the OECD average is 20.7 percent. An all-embracing system of health, pension, accident, long-term care, and unemployment insurance provides protection against the financial consequences of the risks we face in everyday life. In addition, the welfare lifeline offers tax-financed services such as the family services equalization scheme (child benefit, tax concessions) or basic provisions for pensioners and those unable to work. Germany sees itself as a welfare state that considers the social protection of all its citizens to be a priority.

Posted by: c. moneybags at October 8, 2011 5:45 PM
Comment #330207

To all:
You know, I think the question isn’t why are people protesting on Wall Street now. It’s why they haven’t protested earlier. My guess is that it takes some time for people to get the impression that the folks who screwed things up, who piled false wealth on top of false wealth, simply aren’t going to admit that they had a problem.

Now, I think, they’re quite sure that the system’s not taking its responsibilities seriously, that things aren’t getting better on their own, that Wall Street hasn’t learned its lesson.

A lot of what I’m reading from folks on the right here is insults and slander. Seriously, folks, did that work for Democrats facing off against the Tea Party? You can’t say that Democrats didn’t say equally heated things. Did it work? No. Democrats would have been better off not being defensive, but providing an actual defense of their policies. Degrading your opponent in a debate is not the same as winning that debate in the eyes of others.

Rhinehold-
The post 2000 recession had 1/17th of the drop that the Great Recession did. Obama managed to create jobs coming out of that, while Bush managed to kill even more jobs coming out of his recession, despite all the tax cuts he volunteered. His peak unemployment was 6.3% during it.

If you want to play victim, it helps if you have it rougher than the other guy you’re pointing fingers at.

As for the forgotten man? The irony is, you’re looking at them, and right through them. The reality is, you cannot get out of the economic hole we’re in except by improving demand, and everything the Republicans are trying to do, and libertarians as well, functions better to use this crisis as a pretext to kill big government than as an actual aid to the economy.

Given what Republicans promised to Americans (jobs, jobs, jobs), they’re going to find it rather difficult to explain what they’ve been doing, and don’t think liberals like myself aren’t going to force the question on them.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 8, 2011 5:52 PM
Comment #330208

SD

“Herman Cain is the victime of racism, rather than being disliked for his rather extreme politics.”

Let me extend some thoughts from this quote.

Since he is extreme in your view, then your are extreme in my view. Meaning that you consider him extreme right wing,(I don’t know how that comes about in your mind), then you by nature are extreme left wing.

There is something that the left just does not understand. That when you place the extreme right on someone then you are confessing that you are 180 degrees from him and therefore you are left wing extreme. The is a basic understanding. So you are getting closer to the confession that you are a socialists as I and others have stated here. Honesty is good for the soul.

Maranatha

Posted by: tom humes at October 8, 2011 6:07 PM
Comment #330209
What will you start saying in a couple weaks when these non-violent protests fail to take the dark direction you so fearfully predict?

They will probably say about the same things the left said when their predictions of violent overthrow attempts of the TEA Party didn’t happen…

If we had kept to Clinton’s fiscal course

Which were what, Stephen? Let’s be specific here…

BTW, remember the fact that had we not overreacted to Enron and put in Mark to Market accounting measures (that FDR had good sense to get rid of in 1938) we would not have had the impact on the economy that we did. Banks that dealt in derivatives would not have had to zero out their ledgers, preventing them from being able to lend any money and the businesses and individuals that needed those funds would have had them. The banks would not have needed bailing out and the businesses would have been able to continue on without stealing the funds from our children to stay afloat just so that the Democratic Party could get their candidate elected…

As for the forgotten man? The irony is, you’re looking at them, and right through them

You obviously have no idea who that Forgotten Man is, it definitely isn’t the spoiled brats attending these protests… In fact, the definition of the Forgotten Man is the one who is quiet and does not protest, especially with such moronic ideas.

$20 per hour minimum wage? Guaranteed house and job? No, the Forgotten Man does not want any of that, just a change to be able to better their lot in life without doing so on the backs of others.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 8, 2011 6:29 PM
Comment #330210

th states:

There is something that the left just does not understand. That when you place the extreme right on someone then you are confessing that you are 180 degrees from him and therefore you are left wing extreme.

???

So I think that most of the population would consider people who are against basic worker protections such as: health care, secure pensions, family leave, unemployment benefits, and claiming class warfare over a small tax increase for millionaires, are extreme right.

Therefore, by your logic, the majority of the U.S population are left wing extremists. Cool!

Posted by: c. moneybags at October 8, 2011 6:47 PM
Comment #330211

Rhinehold you state:

$20 per hour minimum wage? Guaranteed house and job? No, the Forgotten Man does not want any of that, just a change to be able to better their lot in life without doing so on the backs of others.

Wouldn’t a $20 per hour minimum wage job help someone better their lot in life? And if they ARE working, how would they be doing so on the backs of others?

Also, I didn’t realize they were protesting for a guaranteed job and home. Is Publishers Clearing House down at the protests promising free homes in downtown Manhattan now? If so, cool. This protest really has had an effect.

Btw- $20 per hour equals about $28,000 net per year. Whoa, maybe they could buy a car now to get to their minimum wage job. And extra bonus, they might take part in buying more goods and services which could help the economy. I really like this idea of A $20 minimum wage job.

Posted by: c. moneybags at October 8, 2011 7:31 PM
Comment #330212

c. moneybags


“And extra bonus, they might take part in buying more goods and services which could help the economy.”


yes….goods and services that would now cost much more due to the $20 an hour minimum wage. hey, why stop at $20 an hour? why not $50, or $100 an hour? wouldn’t that be even better? then they could afford to buy a nice home. boy that $25 big mac will sure be a treat, just don’t super size !

Posted by: dbs at October 8, 2011 7:59 PM
Comment #330213
Wouldn’t a $20 per hour minimum wage job help someone better their lot in life?

Not in the long run, no. Let’s play it out. A person is now making 20/h instead of 7/h. What do you think the person making 10/h is now going to say? They are going to want 3/h more than minimum wage, so they will demand 13/h. Then those making 15/h will want 8/h more than minimum wage, so they will demand 28/h… Do you see how that goes? Eventually, the costs of goods will increase, everyone will be making roughly the same as they were in relative to the cost of living and nothing will have been accomplished.

Nevermind that a federal minimum wage is moronic considering the vast differences in cost of living throughout the United States…

And if they ARE working, how would they be doing so on the backs of others?

If the job can only exist because of the minimum wage laws, the businesses pay more than they need for the work, they increase their prices to compensate, and everyone else ends up paying more…

Also, I didn’t realize they were protesting for a guaranteed job and home.

Read some more and figure out what is going on, you might learn something. I provided a link earlier that listed those as part of the proposed demands of some of the group.

Whoa, maybe they could buy a car now to get to their minimum wage job. And extra bonus, they might take part in buying more goods and services which could help the economy. I really like this idea of A $20 minimum wage job.

You apparently haven’t learned about Broken Window Fallacies and how your idea would result in less opportunity, not more. It’s a big failing of progressive thought, but one they just can’t seem to grasp.

I’ll point you to a quick summary that may help explain why what you suggestion won’t work as you think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_window_fallacy

http://reason.com/archives/2011/08/24/broken-windows-around-the-worl

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 8, 2011 8:16 PM
Comment #330214

Rhinehold,

“Mark to market” accounting rules were relaxed in late March of 2009 at the height of the meltdown to essentially “mark to model” rules. But, it did little to assist the banks in unloading their mortgage backed “toxic” assets in the private markets. Nobody was going to touch those convoluted mortgage backed debt instruments.

But, there was a white knight for the banks. It was the Federal Reserve that made a market for the toxic assets. In November of 2008, it began a program of purchasing mortgage backed assets from the banks at face value. The program is commonly referred to as QE1. The Fed purchased over $600 billion in Mortgage-backed securities (MBS). By March 2009, it held $1.75 trillion of bank debt, MBS, and Treasury notes, and reached a peak of $2.1 trillion in June 2010. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing#Amounts According to some reports, the Fed is holding 1.1 trillion of mortgage backed assets. http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Mises-Economics/2010/0804/Can-the-Fed-unload-its-toxic-assets-successfully

Where did the Fed get the money to purchase the assets? It printed it. The banks got cash for the face value of the mortgage backed securities and the Fed got the assets. In order to control the inflationary consequences of flooding bank reserves with cash, the Fed agreed to pay interest on bank reserves in order to create an incentive for banks to park it.

The purpose of the program was to increase the capital position of banks by transforming unmarketable and depressed securities into cash at face value. Theoretically, the Fed could simply sell back the assets to the banks and reduce the amount of bank reserves and manage any inflationary consequences. But, can they eventually unload all those assets? There is also the danger that the assets held by the Fed will not recover there face value and the Fed will realize a loss. Thus far, the Fed has realized a profit.

I am curious as to conservative thought on QE1. Generally, it has been thought of as a huge success. The banks’ solvency problem was managed. The Fed has not lost any money so far and has actually made a profit. But, it did involve a substantial amount of Fed money printing by expanding its balance sheet. Was that bad? Should the Fed have made a market for the securities? Should the Fed have allowed the banks to fail?

Posted by: Rich at October 8, 2011 8:27 PM
Comment #330216

yes….goods and services that would now cost much more due to the $20 an hour minimum wage. hey, why stop at $20 an hour? why not $50, or $100 an hour? wouldn’t that be even better? then they could afford to buy a nice home. boy that $25 big mac will sure be a treat, just don’t super size !

I’d rather have the money in my pocket and then be able to decide if I want to buy a $25 big mac.

