Third Party & Independents Archives

Are You Ready For The Next Great Thing?

Recently the Washington Post dedicated the entire ‘business section’ to reporting on the next world order and measurement of the current globally economy. The crux of their reporting, “forty years after the old one collapsed, leaders are still searching for a global economic framework that holds up.”

Gisting from the report: The old world order came into being months after WWII followed by three weeks of negotiation by 730 delegates from 44 nations in Bretton Woods, N. H. That system ended 40 years later with Nixon ending the gold standard after a weekend of secret deliberations.

We are suffering the consequences from an improvised, on the fly financial system that has failed. For the past 40 years capital has move freely around the world while countries have intervened according to their domestic interests. This has led to a series of financial crises: N. Europe in the early 90's, Mexico in 94, several East Asian nation in 97, Russia in 98, Argentina in 2001, culminating in the big one of 2008.

A new world order would require the US go forgo the easy borrowed money. For China, it would mean giving up high export growth that has brought millions out of poverty. Germany would have to cut back on high savings levels and comfortable lifestyles. Britain would need a new economic model rather than relying on gigantic investment banks.

Bretton Woods was influenced by British economist John Maynard Keynes. In the panic of 2008 policy makers turned to Keynesian thinking in bailing out banks, easing monetary policy, using capital to stimulate growth and avoiding trade tariffs aimed at disrupting trade flows.

In so doing they averted a depression, 25 percent unemployment and the potential for trade wars. But, that success is the reason there has not yet been a new Bretton Woods. Things haven't gotten bad enough to spur nations to make the sacrifices involved for an over-arching remake of the world financial system.

World leaders are responding to the crisis of the moment. Countries are muddling along rather than making serious fundamental changes. Conditions haven't become bad enough to prompt a global grand bargain that might create a strong world order.
European leaders are focused on their immediate debt crisis and risks to their common currency The U.S. is interested in wrestling with it's own debt crisis and China, where growth has done more to bring people out of poverty than all the foreign aid in the world, is busy protecting their export business and protecting their undervalued currency.
A major bugaboo is enforcement of policy agreements. Paul Volcker, Ex-Fed Reserve chairman, noted that he often asked George Willis, of the Bretton Woods era, what would work relative to some recommendation about the monetary system. George would say, 'it won't work'. One day Paul asked George 'what would work', and George replied, 'nothing', and that is where we are today. End Gist.

Couple of notes from other articles in the business section. Remittances sent from mostly Mexicans living in the U.S. average around $21B/year and are the country's second-largest source of foreign currency, after oil, according to the State Dept.
Even as the U.S. is the world's largest economy and biggest contributor to the IMF and World Bank, the world cannot count on U.S. growth to be the engine that powers the global economy out of the ditch.

IMO, the report is factual and well defines the status of the evolving world order. I especially agree with the report in that "conditions haven't become bad enough to prompt a global grand bargain that might create a more durable economic system." I don't agree that 'Keynesian thinking' was the right approach to the recession.

I believe it would have been way less disruptive and maddening and sustainable for the world's peoples if leaders had pursued a policy of leaving developed countries economies 'as was' while making an international attempt to bring developing/impoverished countries up the level of developed countries. As it is greed and policy makers have put us all on the edge of the cliff. What does it say about globalisation policy when CEO income is this country has increased over 400% since 1970 while worker income has been stagnant or in some cases up by 26%. This, while full scale warfare is ongoing to break the middle class to where they will accept developing country wages, $5-7/hr, IMO. While the U.S. bleeds the $21B remittance, what is being done with that money? Are roads/watersystems/airports/hospitals/agribusinesses/ and so on being built with that money? Mexicans living under the UNDP poverty level is around 17-18% while they have 11 billionaires among them. For reference, Canada has 24 billionaires and the U.S. has about 11-12% poverty.

I fully agree that the 'new world order' won't fully evolve until developed countries are on an income equivalent with developing countries. Equates to a number of years or decades hanging on the edge of the cliff, IMO. And, so long as we continue to be ruled by corpocracy the divide between haves and have not's can only grow wider. Some will call it class warfare, jealousy/hate for upper crusts, etc, but I call it globalisation and corpocracy run amuck and it will take a 3rd party with a different political attitude to right the ship of state. A 3rd party designed to remove the money influence from politics/gov't and repeal corporate personhood and money is free speech law. A party such as the Republic Sentry Party, designed for 21st century politics.

Otherwise, we have the Corpocracy we deserve.