Posted by: c. moneybags at October 8, 2011 9:13 PM
Comment #330217

tom humes-
Nice misquote. I know you guys abuse the “out of context” rationale, but what I was saying was that accusations of racism against Herman Cain are just a sensationalist charge, and a hypocritical one to boot.

You don’t help yourself by accusing me of being extreme because I say he’s extreme. It is not extreme to say that Public officials need not take special loyalty oaths because they are Muslim. The constitution, in fact, in its original form prohibits religious tests for officeholders, and the other parts of the Constitution make that none of anybody’s business, and out of Congress’s hands. When even Richard Land, of the Southern Baptist Convention, is saying that your policy on Muslims is extreme, that’s saying something.

He believes that abortion should be illegal even in cases of rape or incest, or so he said when he ran for Senate in 2004.

He’s saying we should go with this 9-9-9 plan, a complete overhaul of the tax code that would set three flat taxes at rates so low that they are guaranteed to tank revenue. Not that he cares, stabilizing fiscal matters seem less important to him than destroying big government.

He would have the Fox guard the Henhouse by appointing the very industry leaders whose industries are regulated to decide which regulations to do away with.

He’s even making blatantly false allegations about new regulations for farm dust. This in support of eliminating the EPA.

And he’s calling people exercising their free speech rights unamerican. Why?

I’m after the worst economic crash in decades, and the subsequent taxpayer funded bailouts and refusal on the part of financial companies to clean up their act, people should be angry. Why is it un-American to protest corruption, incomptence, a lazy form of government that doesn’t care that Americans lost trillions in wealth thanks to the actions of the supposedly self-policing markets.

The GOP calls those people extremists, but their opinion is actually mainstream consensus. People want the banks put on a very short leash. They are mad at the way the current system is run, and the perverse incentives big business has to make the situation worse. They’re sick of Washington getting in the way of what the people want.

I think the GOP says the word “extremist” because it needs to cover for its own extremes, to distract people about how far away from center they really are. I mean, the Public option and medicare buy-in were genuinely popular. So is the idea of actively trying to create jobs, instead of just waiting for things to get better. Creating, jobs, by the way, has consistently polled better than deficit reduction, especially deficit reduction by dangerous standoffs over debt ceilings.

Republicans call people like me, people out protesting the current state of things, extremists in order to instill self-doubt in those who are no longer as satisfied as they once were to simply, passively stand by and let corporate America have it’s way. They don’t want people considering an alternative, no matter how lousy the results their own policy gained. It can’t, and it won’t last.

Until the problems that have people so ticked off are solved, you will continue to see outbursts and demonstrations like this, and the more you do to try and contain it, the worse it’s going to get, because folks have recognized that if they want the job of looking out for their interests done right, they’ll have to do it themselves.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 8, 2011 9:26 PM
Comment #330218
“Mark to market” accounting rules were relaxed in late March of 2009 at the height of the meltdown to essentially “mark to model” rules. But, it did little to assist the banks in unloading their mortgage backed “toxic” assets in the private markets. Nobody was going to touch those convoluted mortgage backed debt instruments.

You fail to grasp the issue.

By March 2009 the damage had been done. Unfortunately, in October 2008 there were many many calls to relax the rules so that the banks who had these derivatives on their books could show them having some value, not zero as they were forced to record. Due to their lending regulations, they can only lend 8 to ever 1 dollar they have as an asset, but millions of dollars where suddenly erased from their books, as a result they were no longer able to loan any money because of those rules. That was where the problem lied, the banks couldn’t loan to the businesses that needed those short term loans to keep operational, some were bailed out, some went under, and the economy tanked.

By the time that the rules were relaxed, the bailouts had happened so that some of the banks didn’t fail, but many more did. The economy had already contracted by then, so the banks being able to loan again no longer helped, the businesses had either failed or were bailed out and were then beholden to the government.

I am curious as to conservative thought on QE1.

I can’t help you there.

Generally, it has been thought of as a huge success.

By progressive and statists, yes. By anyone who is wary of ‘printing money’ to solve problems that could have been avoided by temporarily reducing the Mark to Market rules (but choosing not to in order to keep the economy in shambles until after the election) not so much.

I’d rather have the money in my pocket and then be able to decide if I want to buy a $25 big mac.

Or the 1000 a month in electricity, 1500 a month in heating costs, etc… Great idea. We go through this every time the minimum wage is increased, it doesn’t help, never has, never will.

Until the problems that have people so ticked off are solved, you will continue to see outbursts and demonstrations like this, and the more you do to try and contain it, the worse it’s going to get, because folks have recognized that if they want the job of looking out for their interests done right, they’ll have to do it themselves.

And you did the same thing to the TEA Party when they were doing the same thing two years ago. Quit acting shocked that people on the right are making things up about the 99%’ers when the left did the exact same thing two year ago, it isn’t becoming.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 8, 2011 11:28 PM
Comment #330219
“Mark to market” accounting rules were relaxed in late March of 2009 at the height of the meltdown to essentially “mark to model” rules. But, it did little to assist the banks in unloading their mortgage backed “toxic” assets in the private markets. Nobody was going to touch those convoluted mortgage backed debt instruments.
You fail to grasp the issue.

Let me add what I forgot to say… There was no need for the banks to ‘dump the toxic assets’, there were still houses attached to those loans, they were still worth something. They may not have been worth their stated value, but most banks had some funds to handle that, the problem is that they had to say that those assets were worth 0.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 8, 2011 11:31 PM
Comment #330222

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27100454

“The SEC has destroyed $500 billion of bank capital by its senseless marking to market of these assets for which there is no marking to market, and that has destroyed $5 trillion of bank lending,” he said.

“That’s a major issue in the credit crunch we’re in right now. The banks just don’t have the capital to start lending right now, because of these horrendous markdowns that the SEC’s approach required.”

Had congress did in September 2008 what they eventually did in March 2009, we wouldn’t have needed QE1 or the bailouts, the economy would have taken a small dip and we would have been back on the road to recovery much sooner. But, as I said, the Democrats had an election to win and they knew that a failing economy would get Obama from -3% in the polling to winning the election (which is exactly what happened).

They are the people at fault for our current economic crisis, but you won’t hear that because class warfare is a much better for the parties in power…

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 8, 2011 11:45 PM
Comment #330223

http://mikesright.wordpress.com/2011/10/07/seiu-was-behind-occupy-wall-street-from-the-beginning/

Hmmm, going to have to investigate this…

Well, well,who would’ve guessed? The “grass-roots efforts” of Occupy Wall Street weren’t so “grass-roots,” after all; the organizers have been working with ACORN and SEIU fronts from the very beginning.

In the first video, one of the organizers of the demonstration admits to the fellow Kool-Aid drinking Socialist interviewer that she has been closely working with the Working Peoples Party from “day one.”

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 9, 2011 1:03 AM
Comment #330224
In many ways, the press treats this protest the way they treated the Tea Party, completely distorting the story. Journalists ignored the mainstream of the Tea Party and instead focused on the fringe. Instead of showing the hundreds of signs calling for smaller government, reporters instead focused on the one sign showing Obama as Hitler. In the end, this reporting became self-fulfilling. The Republican fringe disaffected with the establishment were convinced by this reporting, believing that they, too, should join the Tea Party, thus derailing it….

[The protesters’] loving acceptance of those who disagree with them is astonishing, but it’s totalitarian. It asks that people give up their individuality to the state the occupiers are creating. Rather than free speech, the protest has a sort of “managed speech” to make sure everyone has equal time. There is also the flip side, that not to join the movement or to disagree with the protesters means that you are working against the interest of the people….

The protesters are…predominantly white with blacks underrepresented. On the flip side, blacks are over-represented in the police force. The protesters often compare themselves to the Civil Rights Movement, but the photographs of the recent arrests often show black policemen arresting white protesters. I don’t know if this is a vindication of the Civil Rights Movement or if there is still more work to go, to get the blacks better ensconced in middle-class American to send their kids off to college with that combination of privilege and entitlement that turns them into protesters.

The makeup of the protesters also led to amusement among the cops, stationed in pairs on all four sides of the park. For some, their normal beat is in the poor areas of New York City. The police, who daily see the struggle of the real poor, had little use for protesters complaining about jobs while they carried around expensive MacBook computers paid for by their parents.

http://erratasec.blogspot.com/2011/10/independent-reporting-of.html

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 9, 2011 1:34 AM
Comment #330225

Another passage that I couldn’t help posting:

By the way, while Wall Street may be responsible for bad things, it is Wall Street who financed putting a million miles of fiber optic cables crisscrossing continents and under oceans. It is Wall Street that financed the thousands of cell towers. It is Wall Street from which venture capital comes to finance startups like Twitter. Thus, tweeting “Down with capitalism” from your iPhone for those around the word to read seems to be the most ironic thing a person can do. The live stream from the protest site, shared with 12,000 (at this moment) people across the Internet is a testament to Wall Street’s allocation of capital that these protesters fight against. [Obligatory Monty Python reference]

That the protest is dominated by Internet savvy youths exploiting social media is frequently mentioned. But what is not mentioned is the fact that the protesters are overwhelmingly college students, or recent graduates who still haven’t found jobs. They aren’t just any college students, but the stereotypical sort that you might expect to be involved in campus activism, such as graduate students in “Gender Studies.” I found nobody with engineering or science degrees, but many from arts and acting colleges. After talking with one guy for a while about unemployment and his difficult in finding a job after college, I found out that he was a “poet.” I’m not sure he understood that employers aren’t looking to hire poets. The only person I met that had a political science degree was one of the police officers “keeping the peace.”

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 9, 2011 3:53 AM
Comment #330226
Republicans call people like me, people out protesting the current state of things, extremists in order to instill self-doubt in those who are no longer as satisfied as they once were to simply, passively stand by and let corporate America have it’s way. They don’t want people considering an alternative, no matter how lousy the results their own policy gained. It can’t, and it won’t last.