Posted by Roy Ellis at September 25, 2011 8:42 PM
Comments
Comment #329796

Speaking of the corpocracy…

I’ve been waiting for one of you at WB to write something (anything!) regarding #occupywallstreet.
It is after all a true populist uprising, it’s building, and a huge number of people (100 or more) have already been brutalized and arrested.
Even though we all know the corporate MSM is absolutely refusing to give it the time of day, it is literally all over the web…

If people don’t know anything about it, here’s a little of what Democracy looks like. It’s We the People exercising our first amendment right to “peaceably assemble and petition our intentionally ineffective government for a redress of grievances” against the Wall Street Criminals who intentionally wrecked our economy (so they could steal as many of our tax dollars as they can from us and leave us “little people” with nothing):

Occupy Wall St S24 Police Riot

This second one shows the NYC police blatantly violating our first amendment right to assemble:
PEACEFUL FEMALE PROTESTORS PENNED IN THE STREET AND MACED!- #OccupyWallStreet

Can any of you imagine a bunch of Tea Party women peacefully protesting on a city sidewalk being penned by the cops like this and then maced directly in the face? No, I can’t either.
And, can you imagine how if this had actually happened to Tea Party women instead of Progressive women how often we’d all be forced to watch this clip being played over and over and over on corporate television media so a mountain of outrage could be repeatedly expressed? Yeah, sure you can — and so can I.

But just look at how many cops they’ve got out there! Ha ha! The oligarchs are obviously scared sh*tless — and rightfully so!!!

Time to get out in the streets folks and take the power away from the criminal class (right and left) who has been running our country. You know they can’t possibly arrest us all!
The People Have The Power!!!

Posted by: Adrienne at September 26, 2011 3:13 AM
Comment #329798

Adrienne, I believe a large majority appreciated the folks who protested on/around Wall St. It does take some chutzpa to travel from afar and give of your time to protest on some issue.

That said, these folks just wore out their welcome, IMO. I’m sure the local businesses were complaining of protesters impeding everything to the point of affecting their livelihoods.

A protest might last a day or two but at some point it rises to the level of a siege. These protesters fully intended to stay in place until they were physically moved.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/21/occupy-wall-street-protest_n_974693.html

Some aspect of the protests were being paid for through donations with ‘white shirt’ supervisors calling the shots, etc.

I believe if Glenn Beck and company had hung around the mall for more than a day or two they would have been asked to leave.

As it is, I am a peaceful man. Just sign up with Republic Sentry and we will abolish corporate personhood through the vote and go on with our lives.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at September 26, 2011 11:04 AM
Comment #329802


Roy, that is what Wall Street and the MSM were hoping for. The protesters show up for a day or two then disperse with a tiny spot in the MSM that is quickly forgotten about. IMO, business as usual can only be changed if business in this country is shut down. If the people, all across America, where to go into the streets and shut down business as usual it wouldn’t take more than 2 or 3 days to get results.

The corporations have given us our mass consumption lifestyle that we like so well and is a big part of the problem as well. It has to be taken into consideration if a solution is to be found.

Division and a lack of cooperation on the part of the people is exactly what it takes to maintain the current corpocratic status quo.

I am all for raising the people of the third world out of poverty. I am extremely doubtful of this being accomplished without sacrifices by the people of the developed nations.

For every person that rises out of poverty, their consumption of natural resources, including energy, goes up dramatically. Forecasters predict that world energy consumption will be 52% higher than today by the year 2035. The consumption of other natural resources will be similarly stressed.

Americans often take the American way of life for granted without the recognition that it was partly achieved on the backs of third world peoples, corporate owned Banana Republics, reinforced by the guns of U.S. Marines on more than one occasion, oil sheikdoms, etc. Our foreign aid is peanuts compared to the resources we have taken from these third world countries for our mass consumption lifestyle.

Posted by: jlw at September 26, 2011 12:53 PM
Comment #329817

jlw, turn it on its end in a coupla days?? Pulzzz! Bunch of couch potatoes here, jlw. Ain’t gonna happen. Even the blokes that showed up in NY were paid through donations from somewhere.

Gonna take grassroots organization. People are going to have to want change enough to at least get off a mouse click for a 3rd party - not just any 3rd party.

Then, it will take committee, study groups, policy wonks, and so on getting together to lay a frame work for accomplishing objectives. Coming up with an agenda that the disenfranchised and independents will support. Then voting, etc.

A ‘peoples movement’ might be well organized and in large number but has little clout within the halls of congress/justice. There are only a couple of ways to gain power within the system of gov’t. One way would be through Article V Convention but congress and the supreme court have shut down the part of AVC where the ‘people can propose’. And, congress controls the other part of AVC where ‘congress can propose’. The other way is through a well organized 3rd party where candidates can become elected into the halls of power.

The need for a 3rd party is mentioned on occasion. Matt Miller wrote a compelling opinion in today’s Washington Post, He also has put together a stump speech that’s pretty interesting.

He recommends some far reaching reform but fails to deliver, IMO, falling back to fringe change for the most part. I appreciate his effort but I think he misses the target on reform. He doesn’t recognize that corporate personhood is our most grave problem, long standing and tightly embedded in congress and the courts. We all recognize that the country is thoroughly divided on the issues and that putting a party agenda together that reflects wide ranging reform on multiple issues just can’t get off the ground.

That is why I advocate for a 3rd party, initially limited to a specific agenda targeting the abolishment of corporate personhood. Coalesce around, and accomplish that one major issue before expanding the party agenda.

Not only does Matt not recognize the major issue needing reform, he believes that the ‘money influence’ and related issue of campaign finance reform is impossible so just forget about that. I wonder if he is aware of Move To Amend and Reclaim Democracy? Then, he reverts to trying to grow roses in a cesspool.

Stump speech excerpt: “Next, on campaign finance, we should stop deluding ourselves that we can ever get private money out of politics. We can’t. It’s like ants in the kitchen. You plug one hole and they come back somewhere else. Instead, let’s offset this private cash by giving each voter 50 publicly funded “patriot dollars” to contribute to the candidate or cause of her choice in national elections. This would introduce $6 billion each election cycle — more than enough to offset private donations. And it would encourage candidates to appeal to average Americans rather than just grovel before wealthy donors. Pair this publicly funded voucher with instant Web-based disclosure of all donations and we’d have a far more level, transparent playing field.” End Excerpt.

And, his stump speech fails reality as does most 3rd parties. The moment a 3rd party gains some traction or demonstrates potential the ‘money influence’ will show up and in short order co-opt the party to come under the big tent of corpocracy. A 3rd party must be designed for the 21st century, with rules to prevent co-option by the money influence and oversight of elected officials by the party membership, to the point of rejecting incumbents from the party if they don’t support the agenda or play by the rules. Otherwise, what’s the sense in establishing one or more parties to join the duopoly/corpocracy? It is this last para that keeps me floggin the blog.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at September 26, 2011 9:57 PM
Comment #329835

Roy:

Adrienne, I believe a large majority appreciated the folks who protested on/around Wall St. It does take some chutzpa to travel from afar and give of your time to protest on some issue.

You act like it’s over. Well it’s not. Those who were arrested and brutalized went right back to the protest upon their release from jail. In fact, this movement of people standing up has just begun — and now high profile figures are coming down to to talk to ‘The 99%.’(This is what they’re calling themselves because 1% of the people in this country now controls/destroys everything for The 99% of the rest of us). People like Michael Moore, Susan Sarandon, Immortal Technique (rap star) and other well known people are joining them. Others such as Noam Chomsky, have been speaking out in support. Furthermore, these protests are starting to spread all over the country. Check out occupytogether.org and look at the list of places where this is spreading.

I myself have spent some time down at the occupation that is taking place in San Francisco right now. I’ve been bringing sandwiches and gallons of water each time I do — and I encourage anyone reading this to do the same in their areas if they support what is happening.

That said, these folks just wore out their welcome, IMO.

You know who really wore out their welcome? The Fat Cats On Wall Street. As for these protesters wearing out their welcome by coming to Wall Street, or to any other place where they’re protesting in America? TOO BAD — they’re not leaving because they’ve had their futures stolen from them by Wall Street and they’re down there attempting to get it back.

I’m sure the local businesses were complaining of protesters impeding everything to the point of affecting their livelihoods.

Actually, you couldn’t be more wrong. Local businesses (especially the family-owned businesses) are right now making tons of money off of all these people. The only ones who I have heard refused to serve the protesters (simply because they are protesters) is the Burger King Corporation — and now a progressive boycott is underway. Which is great, because BKcorp is tied to Goldmann Sachs!

A protest might last a day or two but at some point it rises to the level of a siege. These protesters fully intended to stay in place until they were physically moved.

You mean INTEND since they’re all still there and not going anywhere, and the their numbers are growing. As for a siege, this is a protest movement that intends to counteract the fact that Wall Street has taken our country (and indeed, the entire world) hostage.

Some aspect of the protests were being paid for through donations with ‘white shirt’ supervisors calling the shots, etc.

I don’t know where you got this, but it’s nothing but DIRTY LIE. They’re taking donations from ANYONE who wants to donate, but there are absolutely NO SUPERVISORS calling the shots for any of these people.
Instead, they have organized themselves through Direct Democracy by forming working committees in charge of different functions for the ongoing protest. Some groups are involved with media (livestreaming) for the protest and marches, some groups are in charge of securing food and water, some groups are involved with outreach via the internet, some groups are in charge of hygiene issues for the protesters, etc., etc., etc. These committees meet once or more a day to do their announcements.
But people don’t have to take my word for this. They can go and watch how these people are organizing themselves by looking at the Livestream link of the protest.

I believe if Glenn Beck and company had hung around the mall for more than a day or two they would have been asked to leave.

Glenn Beck and the Tea Party don’t have hang around for days or worry about getting exposure for their views — they’re well funded by the billion/millionaire 1%, and they have a corporate television stations broadcasting propaganda for the 1% — 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

As it is, I am a peaceful man.

So are these protesters. It’s the police that have been violent — although I have heard that some of the blue-shirted cops (less well paid than the white shirts) are starting to balk at the idea of roughing these peaceful protesters up.

Just sign up with Republic Sentry and we will abolish corporate personhood through the vote and go on with our lives.

The working class has never won a damn thing in this country without taking to the streets. The protesters on Wall Street, and elsewhere fully understand this.

In the words of Immortal Technique:

“Realize what’s really at stake here. The future of not just this country, but of this world, is all about to go. Not on some 2012 shit, but realistically speaking. The resources are running out. You’re going to look at this video years from now and say, ‘Damn, yo. He was right, we should have been focused on this.’”