Stephen, long time no see, but seriously you are making this statement with a straight face after what you and the left said about the TEA party?

http://www.watchblog.com/republicans/archives/006828.html#292811
http://www.watchblog.com/republicans/archives/006941.html#296105
http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/007266.html#310763
http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/007533.html#323246

Do I need to go on?

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 9, 2011 4:13 AM
Comment #330227

Rich
I sympathize with some of the demands. The problem is that they are unrealistic. I am not sure how many hundreds of thousands of dollars I lost on my house and investments. It is a lot. Sure I would like to have that back. But where would it come from?

The protests assume that there are some people who ripped us off sitting on piles of ill-gotten gains and that if we could get them to give this back to us, we would be made whole. But this is not true.

Who ripped me off? The guy down the street who took out a mortgage he couldn’t afford. He helped cause the drop. He ripped me off. The people who got subprime loans and then didn’t pay? They ripped me off. The people who made money on these subprime loans, they ripped me off. Many times the person getting ripped off and the person ripping off are the same guys. It is was a systemic collapse.

So some of these guys are both victims and perps. Many of the protestors are young people unhappy about student loans. Join the club. I had piles of student loans that ate up more than half my take home pay during the first years working.

To your question about why those who caused the problem should be “saved” the answer is that they shouldn’t. But we need to save the financial system and many of those who benefited earlier are helped by this.

JLW, Stephen et al

You asked for a word about Germany. I have been there many times and I used to speak German. Germans are successful because they work and hard and generally behave themselves. The social policies that work reasonably well in Germany depend on culture. We have much more diversity in the U.S. Not everybody can be expected to actually work hard and cooperate. Even with all this, Germany faces significant challenges. They have had great difficulties in integrating new immigrants.

One of the biggest things the Germans complain about is what they consider the lack of strong work ethic among people in other countries. If you have some German friends, ask them if they think Americans work hard and then ask them about other countries.

Posted by: C&J at October 9, 2011 7:42 AM
Comment #330228

c. moneybags

“I’d rather have the money in my pocket and then be able to decide if I want to buy a $25 big mac.”


so i guess making $10 an hour and having the money in your pocket for a $3 big mac isn’t the same thing huh. artificially driving up wages and at the same time driving up the prices of goods and services produced by those wages doesn’t change the position in life of those earning those wages. the only difference is that at some point you will need a wheelbarrow to carry the cash to pay for that big mac.

Posted by: dbs at October 9, 2011 10:53 AM
Comment #330229


C&J, are you saying that your work ethic is less than would be desired and that in reality you are not earning your pay? Surely you are not including conservative workers in your description of American workers? Those conservative union members are the only ones that actually work. Considering the fact that 80% are conservative and only 20% liberal, don’t you think you are being a little harsh.

There was a time when the work ethic of American workers was very high and right up until corporations started outsourcing, they were considered the most productive in the world.

What changed? Loyalty and respect is what changed. To corporations, workers became easily interchangeable work units. Mass layoffs where workers are tossed out of work like flies being shooed off a rotting piece of flesh. A corporate mentality where any downturn, any economic bump in the road, any change, is placed squarely on the back of the workforce. Stagnant wages, easy credit and inflation, that is what the American worker has been fed a steady diet of. Constant animosity towards workers and constant attacks, a hundred years of attacks on union workers.

Just today I read of another way in which business is displaying it’s attitude towards workers, if you have been laid off for 6 months or more, you are no longer employable.

Imagine if Germany had a bunch of right wing suck ups constantly attacking and ridiculing the work ethic of Mercedes workers. Since the days of the Robber Barons, corporate America has shown great animosity towards workers. The American workers stood up for themselves back then and they should be near the point of doing it again.

If German business had the same attitude towards workers that is displayed by American business the German workers would rise up in revolt.

The big difference between Germany and America isn’t the workers. Our culture is a composite of all cultures. It is currently having a large portion of salsa added to it. I can see how that might be a problem for someone with an Aryan attitude.


Who gave the guy down the street a mortgage that he couldn’t afford? It has been my experience that banks don’t often give mortgages to people who can’t afford them, but if the pickings are right, if the regulations have been corrected, the banks can create MORTGAGE SALES COMPANIES who could care less if the customer can pay because they get paid up front for selling and bundling.

If your equity is growing faster than can be believed, it is almost always to good to be true. The sucker bait was enticing. You were ripped off by a group of people. They included bankers, financiers, regulators, a AAA rating, and politicians of both parties. Much of the wealth was turned into assets that are now in the possession of bankers in the form of foreclosed properties. I hope those properties rot to the ground before they can be resold. It would be some consolation. The only one the people might get other than Dodd falling on his sword to save the rest. I am sure Shelby is thankful. He is thankful of his partisan constituents as well.

It was caused by a few bad apples is correct, quite a few bad apples (sharks) at the top of the feeding chain.

Posted by: jlw at October 9, 2011 1:30 PM
Comment #330230


Rhinehold, I to am glad to here from you again.

Economics is not taught in the science departments of universities for an obvious reason.

Our politicians axed much of the regulations governing the financial markets, allowing financial institutions to diversify in ways, some of which should not have been allowed. In addition, the politicians failed the people by not exercising their anti trust measures and allowing the phenomenon of to big to fail. As a result, the politicians put themselves in a position where they could bailout their financial institutions buddies or let the economy go into a total collapse. Sometimes I think it would have been best for us if the economy would have collapsed. But, then I realize that the opportunity to finally get the government to represent the people as a whole rather than the special interests would probably be wasted by partisans determined to reelect their favorite politician, the only one that is blameless among the whole bunch.

Posted by: jlw at October 9, 2011 1:59 PM
Comment #330235

jwl

I love my job and as a result I put in very long hours and I am productive. I would work for less money than they pay me, but my productivity justifies the money I get. As I get older and my energy levels decline, maybe that will not be true, but I hope to be long gone before they have to throw me out. I have never accepted welfare or unemployment, I pay all my taxes and I almost never miss a day of work (Besides planned ahead appointments I have taken only seven sick days in the last twenty-six years, five of them because of one incident when I was hit by a car on my way to work.) I am not talking about Americans like me and I also think that mainstream Americans have an excellent work ethics. Germans I talk to often disagree.

All that said, I have noticed a decline of our work ethic over my lifetime. I used to joke that my father once refused a 40 hour a week job because he didn’t want to work part time.

Anyway, my problem is not with most Americans and I understand that in these hard times even good people can be unemployed. But if you were unemployed also in good times (in 2006 for example), there is probably something wrong with you.

Re mortgages - there are bad guys at both ends of a bad mortgage.I think they should both lose money. However, I don’t think that we can get that money “back”. Prices of houses and some other things went to high. When they came down, they smashed some of our wealth. There is no compensation for us now and the protests certainly will create no wealth.

Posted by: C&J at October 9, 2011 2:55 PM
Comment #330247
The mob should be carrying signs IDing themselves. Something like “Anarchists -101 for 2011 and Beyond”.

Yes they should Tom.


““As far as anyone knew I was part of this cause — a cause that I had infiltrated the day before in order to mock and undermine in the pages of The American Spectator ,” Howley wrote. (The language in the story has since been changed without explanation.)”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/conservative-journalist-says-he-infiltrated-escalated-dc-museum-protest/2011/10/09/gIQAIKxCYL_blog.html

Posted by: j2t2 at October 9, 2011 6:34 PM
Comment #330248
The mob should be carrying signs IDing themselves. Something like “Anarchists -101 for 2011 and Beyond”.
Yes they should Tom.

:(

This goes to provide an example to Stephen about people not understanding the principles that the US were founded upon…

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 9, 2011 6:52 PM
Comment #330259

Rhinehold are you saying the country was founded on principles such as infiltrating groups to undermine them?

Posted by: j2t2 at October 9, 2011 10:06 PM
Comment #330260

I read that GOP candidate Buddy Roemer plans on being at the NYC protest on Tuesday to lend support. Seems he has been outspoken about the corporate abuse at Repub conventions. No wonder Faux wouldn’t let him in the debate.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/06/19/248108/buddy-roemer-corporate-power/

Posted by: j2t2 at October 9, 2011 10:13 PM
Comment #330264
Rhinehold are you saying the country was founded on principles such as infiltrating groups to undermine them?

No, the principle of being able to speak your mind without identifying yourself.

But yes, infiltrating another’s movements has been a staple of humanity for as long as societies have cared listen to what others say… Curious if you were upset about it happening in 2009 with the TEA Party? Or were you just upset when those people got caught?

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 9, 2011 11:12 PM
Comment #330270
the austerity measures that they’ve imposed there, and in other countries have not gotten the results you folks said they would. Confidence has not returned to those countries, and their economies are worse than before.

Ah, I see you’ve taken the latest Krugman talking point to heart…

http://reason.com/blog/2011/10/10/another-krugman-micks-up-irish

That one wept for “virtuous, suffering Ireland,” which was “gaining nothing” from efforts at budget reform – reform that Krugman compared with “bleeding the patient,” who “has nonetheless gotten sicker.”

Now the savage beauty of the terrible austerity has been born, and begorrah! Ireland’s bond yields are dropping rapidly, in spite of Krugman’s sarcastic dismissal of the idea that international debt markets would reward the country for its fiscal restraint. McArdle quotes more good news from the Wall Street Journal:

The national statistics office said Thursday gross domestic product in the three months to June was 1.6% higher than in the first quarter and 2.3% higher than in the same period of 2010.

That was the fastest year-to-year expansion since the last three months of 2007, after which Ireland’s previously fast-growing economy was felled by the financial crisis and the collapse of a debt-fueled property boom.