“If you really do want to make a change, you want to have some kind of effect, if you want to build your life around the people, come down here to Wall Street. People are still here. They’re still working. They’re still willing to have a conversation. They’re still willing to debate with people. They’re still willing to have that debate. That’s how you know somebody’s a fraud: they’re not willing to put their ideas up against somebody else’s. They’re not willing to measure the failure of their own system.”**

“If we don’t change our minds about how this country works, then we’re not going to have a country anymore.”

“We talk about democracy so much, but we have supported so many governments around the world that are the farthest thing from a democracy, as long as they give us access to their natural resources. As long as when we say jump, they say how high. That’s it. We have employed bin Ladens plenty of times, when it serves our purpose. We employed Saddam Hussein when it served our purposes. And I say ‘we’ because we are the people that have a responsibility to change that sort of behavior in this country. And if we don’t, we will suffer the same fate as everything that never evolved. We will become extinct as a species. That’s your fuckin’ option. Change and get better and accept that this system is flawed and needs to be changed, or become extinct.”

[**This refers to the fact that the protesters have asked the oligarchs on Wall Street to come down to the park and have a conversation with them — and the 1% has (naturally) refused.]

Susan Sarandon:

“It never changes from the top, it only changes from the bottom, this is great. People are rightfully upset about the inequality.”

Michael Moore:

“The 400 richest Americans own more wealth than 150 million of us combined. What we have to do here is realize how much more power we have than they have. They think power is derived from bank accounts, but our power is derived from the people. All the people. Not the 400.”

Roy:

Otherwise - - -

Otherwise what, Roy? Things have to be changed the way you claim they have to be, or they can’t be changed at all?

Posted by: Adrienne at September 27, 2011 3:21 PM
Comment #329838

“This is what they’re calling themselves because 1% of the people in this country now controls/destroys everything for The 99% of the rest of us”

Shouldn’t they be calling themselves the 9 or maybe 19%, give or take a few? Since that is more in line with the number of people who actually support their views and actions, it would be more honest.
I sure as hell know they don’t represent me or anyone I know, in ANY way.

Posted by: kctim at September 27, 2011 3:48 PM
Comment #329842
Shouldn’t they be calling themselves the 9 or maybe 19%, give or take a few? Since that is more in line with the number of people who actually support their views and actions, it would be more honest. I sure as hell know they don’t represent me or anyone I know, in ANY way.

No, The 99% is a very accurate name for these protesters. Because their protest is on behalf of EVERYONE who isn’t in the 1% of wealthy people who control/destroy everything in this country for everyone else.
This means they are there to represent people who are too deluded/misinformed to understand what they are there to do, and, it even includes representing the cops who have wrongly and unconstitutionally brutalized and arrested them for exercising their first amendment rights.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 27, 2011 4:09 PM
Comment #329847


Roy, the progress that workers have obtained, protecting them from the abuses of wealth, and which are, for the most part, taken for granted by workers today, where gained in the streets, fighting company goons, not in the halls of Congress. Workers protesting, farmers boycotting, corporate goons reacting, that is what got the attention of a majority of the people, which got the attention of government.

Jim Crow wasn’t crushed because Rosa Parks caused a scene on a bus or because of one little march. It was crushed because Rosa Parks ignited a peaceful revolution that was attacked by the reactionary forces, forcing the issue in such a way that the government could no longer appease the Crowites.

Protests in the street, boycotts, etc., have a track record of getting results, but they usually don’t get support from the general public until conditions are approaching intolerable.

On the other hand, third parties have no track record of success in achieving any goals. The Progressive party achieved no goals in Congress, but the peoples movement known as the Progressive Era did.

Protests are the catalyst that ignite awareness and concern in the general population and that is what moves Congress. This is exactly what the tea party protesters are trying to do. A majority of the people agreed with the tea party on the dangers of deficits and debt. They disagree with the tea party solutions of protecting and shifting even more power to wealth while making draconian cuts in social spending.


Posted by: jlw at September 27, 2011 5:23 PM
Comment #329849

Sorry Adrienne, but I am neither deluded or misinformed and there is no way in hell that their views represent me or anyone I know.
They represent themselves and themselves only. That is why the support they fantasized about never showed up.

However, it makes total sense that these few people THINK they are representing everybody. I’m sure they also THINK it is only they who know what is in everybody else’s best interest.

Posted by: kctim at September 27, 2011 5:58 PM
Comment #329853

kctim,
The 99% represent most Americans — because they are such a large and varied group. But you go right ahead and take the side of the Wall Street Banksters if you really think they have your best interests at heart. See where that delusion gets you if you wish.

As for support that never showed up? It’s you who is fantasizing that it never did. Because indeed, it has — the number of protesters only grows larger with every passing day.
In fact, today they marched to the main post office for the Postal Worker’s Rally to lend their support to those workers (in case you don’t grasp what’s going on, it appears that the government is trying to put our US Postal Service out of business and turn it into a for-profit enterprise), and there was such a huge number of people who marched today that the police finally stopped trying to control anyone, nor did they use their orange nets or arrest anyone.