The Central Statistics Office also raised its calculation of growth in the first quarter to 1.9% from the previously estimated 1.3%. The growth was broad-based, including manufacturing, agriculture, transport and communications.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 10, 2011 7:39 AM
Comment #330280

phx8, good article.

Here’s another:
Panic of the Plutocrats

Posted by: Adrienne at October 10, 2011 1:36 PM
Comment #330283
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
— Mahatma Gandhi Posted by: Adrienne at October 10, 2011 2:15 PM
Comment #330285

Why #OccupyWallStreet?

Posted by: Adrienne at October 10, 2011 2:43 PM
Comment #330287

Rhinehold, “a staple of humanity” really! Infiltrating groups to undermine them is not a staple it is a dirty trick. When the government does it it is wrong. When a journalist does it to make the news not report the news it is wrong. But it is not a principle nor a staple. It is wrong. Using past events to justify the actions of these guys doesn’t make it right.

“and he openly claims to have helped instigate the events that prompted the museum to close.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/conservative-journalist-says-he-infiltrated-escalated-dc-museum-protest/2011/10/09/gIQAIKxCYL_blog.html


As far as the tea party I heard the rumors of things but has anyone ever proved any of them or are they just unfounded rumors used to defend the conservative journalist in this case?

Posted by: j2t2 at October 10, 2011 4:07 PM
Comment #330293

Adrienne

Good to quote Gandhi. Of course Gandhi was fighting for people who actually worked and actually were oppressed. It is hard to figure out what the anti-Wall Street guys really want, but it seems not to be getting the fruits of their own work.

Posted by: C&J at October 10, 2011 7:28 PM
Comment #330296

From the quote Rich provided…”but also recognizing that properly restructuring debt will wipe out many existing holders of mismanaged financials and will require a transfer of ownership and recapitalization by better stewards.”

It is called bankruptcy and has been the perfect tool for generations. Of course, it was not used in our recent financial troubles. It should have been.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 10, 2011 7:40 PM
Comment #330420
It is wrong. Using past events to justify the actions of these guys doesn’t make it right.

And I said it was ‘right’ when? I ‘justified it’ when?

You are taking my disgust of the desire to require ID before speech can be made or protesting take place as somehow approving of someone’s actions, which I have not done.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 11, 2011 9:09 AM
Comment #330426

And you are taking my sarcastic “yes they should Tom” used to introduce the “conservative” “journalist” as agreement with Tom’s authoritarian suggestion Rhinehold.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 11, 2011 5:39 PM
Comment #330447

Rhinehold-
The problem on those toxic assets is not that their worth has dropped, so much as it is that their worth cannot be determined. See, if you could look into those assets and go, “Hmm, I think this property is undervalued, we should buy it or keep it if we already got it, and sell it when it rebounds”, or say “This property ain’t worth crap, or it’s worth less than we paid for it, so let’s dump it, and move on.”

Instead, you have a situation where nobody really knows what they have.

Oh, and as far as Ireland goes, Last year their economy contracted by 1 percent. The year before, it contracted by 7.6 percent, and the year before that, 3 percent.

It’s unemployment rate, right now, is pretty much steady at 14.6%. To give an idea of the contrast, it was in the 4-5% range for much of the last decade.

Look at Greece, too: Unemployment was at 7.5% in 2008. Now it’s at 16.7%. Spain was at 9% in Jan. 2008, and now is at 21.2% You can improve an economy with a lot of people in dire financial straits, but that means, all too often, that people go further into debt in order to do that. Ireland’s export sector is doing well, but it’s domestic unemployment is still high.

Which means, more or less, that some companies might be doing well, but their unemployment is half again as bad as ours. What is austerity helping? Are the debts going down? Are the economies improving?

All these things aren’t working out like they should in theory. The problem is not a lack of liquidity in markets, it’s a lack of customers to make that liquidity useful.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 12, 2011 12:41 PM
Comment #330448

Jack:

Of course Gandhi was fighting for people who actually worked and actually were oppressed. It is hard to figure out what the anti-Wall Street guys really want, but it seems not to be getting the fruits of their own work.

Why don’t trying being honest and admit it — you know damn well exactly what the protesters want (because one would truly need to be a complete ignoramus not to know that Wall Street has criminally collapsed our economy and stolen a mountain of taxpayer money). Yet with these comments it appears you want to make yourself a spokesman for the views of the cold, callous 1%, who hold absolutely zero compassion for any American who struggles on a daily basis.

The people people who are protesting on Wall Street and around the country have either lost their jobs or have lost hope of finding a job, through no actual fault of their own (due to the thieves on Wall Street who have wiped so many people out, and because of the greed of corporations who have outsourced all of the jobs), or due to a complete lack of opportunities.

Obviously you’re proud to represent the exact opposite mentality of the people who are right now occupying Wall Street and other cities around this country. (This being: “I’ve got mine, so the rest of you can just f*ck off!”)
Well, I for one am not going to allow you to claim any victory with your oh-so-familiarly snide, heartless comments here. What’s happening with these protests now seems quite certain to change the American political landscape, and I’m no longer quite as cynical or convinced that the majority of our people really do share the same sort of morally bankrupt views that are so prevalent on the far right.

The American people have been steadily rising in ever growing numbers as result of basically having nothing left to lose — and due to simply knowing that they CAN rise because so many others have already done so! It’s been so fantastic to watch these long overdue protests unfolding too — because all of us really DO have EVERY RIGHT to: “peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

So go ahead Jack — defend the indefensible and say whatever pathetic thing you want to say — because it has become as plain as day that a new day is going to dawn as a result of the 99% Movement. The 1% and their supporters will no doubt keep spewing a lot of empty insults, yet nothing you say or do is very likely to stop this new American revolution from unfolding.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 12, 2011 1:05 PM
Comment #330481


Who was oppressing the people that Gandhi was fighting on behalf of?

Adrienne, If Jack was working in India, for one of the oppressors, during the protests of Gandhi, he would wonder what the fuss was about. What would those people have to protest about? Don’t they realize what wonderful things the British Empire and it’s business associations have done for them?

It is a mental state, oppression always thinks it’s the good guy.

They have been laughing, while the movement grows.

A majority say they have heard about the Wall Street protesters and a majority of those have a favorable opinion of several of the protesters demands.

A worker protest can achieve more progress by sitting on it’s rear than by throwing bricks.

Posted by: jlw at October 13, 2011 12:54 AM
Comment #330501

You know what’s funny is that some of the points made above are also on:
UnitedIssues’s Debate stream.

Posted by: James Todd at October 13, 2011 4:25 PM
Comment #330523

Adrienne

The Wall Street protesters have not articulated practical demands. If I complained about what they said, you would attack me for making assumptions about them.

I heard on NPR today that one of the demands was forgiveness of student loans. So are Wall Street bankers responsible for kids taking out loans to pay tuition? I had massive student loans BEFORE the recent crisis.

I heard that the protesters want an increase in government programs. How did the Wall Street guys affect this? Government is spending more than ever. The protesters want it to spend more on them.

It is difficult to see exactly how the protesters are being oppressed or who is oppressing them. From the few demands I have heard them make, they seem a lot more like spoiled kids and people who would prefer that government give them money. From the pictures I have seen, none of them look like they have had trouble getting food to eat. This is not a Gandhi situation.

jlw

The independence of India could have been handled better. Millions of people were killed in the immediate aftermath and British India was partitioned into two and then three states that have disrupted the subcontinent ever since.

If I had been there at the time, I probably would have sided with the Brits and tried to work toward a more orderly transition of power.

Gandhi was a good and holy man, but his ideas about economics were wacky. It took India three generations to come out of that socialist shadow. We can admire his commitment to peace, but we have to judge the whole result.

Years of substandard economic growth and the continuing instability of the former NW frontier are also some of the legacies.

Posted by: C&J at October 13, 2011 8:07 PM
Comment #330544


C&J, The best explanation for ‘why the Wall Street protests’ can be found by going up to Adrienne’s post #330285: click on the link and while the video is loading, look to your right side of the page, click on The George Carlin video, and you will learn why.

Like healthcare, the price of higher education has out paced inflation and the cost of living by a substancial percentage

Are the banks partly responsible? Yes! So to are the universities and most especially the government! More and more, the children of the poor and the middle class are being priced out of higher education. For them it is becoming increasing hard for them to attempt to better their position without incurring a huge debt to begin their new careers. It will get worse because the price of education will continue to escalate while the wages of new college graduates will continue to decline.

“It is called the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.”

Student loans have become just another part of the substitution of wages with debt, And no one is more to blame for that than the banks and their political enablers.

Why don’t we do a better job of educating our primary and secondary students? Because we don’t want to do a better job. If we did, we would.

We can fight for the rights of all or the freedom of the few. That is what it really boils down to.

The Indian subcontinent’s legacy includes 400 hundred years of exploitation by Western powers. The purpose of colonialism is exploitation, not altruism.

In hind sight, almost everything could have been done better. In the case of independence, there was no other option, the Empire was falling apart, could no longer be sustained,

The division of the subcontinent had far more to do with religious ‘BELIEFS AND INTOLLERENCE’ than politics or economics. Did the British wealth exploit those difference, promote them, when they where the rulers.

After the 13 colonies rebelled against the Empire, they went through a period where disagreement and tension simmered and brewed until it boiled over into the Civil War. It was repeated, in a less destructive way, with the progressive movement and civil rights.

Hopefully, the latest rebellion, The Wall Street protests, which have been spreading both nationally and internationally, will bear fruit, but there is no guarantee that the people of this country will stop complaining, start paying more attention, and actually do something about the direction that the country is going.

I am shocked that you failed to mention the Empire’s greates contribution to India, it’s bureaucracy.

The legacy left by the colonial exploiters was repeated along similar lines in the Middle East, Africa, etc.

The days of exploitations rule are numbered. Why? because they don’t care.

Are the wealthy suffering from the economic problems? It depends. If we are talking about barely millionair on paper, the answer is yes. A substancial number of barely millionair are no longer that.

If the day ever comes when the CEO of a corporation only makes 10 times as much, rather than 100,200,400 times as much, as the people at the bottom of the corporate ladder, there will be no shortage of qualified applicants.

If the day returns when the assets of the wealthy owners of a corporation are forfeit for damages caused by the corporation, the world will be better off for it. Perhaps the primary purpose for the Rule of Law is the protection of wealth.

If the day returns when corporations are charterd for a specific purpose and for a specified period of time, the world will be better off for it.

Posted by: jlw at October 14, 2011 3:05 PM
Comment #330561

Anyone hear how a cop ran over a guy today at the Occupation? He wasn’t a protester, but was working as a legal observer for the National Lawyers Guild. After the NYPD ran over his leg, twice, and beat him up badly, they arrested him for a bunch of crap (the usual BS cobbled-together charges) and then had to take him the emergency room at Bellevue. His lawyer hasn’t even been allowed in to see him yet — and he’s been in the hospital for many hours.

His lawyer, Yetta Kurland, was on Countdown tonight — look at this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Mk-qmLFtB8

To protect and serve? What a sick joke that has become. America has become a police state run by Criminals.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 15, 2011 2:31 AM
Comment #330573

Word out now — Ari Douglas, the legal observer run down by the cop had his leg broken after the cop ran over it — twice.
I’m sure there will be no repercussions for the cop.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 15, 2011 11:57 AM
Comment #330575

“America has become a police state run by Criminals.”

yes, and the top criminal now resides in the white house. not to mention he supports the infantile behavior of these whinney cry babies, marxists, and anarchists. it’s time for them to go home. where ever that may be. my guess is most likely mom and dads basement.


“I’m sure there will be no repercussions for the cop.”


what repercussions were there for the senseless beating of reginald denny by a common street thug, for no other reason than being white, and being there. i can think of no better reason for clinging to my guns and religion.


you whine constantly about the police beating some one who refuses to follow directions to get out of the street, but could care less about innocent people being beaten, victimized, or killed by these same morons who themselves show no common decency towards those around them just trying to live thier lives.


Posted by: dbs at October 15, 2011 1:19 PM
Comment #330579

dbs

I will proudly light the flame.

The cop should be fired for not running over his head. It was hollow and worthless anyway.

Posted by: tom humes at October 15, 2011 3:29 PM
Comment #330582


dbs, could you be more specific about how the Wall Street protesters have any connection to the race riots in 1991 or the street thugs that attacked Denny?

Those people were arrested and put on trial for their actions. Personally, I think they deserved harsher sentences, but I wasn’t on the jury and it was their decision.

Why have you singled out the white victim without mentioning the Asian and Hispanic victims that were attacked the same way on that day? Is it because the white victim got all the publicity?

You also failed to mention that, although the actions were unjustified and criminal, they were fueled by the rage, in that community, brought on by the acquittals of the cops in the Rodney King case.

There is nothing special about police officers. They can be good people, dedicated servants of the public, rotten to the core, or somewhere in between.

The New York police department has a long and sorted history. They are not all good guys by any stretch of the imagination.

The Wall Street protesters are mad as hell and they want change. Their rage has been kept in check and not boiled into a mob mentality and that is what is upsetting the conservatives the most.

It is a bold and daring move to challenge the true Gods of America. This often happens when the Gods get stingy with the manna.

There is only one voice that is more powerful than the voice of the moneyed Gods and that is the voice of the people.

Virtually every major conservative has denounced the protesters. It is not working, the voice is continuing to spread.

Since you show so much contempt for the protesters, perhaps you should consider volunteering for ringer duty.

Anarchist? Do you even know what the anarchist creed is? Are the Wall Street protesters demanding that the government be dissolved? The government becomes the instrument of the wealthy only when the people are complaisant enough or disinterested enough to allow it to happen.

Posted by: jlw at October 15, 2011 4:21 PM
Comment #330583


Marantha.

Posted by: jlw at October 15, 2011 4:22 PM
Comment #330587


Correction: Maranatha.

Posted by: jlw at October 15, 2011 6:44 PM
Comment #330596

Question: why is this post (and this person) still on Watchblog?

dbs

I will proudly light the flame.

The cop should be fired for not running over his head. It was hollow and worthless anyway.

Posted by: tom humes at October 15, 2011 3:29 PM

Anyhoo,

The OWS movement has already eclipsed the Tea Party, and changed the dialog in this country. Fox News had a poll two days ago in which *57%* said they agreed with OWS. Here’s a link to an article from Fox: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/10/14/understanding-occupy-wall-street/

You OWS decryers are whistling in the dark, running scared. The protesters are out making history…while you are *becoming* history.
http://www.alternet.org/story/152746/eliot_spitzer:_why_occupy_wall_street_has_already_won?akid=7721.271896.hLh1y6&rd=1&t=8

Here’s one that will *really* scare the crap out of you railing against OWS:
http://teaoccupyunited.com/pages/teaoccupyunited-mission-statement

Here’s a real interesting “rant”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=cCRnkamitVk

Posted by: steve miller at October 16, 2011 11:04 AM
Comment #330600

We will see how much the American people support the OWS when it turns violent. When businesses are destroyed and cop cars are set on fire, and when the American taxpayer realizes how many millions it has cost. And we will see how fast the democrats, who have embraced this joke, can distance themselves from the violence. OWS is nothing like the TP, no matter how envious the left has become and how much they want it to be like the TP.

Posted by: Mike at October 16, 2011 4:43 PM
Comment #330603

Well mike, you got me there! The Tea Party isn’t anything like OWS. But nor do we want to be, we already are having a much bigger impact than the Tea Party EVER had in it’s first month. This is going to be what the tea party could have been if it hadn’t been co-opted by the far right. OWS is non-partisan, and more importantly….NON-violent. So sorry. We don’t want to secede from anything, target anyone, put ‘em in the crosshairs, none of that silliness. This is a popular movement that has more “legs” than the TP, because it’s not just for a small percentage of ideologues: it’s for everybody. All are welcome, regardless of message, as long as they crave a more true representational democracy, free of money and corruption. You get it? I’m trying like crazy to get Tea Partiers to join us, am having some success. Sorry if this scares the bejesus out of you.

Posted by: steve miller at October 16, 2011 6:09 PM
Comment #330604

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/new-poll-occupy-message-twice-popular

Ooops.

Posted by: steve miller at October 16, 2011 6:19 PM
Comment #330608

Steve

I think we all agree that we don’t like how the economy is working and that many people messed up. We are part of the 99% in this. I am sure that most of the Tea Party activists also agree. They are certainly part of the 99%.

The next step is what to do. We know that Obama messed up. Replace Obama? We know that Fannie and Freddie messed up. Close them down? We know that many firms were bailed out. Take back the money? We know that government spent lots of money to little avail. Cut it back?

The occupiers are fine until they define what they want and how they intend to get it.

The occupiers remind me of what Aristotle said about anger. Being angry is easy. Being angry at the right person, to the right extent and in the right way. That is hard.

So I can see with 100% certainty that I agree with the occupiers that I don’t like the current situation. I think you could probably count on nearly 100% support from the American people for that.

I don’t know if you ever saw that old movie “Convoy” with Kris Kristoffersen. In the movie, a guy takes the lead of a convoy of trucks, that keeps getting bigger. Everybody thinks it is some kind of movement. But it is just frustration w/o a positive agenda.

Let’s hope this movement remains as peaceful as the Tea Party had been.

Right now it is fun for all involved. October is a pleasant month in New York. The cold rain of November might be different.

Posted by: C&J at October 16, 2011 9:16 PM
Comment #330610

Steve:

“we already are having a much bigger impact than the Tea Party EVER had in it’s first month.”

Steve, when the OWS has had an effect on elections, as the TP has, come back and tell us how much impact you have had. My guess is that these protestors will have an opposite effect on elections. I know that Obama is just using these poor souls to further his political carreer, but it WILL have the opposite effect. Obama is such a bad president, he virtually has no chance of wining unless he can lower the unemployment, which he can never do. His policies are anti-business and add to that his support of these anti-capitalist morons.

Posted by: Mike at October 16, 2011 10:15 PM
Comment #330611

Well….the OWS needs more consensus as to what their “demands” will be. But it’s pretty clear what the main few are: Get money out of politics/repeal corporate personhood/campaign finance reform. Return to a more progressive system of taxation. Stop the wars/control spending. Investigate mortgage bundling/CDOs and other CDS/derivatives and the banks that sold them like crazy while betting the market would fail.

There are certainly a bunch of fringe-element demands…which is what is so good about this movement; everyone has a voice. Sorta like what the country should be like. The good ideas that have the support of most will rise to the surface and be clearly articulated by……well, no one really knows. But Moveon and the like will get bitch-slapped in a hurry when they (inevitably) try to co-opt or otherwise speak for the movement.

Some other possibilities? End the Fed….? At the least, take a hard look at how the Fed operates, who gets the money and why……? More Constitutionally-oriented oversight of lawmakers.

I don’t really speak for the movement, of course. I do spend all of my free time researching and dialogiing with both OWS AND Conservative/Democrat/Tea Party folks. I have also been posting on the OWS and related websites and getting a lot of information. I will say this; some who comment are over the edge. In both directions. But there are also a lot of clear-thinking individuals who are serious about participating in direct (or if you like, representational) democracy. Which is what the founders had intended for our Constitutional Republic, yes?