Maybe the police are finally starting to realize that they too are actually part of The 99% that needs to confront the voraciously greedy 1%?
One lives in hope…

Posted by: Adrienne at September 27, 2011 7:40 PM
Comment #329861

It seems incomprehensible to many that well educated, well dressed, hard working, financially secure bankers could be nothing more than sophisticated con men. But, that seems to the case when the type of financial dealings that led up to the 2008 collapse are examined in any depth.

What is more incomprehensible to me, is how these “con men” got away with it and have somehow convinced the rest of us to cover their fraud and reckless investments to the tune of trillions of dollars.

It wasn’t always that way. In the late 80s, the Saving and Loan collapse resulted in over 1,000 major criminal convictions and many more findings of civil liability. Indeed, the son of a sitting vice-president was even indicted. Today, what is the track record on the 2008 collapse? One criminal conviction.

We saved the financial “con men” as well as the “sophisticated” investors that they duped. Everybody was payed or guaranteed every dime invested.

However, what was the fate of the average Joe indebted to those banks and investors or having his equity wiped out by the collapse? Not a dime of help.

What was the help for the main street economy devastated by the financial collapse? A mere pittance compared to the trillions dedicated to saving the ” Masters of the Universe.”

Perhaps, we need to all wake up and take a look at the big picture before denouncing the financial protesters as some wacko fringe groups.

Posted by: Rich at September 27, 2011 10:17 PM
Comment #329864

Well said, Rich.

It is time to wake up. Because it’s become very clear that our ineffective government (left and right) is more interested in catering to the rich 1% than concern themselves with the rest of us — The other 99%. These wealthy politicians decided that the Wall Street crooks were not only “too big to fail” but also, too big to jail — and that’s horsesh*t.

Together, We the People should no longer stand silent and compliant with a government and a financial system that no longer actually represents the vast majority of our citizens. And, no one should be considered above the law, most especially after they’ve stolen so much, wrecked so many lives, and ruined so many hopes for the future.

If some folks out there need inspiration to stand up and join, or simply give some support to the people protesting near Wall Street, it might help to remember that this country began when We the People finally decided they had really had all they could take of taxation without representation.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 28, 2011 1:37 AM
Comment #329866

Adrienne
Now why do you assume that I am taking sides here? It is not my fault that this protest did not gain the support that was dreamed about and that was needed for it to be taken seriously by the people.
Perhaps if they would have protested over the actual criminals not being held accountable, they may have enough support. Instead, they are protesting against Wall Street itself and capitalism, and the vast majority of Americans do not share the same nutjob ideas with these people. IF they did, the people would be standing together.

I love this 1% rhetoric the progressives have clamped on in hopes of gaining support for their half-baked freedom killing ideas. One would hope that sooner or later they would finally realize that ‘money, envy and give me more’ is not how most Americans live their lives.

There is a huge difference between a revolution based on taxation without representation (which by the way is still alive and promoted today) and a revolution based on ‘give me more.’ The former creates a country while the latter destroys it.

Posted by: kctim at September 28, 2011 9:17 AM
Comment #329876


1) Repeal the citizens united decision.

2) Wide spread debt forgiveness.

3) Pay as you go for military interventions.

4) Pass a Tobin tax.

5) Universal care centers.

6) Reinstate Glass Steagall.

7) Paid sick leave.

8) Increased Political Transparency.

9) Negative income tax.

10) Full Employment.


Will these reforms kill capitalism? No they won’t.

The conservative alternatives to these reforms:

Deregulate Business.

Reduce the size of government by eliminating everything that conservatives disagree with while enforcing their will on all, keeping in mind that conservatives have a laundry list of freedoms they want to prevent others from engaging in.

It isn’t the left that is threatening the future of capitalism, it is the conservative ‘let us be free, leave business alone crowd that is the great threat to the future of capitalism.

Government spending on social programs, government regulation of business, government taxes, not one of these has every been responsible for the many recessions and depressions that this country has experienced in it’s history.

Kctim, I wonder why this protest isn’t growing with sister protests in cities across the country. Like in Boston, Louisville, San Diego and other cities.

Rich the bankers can get away with it because the conservatives know that they are not guilty of wrongdoing. It was the lying good for nothing low income workers that screwed the marks out of their to good to be true equity. Conservatives have faith in what they believe, not in facts.

The bankers haven’t gotten off completely. The big guys they deceived are suing.

Adrienne, taxation without representation? Every 700,000 Americans have a representative. A few thousand of them are paying for the lions share of that representative’s reelection campaign and by the representative’s reckoning they deserve special representation.

And the Senate, they would be more comfortable if the Senate Chambers were located on Wall Street. I think the SCJ’s have already moved the Court there.


Posted by: jlw at September 28, 2011 3:35 PM
Comment #329878

jlw, you forgot Chicago.

But we both know that the expected usual protesters aren’t who I was refering to, don’t we.

When these little gatherings actually get the support of the people, THEN they can claim that they represent the people.
Until then, they are only preaching their ‘capitalism is a failure,’ ‘give me more’ and ‘feel sorry for me’ politics to the few who already support them.

Posted by: kctim at September 28, 2011 3:56 PM
Comment #329880

You are correct kctim…they represent no one except for their little group of people filled with “entitleitis”.

Do they have a plan for what comes next…doubtful. They are merely envious little people with too much time on their hands.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 28, 2011 4:36 PM
Comment #329882

Royal, it has already become nothing more than a political rally for the standard leftist desires.

Posted by: kctim at September 28, 2011 5:47 PM
Comment #329889

Royal Flush,

“Envious little people.” They probably are. Who wouldn’t be. After all, Wall Streeters make huge sums of money. They can drive themselves and most of the world into bankruptcy, but because they are so important, all the rest of the little people of the world feel compelled to save them. What a deal!

“Do they have a plan for what comes next…doubtful.” Agree. But, could it be worse? Getting rid of a parasitic group of rentiers is a good start. Maybe the future Wall Street will return to financing something productive rather than being a sophisticated gambling house.

Posted by: Rich at September 28, 2011 9:52 PM
Comment #329891

I agree with O’Reilly on so many issues. He wants a flat tax. He won’t indulge in partisan politics. On ‘The View’ today the ladies tried their best to lure him into partisan bickering and he didn’t bite. Bill speaks to solutions, me too.

jlw, on unions. I went to work in the early 60’s for Western Electric in a telephone building. Workers were affiliated with the ‘Communications Workers Of America’. The union didn’t do anything I was aware of, but every couple of weeks they came around looking for a donation for ‘flowers’ for ‘someone’ who died. I was making about $3/hr and my supervisor, who had been an employee for about 12 years, was making $3.50/hr and telling me he had one of the best jobs in the city. After a few months I walked. Later, as folks were digging up the ground looking for Hoffa, the ‘Teamsters Union’ took over. Perhaps a match made in heaven, dunno.

My position is that partisan warfare is self-defeating in that wins are not cemented in place, always subject to change at the whim of the left or right. Numbers tell me this so.

Home Sales/Prices - down
CEO income vs worker income since 70 - 400% to 26%
Commodity prices - up, corn and hay, double in a yr
Insurance - up 20% and going way higher
Unemployment - near 50% for black workers, less for others
Poverty - 42M plus

Partisanship, unions, protesting, etc, ain’t hackin it, jlw.

I believe the majority of workers want to see people in developing countries rise out of poverty. So, what does it say when monopolies/conglomerates use your tax dollars to locate to foreign shores and advertise to foreign customers in the headlong chase to find the very cheapest labor markets, while at the same time flooding the US with ‘tired, hungry, huddled masses’ looking for a job, any job, your job?

Millions upon millions, nobody knows how many as nobody is counting, living in this country on the largesse of your tax dollars for education, healthcare, subsistance, etc, while shipping some $23B in US dollars back to Mexico yearly. And the return? Drug cartels, 50k killed on/near the border since 06, enforcement cost, jobs lost, crime and assoc court/justice costs.

Nope, partisan bickering ain’t hanging with it, jlw. Best put your support behind solutions like ‘removing the money influence from politics/gov’t’. Get behind a non-profit, non partisan org like Move To Amend and Reclaim Democracy. Support actions to ‘vote incumbents from office every time’ and, if you have some spare time, support the Republic Sentry Party in working to abolish corporate personhood, money is free speech and implementing REAL campaign finance reform.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at September 28, 2011 10:03 PM
Comment #329912

I did some research on what the “Occupy Wall St.” types actually want:#1 repeal corporate personhood.

We may be seeing an upwelling from those who are starting to realize that the promise of America that their parents and grandparents enjoyed- educational and employment opportunity- will be denied them.

The tax burden has been shifted from the wealthy to the middle class. Incomes of the rich have soared while blue collar salaries have stagnated, unless you factor in inflation. Then they have declined. Corporations are now “persons” who are allowed unlimited political spending. The lawmakers, wealthy themselves, are bought and paid for by the corporations, and make laws that favor them.

The police brazenly harass, “corral”, arrest, and even mace peaceful demonstrators. There will be a boiling point.

I recall reading that there was virtually no terrorism in Muslim countries in which there was economic opportunity for the young. The apparent lack of opportunity here could become a catalyst for……well, for some bad shit to come down the pike.

So……save the big corporations, spend hundreds of BILLIONS of our tax dollars propping them up. But do nothing about the millions losing their homes. Kowtow to your masters and their sycophants (no offense intended, Tim). Just don’t be surprised when the whole thing blows up in your face.

Oh, and to Adrienne: God bless you for your support of people (just about the only people) who are actually taking action on the problem. Thanks to for airing it out here. Strange how even some who decry the Corpocracy are afraid/reluctant to support attacking the monster’s head.

Posted by: steve miller at September 29, 2011 5:18 PM
Comment #329919


Roy, O’reilly is your man now? What about Beck and Dobbs? All of these pundits, left, right or supposedly centrist, is paid to sow dissension. As a Fox News pundit O’reilly is more centrist than the rest, but he is also rather idiotic at times. Perhaps not as idiotic as myself, but he is up there.