Posted by: steve miller at October 16, 2011 10:28 PM
Comment #330612

Let me quote one interesting comment from the below link:

“Redbloodied….thanks for that intel. The original co-founder of the 60s super radical group, Students for a Democratic Society, the SDS, was Obama’s main man in the actual writing of the Stimulus Bill…that sent most of the money to the states for state worker salaries and pensions…so-called ”saved jobs”. Soros, and groups like ACORN are funding a lot of those so-called ”activiits” in the OWS crowds, as are some of’ the unions. Its such a farce, especially when the likes of Diane Sawyer claim it’s the ”movement of our time”. What a bunch of liars…the entire left is a mess today, and the Democratic Party does not even resemble the party of JFK anymore…its a French hybrid of some kind…not American anymore…crony capitalists to be exact.”


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/10/16/2011-10-16_hundreds_arrested_at_occupy_events_in_chicago_denver_arizona_as_movement_spreads.html

This sums up what America thinks of this so called grassroots protest. Organized and paid for by Soros, Acorn, and union thugs. I’m not even going to ask the idiot liberals to show where the TP rallies even vaguely represented what is taking place in major US cities. But I can show you where this movement is going:

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rome-counts-costs-worst-street-violence-years-144827138.html

http://www.newser.com/article/d9qcpme00/violence-in-rome-as-protests-against-corporate-greed-go-global.html

Or back to America:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/10/figures-nazi-party-throws-support-behind-occupy-wall-street-movement/

These must be the conservatives from the TP, since the left is so fond of comparing conservatives to Nazis.

Or perhaps these are some of the left’s red blooded American patriots:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeuGx8PplAo

Or perhaps this drug-head represents the intelligence level of the left:

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2011/10/15/sean-penn-calls-tea-party-get-n-word-out-white-house-party-which-wants

Herman Cain (a black man) is surging in the republican polls and idiots like Morgan and Penn show their complete ignorance by calling the TP and conservatives racist. How is it possible to communicate with such brain dead ignorance?

Posted by: Mike at October 16, 2011 10:58 PM
Comment #330616

Steve

You say -
But it’s pretty clear what the main few are:

Get money out of politics - This means you, George Soros.

repeal corporate personhood - Depends exactly what you mean. No modern society can function w/o some form of corporate personhood.

-campaign finance reform - everybody keeps trying to do that, but it only seems to bring in more money with less responsibility - see George Soros above.

Return to a more progressive system of taxation - Again, depends on the details. Everybody wants to “tax the rich” until they find out what that means in practical terms.

Stop the wars - That is what Obama said before he was elected. He found that he had to follow the Bush time table in Iraq; he increased our commitment in Afghanistan and just dispatches combat forces to Central Africa. War is very bad, but avoiding it is not as easy as it seems.

Control spending - this is what brought the Tea Party into existence. You don’t need to occupy Wall Street, just support the Tea Party.

Investigate mortgage bundling/CDOs and other CDS/derivatives and the banks that sold them like crazy while betting the market would fail. - There have been investigations. We have significant information about the systemic failure. Unfortunately, the big culprits like Fannie May and Freddie Mac are politically protected. We agree that we should go after them.

SO - again - you are right that most people agree in broad principle with the demands, such as they are, by the occupiers, just as I bet that most people agree in broad principle with the Tea Party.

In fact, I bet I could take the broad goal statement from almost any group and most people would agree.

The problem comes in the means and the details.

This is my platform - I want to reduce poverty, end corruption, clean the environment, ensure a steady supply of clean energy, create an infrastructure for the 21st century, have a more inclusive political system, ensure domestic tranquility and enjoy a just peace with all the nations of the world. Who is against that? But I don’t know if pitching my tent in a park will achieve it.

Posted by: C&J at October 17, 2011 3:33 AM
Comment #330624

Well I went to the local “Occupy” protest last night to see what it was all about. I’m guessing about 30-40 folks were going to spend the night on the State House lawn and they had about 150 the night before (according to the paper). Ironically they held their meeting at the base of South Carolina’s infamous Confederate Soldier’s monument (where they fly the battle flag) and they were going to sleep right under a statue of Ben “Pitchfork” Tillman. Maybe this is a true rebellion!

Although there were several agendas in the crowd the most prominent seemed to be anti-war protesters from what I could tell. Regardless of why people were there, however, there was obvious leadership to the entire event. There were two “facilitator” types that were going over the rules, hand signals and jesters used to communicate with the protesters. And there was one “outreach” type that worked the crowd including me and my wife. The leadership had a generator and some laptops set up across the street and were in obvious communication with someone. I spoke to the “outreach” guy but he was evasive about his participation other than to tell me his mom “lost the farm.” It seemed like they were herding cats though as the crowd was just a collection of walking grievances.

In the end I came away with the just as much confusion as I did when I when up there. Whoever the folks are driving this appear to just want a protest. They don’t appear to be advocating any kind of agenda; they are just there organizing, providing logistics (food, water, recycling buckets), and coordinating with the State police (there were 2 officers on hand). If that’s the case then you could say it is a protest about anything you want to protest. But to me it seemed so Seinfeld.

Posted by: Georgd at October 17, 2011 2:52 PM
Comment #330625

If the movement continues to gain support, the power structure will get more desperate. One should be totally expectant of the power structure to take a more active role in creating an event aimed at discrediting the movement.

C&J, perhaps camping out in a tent to protest won’t achieve anything, but I do know that genuflecting for the rights ideal of a free market will not achieve the goals that you say you believe in.

The goals and the way in which the tea party politicians have gone about achieving those goals has served to alienate many who supported the tea party.

We will not know for sure if the people support this movement unless it has the same opportunity as the tea party got. If the movement has the opportunity to influence the election and supporters of the movement are elected, they will have to produce legislation. The goals in legislative form will be the factor that determines the amount of support that the movement will receive from the general public.

Surely the tea party supports giving the anti-Wall Street protests the same opportunity to influence the legislative process that the tea party has had.

I wonder how conservatives will react when contingents from ‘the movement’ show up in conservative districts, shouting their demands at the conservative politicians town hall meeting.

Is every conservative state going to move it’s 2012 primary up to December 2011?

If 65% of New Yorkers say they support the protests, I guarantee they are not all progressives.

Mike, Cain is the third far right candidate to surge in the Republican presidential polls. Romney is the only candidate that has held his ground. First Bachmann, then Perry, now Cain is the darling of the far right.

Cain said he was just joking, some of his supporters are not. They got the message they were listening for.

And Mike, while there are racists associated with the tea party, the party is primarily a class based movement.

Posted by: jlw at October 17, 2011 3:14 PM
Comment #330628

jlw

George is right about Seinfeld.

When you stand for everything good against everything bad, who can be against you?

As I said above, I support most of their goals. I just don’t think the organizers are telling the truth about their real goals, nor do I believe the method of the protesters could achieve the laudable goals.

The protesters are against the current situation. Indeed, I am also against the current situation and want the man running the show, Barack Obama, replaced by somebody more competent. Is that on the list. Oh yeah, there is no list. We can fill in our own.

So why don’t we throw ALL the bums out. Vote against every current office holder running for reelection. Would you support that?

Re the Tea Party class - it is mostly working class and small business owners.

I wonder what the profile of the occupiers is. I suspect it is mostly students, professionals and union members.

Posted by: C&J at October 17, 2011 5:11 PM
Comment #330633

The very Wall Street that is being protested by the left, ifs the Wall Street that supported bama’s first run. The very banks that are being protested by the left, is the same banks that Obama and his cronies bailed out. The very capitalism that is being protested by these deadbeats, is the same capitalism that created the electronics that the leaders use to get their marching orders.

Oh, by the way, even though most WS leaders are liberal democrats, they are now throwing their money behind Romney. I wonder why?

Posted by: Mike at October 17, 2011 6:50 PM
Comment #330637

jlw, steve miller — it just keeps growing my OWS brothas! :^)

Here’s some video from Saturday in NYC to check out:

This is just amazing — looks like taking your money out of a bank is now a crime in New York? Twenty four protesters were locked inside a Citibank by security and then arrested by NYPD cops simply because they went to the bank together to close out their accounts (the woman who is dragged back inside the bank in this video wasn’t even with the rest of the group, just a customer doing her banking, yet she gets manhandled and arrested just for being there at that moment anyway):
OCCUPY WALL ST (10-15-11) ***EPIC FAIL*** ARRESTED FOR CLOSING PERSONAL CITIBANK

Here’s the aftermath of that same incident:
Citibank customers arrested while trying to close accounts #OccupyWallStreet

Here’s what was happening right in Times Square on Saturday. The cops obviously were ordered not to let the people take over the entire Square (even though New Yorkers do this, and very drunkenly at that, on New Years Eve), so they tried to keep kettling them and squeezing people back into too small a space. Whenever the people pressed forward against the barricades to make more room for themselves, the cops used the excuse to intimidate protesters with horses, and brutalize and arrest them. Some people at the end chant “Go fight crime!”, at the very end the guy asks a good question: “WHO ARE YOU PROTECTING?” One thing these cops sure as hell are definitely not protecting is their reputation.
Police Brutality - Times Square - Occupy Wall Street - 15 OCt 2011

This is totally awesome. A heavily decorated Marine telling the NYPD cops that they’re a disgrace and not acting like Americans:
[Occupytimessquare] 1 Marine vs. 30 Cops (Marine Wins)

On his Youtube channel, the Marine in the above video, Sgt. Shamar Thomas wrote:

“I took an Oath that I live by. I am NOT anti-NYPD. I am anti- Police Brutality. I am no longer under contract with the USMC so I do NOT have to follow military uniform regulations. I DON’T affiliate myself with ANY GROUPS or POLITICAL ORG. I affiliate myself with the AMERICAN PEOPLE that’s it. I REFUSE to affiliate with anything that SEPERATES. There is an obvious problem in the country and PEACEFUL PEOPLE should be allowed to PROTEST without Brutality. I was involved in a RIOT in Rutbah, Iraq 2004 and we did NOT treat the Iraqi citizens like they are treating the unarmed civilians in our OWN Country. No one was brutalized because our mission was to ‘WIN the hearts and minds’, why should I expect anything less in my OWN Country. SEMPER FI.”