The unions are little different than the government, besieged by partisanship and apathetic indifference. The power brokers are enabled by this and they love it.

A friend once told me: I wouldn’t do what you do for a living for all the money in the world, but you make to much money. She made the minimum wage at Kmart. I could see the Kmart store, three miles away from and three hundred feet below my working area. From my vantage point above the river, I could see the next boil your water warning coming before it was posted.

Unions aren’t perfect, how could they be when they are composed of human members. I took on the clique that was running my local and got black balled for my efforts until the next election tossed them out of power. No one stood up to support me, but the were listening to what I had to say and spreading the word to the members that had better things to do than attend their union meetings.

What is your solution for unions? The government is working on replacing the teamsters with Mexican truck drivers. What more do you want? The construction trade workers in my state have been in the process of being replace by $7 per hour/no benefits Mexican workers. What more do you want?

What is your solution for the millions upon millions of people living off your tax dollars? Did you know that poor people in China now have TVs. Shocking isn’t it.

The housing market is still depressed? What are you expecting, a miracle? It is going to be a while before the suckers see a to good to be true nearly doubling of their home equity in less than a decade again. Long enough for them to forget and get suckered again.

Housing prices are way up, “There has never been a better time to buy a home” or get that equity loan, suckers.

If it wasn’t for the unions and the poor, America would only experience good times with no recessions or depressions. Great Cathedrals would be built to worship the Masters of Capitalism and corpocracy. Oh, we have those already.

Partisan warfare is the name of the game. Centrists are not policy makers, they are fence sitters. They don’t even make good referees and they definitely aren’t going to take on the corpocracy. They are not boat rockers. Obama has tried the centrist route and look what it has gotten him, Constant attacks from the right, disillusionment on the left, and silence from the center, except for those centrists who aren’t really centrists.

The only governments that don’t conduct business with a lot of partisan warfare are governments ran by people like Hitler, Stalin and Hussein.

I think that the media, the Republican politicians and the corpocracy will do all they can to prevent the protesters message from spreading while attacking them as fringe elements. It looks like another opportunity to play the socialist tune.

I think the Democratic politicians will try to ignore the protesters as much as possible.

Ultimately this political war may be determined by which side does the most to give the non voters a reason to vote. The last time they had a reason to vote was the Gilded Age.

American businessmen in China are complaining to the Chinese government. They never realized that Chinese workers would want to take such long breaks and that they would be constantly demanding more pay. Looks like Americans may be paying more for those cheap Chinese manufactured goods. They already are paying more for those goods than when they were manufactured here. Less expensive goods was a concept, a selling point, not a reality. Nearly all the benefits have been in the form of profits rather than savings for consumers.

Posted by: jlw at September 29, 2011 6:56 PM
Comment #329922

“Strange how even some who decry the Corpocracy are afraid/reluctant to support attacking the monster’s head.”

Steve,

Excellent observation. Maybe, they don’t really, deep down, believe that. Or, they are too fearful of the consequences of taking on the “monster’s head.” I fear that the Obama administration is guilty of the later. “Too Big to Fail” really has consequences. The moral hazard does have a reality.

Early in the Obama administration during the TARP period, Obama requested a meeting with the principal financial institutions to discuss the crisis and review potential reforms. He was snubbed by some the executives who found excuses for not attending. That one act of disrespect, arrogance and lack of gratitude for the actions, not only of the Obama administration but also of the Bush administration, to save the financial sector, should have signaled the type of people and problem that we are dealing with. No mea culpas, no commitment to reform or even a civil recognition that huge bonuses for executives managing essentially bankrupt corporations due to their own ill advised decisions was not a reasonable or appropriate response to the extraordinary collapse and bailout.

FDR called out Wall Street for its excesses, clearly and consistently. In my opinion, Obama made a fatal mistake in channeling Clinton and not FDR. Compromising and “lets kiss and make up” doesn’t cut it with a group that knows that it has got you by the bal.s”

But, when it comes to Wall Street, conservatives are far worse. We just can’t piss them off or their “job creator” investors. It doesn’t seem to matter that financial de-regulation led to a massive collapse of the economy and malinvestment. It doesn’t matter that job creation by the “job creators” has been abysmal over the past decade. It doesn’t matter that the wealth gap has grown substantially and the middle class has been declining in relative economic power. Whatever Wall Street wants, it should get.

Posted by: Rich at September 29, 2011 7:41 PM
Comment #329925

Jlw, your reply made me recall another union encounter. My father was working as a General Supt with the TVA back in the 50’s. He fired several union workers for a chronic problem of drinking on the job but the union stood by the workers and the TVA fired him and kept the workers. He was in his 50’s and blackballed from working with any TVA unions around the South.

and Rich/jlw.

I’m not a ‘purist’ looking for some dude on a white horse to come and save us. I do like to think I might be a centrist or a populist but populist has such bad vibes with the public. Why, I don’t understand. I like Andrew Jackson. I don’t see him as a corrupt man.