Well said, Sgt. Thomas, and thank you!
THE PEOPLE, UNITED, CAN NEVER BE DEFEATED!!!

Posted by: Adrienne at October 17, 2011 8:17 PM
Comment #330639

My third link didn’t work. Here it is again:
Police Brutality - Times Square - Occupy Wall Street - 15 OCt 2011

Posted by: Adrienne at October 17, 2011 8:31 PM
Comment #330641

Adrienne

I know you like to blame the police. Maybe you are right sometimes. But recall that all police officers are working class guys and almost all of them are members of unions. Do you really want to make these guys the villains all the time?

Posted by: C&J at October 17, 2011 8:36 PM
Comment #330644

Jack,
I agree with Sgt. Thomas. I am not anti-cop — I am very much anti-police brutality and pro-first amendment.
It is a an absolute disgrace how the police are being allowed to rough up, brutalize and arrest occupying protesters all over these United States in defiance of our first amendment right to free speech and freedom of assembly.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 17, 2011 8:44 PM
Comment #330647

Adrienne, many of us saw this all before; during the war protest marches of the 60’s. It was disgusting then and it’s disgusting now. And what some writers have written is correct; this has the ability of becoming violent. And it will have the same results as it did in the 60’s; to cause great division in the country. How can you say you are not anti-cop when the whole purpose of these protests is to violate the law and the constitution? Fifty years ago, the police upheld the rule of law and the National Guard Troops upheld the rule of law. Both have taken an oath to defend the constitution and this country from enemies, foreign and domestic. These protestors are riding a fine line between angry people and domestic enemies. You think you have the support of the democrats and Obama, but when the American people say enough of this nonsense, these liberal politicians will throw these people under the bus in a heartbeat. This is nothing to be proud about.

Posted by: Jeremiah at October 17, 2011 10:30 PM
Comment #330648


“Oh, by the way, even though most WS leaders are liberal democrats, they are now throwing their money behind Romney.”

First I would question that most WS leaders are liberal democrats, but would not be surprised if they were. I would question that all of them are throwing their money behind Romney, but I am sure some of the may be. I would not have to wonder why. Two of those liberal Democrats, Rubin and Summers, along with the Republican Greenspan were instrumental in both the deregulation of the financial markets and the housing bubble, Instrumental in promoting, defending, protecting, covering up and benefiting financially from them. Both were joint ventures of the political parties.

C&J, you say you support most of their goals? You say they are not being truthful about a hidden agenda?

If the movement grows, like the tea party did, it will elect representatives who will reveal any hidden agenda, just as the representatives of the tea party did, and if that agenda is not popular with a majority of the people, it will be rejected by the majority, just as much of the tea parties agenda has been rejected.

I wouldn’t mind seeing a more progressive leader in the White House, but so far no progressive has stepped forward to offer Obama a primary challenge and no progressive third party candidate has stepped forward either.

I know for a fact that none of the Republican candidates support most, some, or any of the goals of the ‘movement’.

Yes, Obama ran as a progressive in the primary and as a liberal centrist in the general election and after he was elected, he told the left they would have to make him produce change, meaning they would have to force Congress to produce. The Wall Street protest is trying to convince the people to do just that.

“re the tea party class - it is mostly working class and small business owners.”

re the Nazi Party - was mostly small business owners and working class, especially middle and upper middle class working class. Most of the upper class as well.

Profile, professionals made up a large segment of the Nazi Party. Students formed Nazi party groups on campuses. They were attracted to the excitement and adventure of becoming members of the brown shirts, drinking beer and kicking ass. They weren’t the non violent types. Not many union members in the Nazi Party.

As a matter of fact, the Nazis outlawed unions before they outlawed socialists, communists and Jews.

Get behind the goals that you agree with and stop profiling, because it just invites more profiling.

Did you see where Rush Limbaugh has call for conservative volunteers to defend the Christian Lords Liberation Army from Obama’s minions? Another fine example of one of the conservatives finest profiling his head up his rear.

Posted by: jlw at October 17, 2011 10:55 PM
Comment #330649


The protests of the sixties did divide the nation. They made people aware of what was going on and that helped end the war in Vietnam, and that divided the nation. They helped to destroy Jim Crow, and that divided the nation. They helped to create environmental awareness and laws, and that divided the nation.

As to these current protesters dividing the nation, that had already been achieved by the tea party. The reason for protest is the huge majorities dissatisfaction with the Congress and the direction they are taking the country. That is not new. It has been festering since before 2008. When the people get to the point where they are actually ready to do something about the Congress and the direction it is taking us, it guarantees that competing ideas about any alternative route will create division.

Everyone has the same goal, create a better America. The tea party has offered it’s vision and it’s policies that they believe will achieve that goal. Now it is the other sides time to offer up their vision and policies to achieve that goal. Like in the sixties, the people will decide which of the goals and policies, of both, they will accept or reject.

Call it political punctuated equilibrium, periods of status quo punctuated by short periods of rapid change, followed by periods of status quo.

Posted by: jlw at October 17, 2011 11:52 PM
Comment #330657

jlw

Do you bring up the Nazis to indicate that the occupy tactics are similar to theirs or to show that Nazis believed in big government and policies to force economic redistribution?

The Nazis have nothing much to do with this discussion. I have not said the occupy Wall Street people were like Nazis. I don’t think that just because they take to the streets you can compare the Occupy Wall Street people to Nazis.

Re Occupy goals - goals are great, their methods to achieve them are currently unknown, but probably involve greater government interference which won’t achieve the goals.

Posted by: C&J at October 18, 2011 5:43 AM
Comment #330659

Jlw said:

“First I would question that most WS leaders are liberal democrats, but would not be surprised if they were. I would question that all of them are throwing their money behind Romney, but I am sure some of the may be. I would not have to wonder why. Two of those liberal Democrats, Rubin and Summers, along with the Republican Greenspan were instrumental in both the deregulation of the financial markets and the housing bubble, Instrumental in promoting, defending, protecting, covering up and benefiting financially from them. Both were joint ventures of the political parties.”

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck. These WS liberals have always supported democrats, therefore they are democrats. Unlike the constant lies from the likes of some on WB, it was Democrat politicians who blocked any regulations of WS, securities, and the banking system. While Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were testifying that all was well with Freddie and Fannie, the housing market was imploding. We can lay the whole financial crisis at the feet of the democrats. WS was supporting those who benefited WS. This don’t take rocket science to figure out.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-wall-street-donors-shift-support-romney-181657957.html

“President Obama’s rhetorical war against Wall Street “fat cats” and his efforts to enact sweeping reforms of the financial sector haven’t exactly endeared him to top financial industry executives.
Now it appears the Wall Street donors who helped fund Obama’s successful 2008 bid are shifting their campaign cash elsewhere.”

“The financial industry abandoned President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign in the third quarter of the year, according to data released by the Federal Election Commission, flocking to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney”


http://www.businessinsider.com/wall-street-abandons-obama-donates-to-gop-2011-10#ixzz1b95kEnly

“Indeed, Democratic support for Wall Street was one of the major motivations behind Occupy Wall Street in the first place. When you read the heartbreaking “We are the 99 percent” Tumblr and you listen to the protesters, you don’t hear frustration with Republicans. The frustration is with Washington. And if Democrats want to work with the Occupy movement (or, indeed, make the “Republicans are the party of the rich” attack really work), they’ll have to undertake root-and-branch reform of their party’s relationship with Wall Street.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/why-occupy-wall-street-and-democrats-arent-natural-allies/2011/10/05/gIQAYuvyNL_blog.html

If this is true, why aren’t the protestors protesting Washington? The reason is because, although people may be upset, there is no cohesive reason for being upset. And those who are controlling the protests are the ones setting the agenda for the protests. And the ones setting the agenda are socialist anti-capitalists who are trying to destroy the country. You say both parties are at fault, but you and the rest of the liberals are supporting democrats and seeking to destroy America.

Read this article about the WS support for Democrats in 2006:

http://files.wallstreetfolly.com/wordpress/2006/09/top-wall-street-execs-placing-more-bets-on-democrats/

“Everyone has the same goal, create a better America. The tea party has offered it’s vision and it’s policies that they believe will achieve that goal. Now it is the other sides time to offer up their vision and policies to achieve that goal. Like in the sixties, the people will decide which of the goals and policies, of both, they will accept or reject.”

jlw, explain to me, what are the goals of the WS protestors? Could you list them and could you compare them to the signs being carried by the protestors?

Posted by: Jeremiah at October 18, 2011 11:24 AM
Comment #330663

The goal of the Occupy Wall Street organizers is to organize a protest. They’ve laid out a list of grievances like 99%/1%, wars, and corporate greed for which people can protest against, but they have purposefully stayed away from specific solutions. It’s a protest for the purpose of protesting at this stage.

What will come of it? Probably many different causes and solutions, each with its own spin after being birthed by the “movement.” At least I believe that was the goal of Adbusters when they dreamed this thing up. The problem will be that the utra-left, the socialists, Marxists, anti-global and alter-global, are going to widely embrace this movement as support for their point of view and causes. . Names like Che and Subcomandante Marcos and ideas like neoliberalism and Accumulation by dispossession are going to be politically discussed in the U.S., something generally saved for European and Canadian consumption. And in typical response the conservatives are going to try and paint the entire movement as that of being Marxist much as the left has tried to broad brush the Tea Party as racist or radical.

In the end I just see much coming of Occupy Wall Street other than more a headache for the Democrats. I’m sure in the aftermath there will be studies at all Universities decrying the misunderstanding of the movement and, with the clarity of 20/20 vision, the goals of the original protests. But I doubt it will all matter much.

At least this is my prediction….

Posted by: George at October 18, 2011 1:25 PM
Comment #330664


Jeremiah, neither Obama or Romney are going to be the next president.

Cain has been designated by God to be the next president. So to have Bachmann, Perry and Santorum so I am not to sure how that will work out. Perhaps this mass calling means we will have four presidents in 2012.

What you say about the Democrats and their Wall Street connection is mostly true. It is even more true for the Republicans but you failed to mention even one of them.

In case you did not notice, Obama has just past a milestone, his one millionth campaign donor. That represents about 1/3 of 1% of the population. When all is said and done, I expect Obama and the Republican nominee may have as many as 3 or 4 million donors between. I expect most of those donors will have a very close relationship with Wall Street and that quite a few of them will contribute to both Obama and the Republican nominee.

Posted by: jlw at October 18, 2011 2:28 PM
Comment #330671

“Jeremiah, neither Obama or Romney are going to be the next president.

Cain has been designated by God to be the next president. So to have Bachmann, Perry and Santorum so I am not to sure how that will work out. Perhaps this mass calling means we will have four presidents in 2012.”

jlw, why would you make such a foolish statement as to say God has designated who is going to win the election? You are probably correct that neither Obama nor Romney will be the next president, but you seem to try, through ignorance, to imply God has ordained one to be the president. I’m sure that God knows who will be the president, but when Obama loses it won’t be because God has chosen to remove him. It will be because he is the most ill-informed, do nothing, and useless man who has ever set in the oval office. Jimmy Carter was bad, but Obama is worse and in so far over his head, he is useless.

“What you say about the Democrats and their Wall Street connection is mostly true. It is even more true for the Republicans but you failed to mention even one of them.”

Wall Street has always supported democrats 4 to 1 over the republicans. So what should I have mentioned? Your argument was that you did not believe WS leaned democrat in support or that they were more liberal, of which they are both. I stated that liberals in WS are now supporting Romney and not Obama. What’s your point?

“In case you did not notice, Obama has just past a milestone, his one millionth campaign donor. That represents about 1/3 of 1% of the population. When all is said and done, I expect Obama and the Republican nominee may have as many as 3 or 4 million donors between. I expect most of those donors will have a very close relationship with Wall Street and that quite a few of them will contribute to both Obama and the Republican nominee.”
Posted by: jlw at October 18, 2011 2:28 PM

There are plenty of liberals who will support Obama; that was not the point. The point was that Obama has lost the support of his liberal base in WS. The WS protestors are protesting the WS bankers and investors, who were the same people who supported democrat politicians. If they want to protest, they should protest the politicians who have catered to WS.

Posted by: Jeremiah at October 18, 2011 4:14 PM
Comment #330680

Jeremiah, sounds to me as if you’ve been standing on the wrong side of history for a very long time. But let’s not argue over our differing viewpoints. OWS is not representing either of the two major political parties — NOT AT ALL. It is a movement that is open to ANY citizen who wishes to fight crony corporate capitalism and the obvious detrimental effect the oligarchy has had upon our nation. It’s really your choice whether you will or won’t stand on the right side of history now.
Btw, you should know that these people aren’t interested in arguing over the past — instead, they’re interested in fighting for a liveable future for 99% of Americans, and in full solidarity with the people of the world who are also fighting for the very same thing.

Anyway folks, came here to share these:

Must see (and awesome) short interview with Chris Hedges:
Chris Hedges in Times Square, October 15, 2011

Says it all, really!

Olbermann interviews Sgt. Shamar Thomas.

And yet another Marine speaks out, this time from Occupy Chicago.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 18, 2011 5:07 PM
Comment #330681

George,
If We the People can pass Constitutional amendments that abolishing corporate personhood and corporate influence and control over our transparently corrupt and bought-off government, Occupy Wall Street will have served it’s purpose — and very well!
Let’s all of us make an attempt to work together (no matter what our preferred political ideology may be) so that our government can once again work for ALL of our citizens, not just for the wealthy 1% the way it has been for far too long. Sound Good?
It’s sounds GREAT to me! :^)

Posted by: Adrienne at October 18, 2011 5:33 PM
Comment #330682

Really wish I had the power to correct errors in this blog. That should read: “…amendments that abolish…”

Posted by: Adrienne at October 18, 2011 5:35 PM
Comment #330699


“If We the People can pass Constitutional amendments that abolishing corporate personhood and corporate influence and control over our transparently corrupt and bought-off government, Occupy Wall Street will have served it’s purpose — and very well!
Let’s all of us make an attempt to work together (no matter what our preferred political ideology may be) so that our government can once again work for ALL of our citizens, not just for the wealthy 1% the way it has been for far too long. Sound Good?
It’s sounds GREAT to me! :^)”

Posted by: Adrienne at October 18, 2011 5:33 PM

Amen to that Adrienne!! You know, we’ve gone beyond mere polarization here in America, to the point where the “other side” is the enemy!!! The trouble with this is that the other side might be your own brother, or your father-in-law, your neighbor. When did holding an opposing political viewpoint make us commies and nazis?? WTF!??!

We are a hair’s breadth from making changes, and soon. If the OWS is not co-opted, we can fight the real enemy. Who is that you ask? Well,it’s the system that allows special interests,mainly wealthy individuals,corporations, and unions, to exert more influence than the sum total of the votes they would have as people. Nothing wrong with wealth,or corporations,or unions….America is the greater for all of them. But where is OUR voice? When a plurality of americans want a more progressive system of taxation, and it’s not even on the table,there’s a problem. Polls have more than 70% in favor of a single-payer health care system. Not on the table. I don’t suppose that it is because it would cause corporations and the health care insurance industry to lose tens and hundreds of billions of dollars,hmmmm? And please don’t cite the polls saying people don’t like obama care,the same polls ask about single payer and get a very different answer. The numbers disliking the health care bill reflect disappointment that it didn’t have single-payer.

Has anyone heard about the GAO report issued this July? It was a
partial audit of the Fed…….the results? http://sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GAO%20Fed%20Investigation.pdf
It details S I X T E E N T R I L L I O N US dollars in loans given to corporations and banks,many of them foreign. Now,I don’t know about you, but the idea that this quasi-public really private bank that has the power to print our currency even though that is a power reserved to the Government has loaned out more than the GDP,more than the total federal debt, without any oversight, is the biggest news story I have heard in about ten years. Am I alone here?
C& J,you continue with your condescension,I will continue to tell you that you’re missing the boat. Look at yourself,man; decrying “redistribution of wealth”when that is what we have been the victims of for the last 30-40 years!! That sounds a little silly!!!

And…..I DO support the Tea Party,and have joined two Tea Party organizations. I’m done hating on people just because they want Herman Cain or Ron Paul to be President. So, I’m with them where we agree!! And where we disagree, I’m not. I think there are more areas of overlap than many would suspect. I am for a FULL audit of the Fed. I am for cutting spending. I am for stopping wars. And look; being against George Soros funding political organizations and NOT being against corporations having the same unlimited contributions doesn’t make much sense, does it? I say take the power AWAY from unions, corporations, George Soros, Moveon, the Koch brothers…..anyone who would suborn democracy by trying to buy influence. One person, one vote, wanna restore democracy? TAKE THE MONEY OUT OF POLITICS. I predict that this will have overwhelming support by the people. I predict there will be a Constitutional convention, or a recallof any politician that votes against it. Will this happen by next November? Maybe not, but it will come.

The dialog here in america has shifted: from a surreal corporate driven spiel where any taxes must be bad, where corporations are persons and money is their speech, from elective wars that are fought for “freedom”…..to a more populist and realist view: The country is being sucked dry by the folks who have all the money, and that money is doing the talking for them, via bought-and-paid for lawmakers who advocate for them, to the detriment of we, the people.

So Jack, I have made (and continue to make) overtures to the Tea Party folks. They are mostly leery, and want to put conditions on working together. (the main condition being the renunciation of Obama!) I think that YOU would do well to jump on the OWS bandwagon; you could give your input about streamlining their message, and a concrete plan of action for getting the demands met. You would love it!!!

Posted by: steve miller at October 18, 2011 7:19 PM
Comment #330718


Herman Cains answer to the Occupy Wall Street protest is his 999 tax plan which will increase taxes on 84% of the people while cutting taxes by nearly 50% for those making a million per year or more.

Posted by: jlw at October 18, 2011 10:37 PM
Comment #330719


Herman Cains answer to the Occupy Wall Street protest is his 999 tax plan which will increase taxes on 84% of the people while cutting taxes by nearly 50% for those making a million per year or more.

Posted by: jlw at October 18, 2011 10:50 PM
Comment #330863

When talk about the supra vaiderugg boots winter
, we can’t don’t refer its shock obsorber system .
classic tall boots supra shoes use to be the professional skate board shoes , and nowadays , it has become more famous all over the world , its shock shock obsorber system classic short bootgive much more comtribution.

Posted by: ujk at October 22, 2011 3:47 AM
Comment #331033

Because the voters are ignorant.

Posted by: Mike at October 25, 2011 6:08 PM
Post a comment