I am basically against unions, especially unions with an agenda such as that of Andy Stern and company. I am against corpocracy such as we are witnessing with the Solyndra affair. I do understand them, their greed and needing to control gov’t to the extent their $$ will permit. But, rather than go into their camp and goad or harass them for some short term gain, I look for long term solutions.

You can’t have a solution until you identify the problem. IMO, the major problem, which gives rise to the unions and corpocracy, is the level of money influence in gov’t and politics. Our Founder’s and leaders down through history have informed us to be leary of the money influence and, here we are. President Obama, one individual, expected to collect $1B for his 2012 run.

I often write that we have too much democracy. By that I mean that to feather their nest people coalesce into groups/organizations to become a small but vocal (wealthy) minority with the $$ clout to control/sway the silent, large majority. Be it Boy Scouts or non-profits. For the winners, it’s great. But, not so great for the losers. I guess it started with Hamilton and the first political party.

But, by solving the major a multitude of wrongs can be righted. By abolishing corporate personhood and money is free law we can remove the money influence through implementation of REAL campaign finance reform. We can invoke anti-trust law to break up monopolies/conglomerates, creating many more companies, renewing competition and innovation and employ far more people from the process. We can then remove the corporate tax and implement a flat income tax which would provide additional revenue and prevent congress from making winners and losers through the tax code. We could bring military spending into balance with revenues and spending. We could come up with a realistic immigration policy and shut down the drug running across our borders.

That’s for starters. I’d like to see a globalisation program that pretty much leaves developed countries as is but works to improve the lot of developing nations based on their NEEDS. A country may not need a tennis shoe factory but would love to have an agri-business, etc. What is Mexico doing with the $23B remittance from Mexican nationals in the US? Nothing, other than subsisting. Been 30 years and Mexico hasn’t been ‘lifted’ Mexico out of poverty yet.

And so on …

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at September 29, 2011 10:26 PM
Comment #329933

Thank you too, Steve! And you also, Rich!
Thanks to both of you for keeping this conversation going! I agree — many talk about reform, but often all it is, is a lot of hot air.

The only way We the People have EVER changed anything in this country when we know we’re right, and the powers-that-be are wrong is when we physically get ourselves down into the streets. It’s always been difficult to make that decision to put ourselves on that line for a purpose, and it’s not always fun when the cops choose to get rough and try to deny us our constitutional rights, yet, it’s absolutely necessary.

As Berkeley Free Speech activist Mario Savio once said:

“There’s a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious—makes you so sick at heart—that you can’t take part. You can’t even passively take part. And you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you’ve got to make it stop. And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all.”

This may be more eloquently stated, but the fact is, this has actually ALWAYS been the case in our country.

And let’s be perfectly clear here — we are NOT living in a free country when we know that giant corporations own our government, and when the 1% on Wall Street owns more wealth than all the rest of our citizens combined, and can get away with steal from so many of us — yet pay no price, or suffer no repercussions.

That’s why this protest on Wall Street only keeps growing in NYC, and around the country — because people recognize the problem and know they are right, and the powers-that-be are wrong.
Here’s a few of the latest groups to join this protest:

Unions and liberal groups to join ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protest
Also:
Airline Pilots Join the Occupy Wall Street Protests

Posted by: Adrienne at September 30, 2011 11:47 AM
Comment #329934

Steve
Not one bit of offense taken. Of course, I would love to hear just how it is that I “Kowtow” to corporations.

Posted by: kctim at September 30, 2011 12:09 PM
Comment #329935

Great article about #occupywallstreet from Glen Greenwald:
What’s behind the scorn for the Wall Street protests?

Posted by: Adrienne at September 30, 2011 1:26 PM
Comment #329942

Adrienne,

The problem that the protesters have in gaining some measure of popular support is ignorance of the issues. Matt Taibbi wrote a great piece a few months ago about how Wall Street got away, figuratively, with murder in the financial collapse or 2008. “Why Isn’t Wall Street in Jail?” http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216

The principal point of the Taibbi article is that the moneyed influence of Wall Street has compromised not only the regulatory agencies but also the criminal justice agencies. One day your the head of an SEC compliance unit and the next day your representing an investment bank in an SEC action. Conflicts of interest are rampant.

He also makes the interesting point that the complexity of financial instruments and transactions has obfuscated common frauds. In that article and in others, he translates the arcane and complex financial transactions into understandable common language and categorizes the frauds into commonly recognized cons. It is extremely hard to prosecute when juries don’t have the background or sophistication to see the forest while lost in the trees.

Posted by: Rich at September 30, 2011 6:24 PM
Comment #329955

Adrienne, that is a good article by Grenwald. And, I very much appreciate people who care enough to go into the street over an issue. I hope the protesters have some success through their endeavor. I agree, that the longer than can ‘hang in’ and the more groups throw in with them the more likely they will get congress’s attention.

I was/am somewhat confused over the makeup of the protesters. They seem to be mostly liberal/progressives from within the Democratic Party. Yet, they are protesting the very establishment that ponies up bigtime$$ for incumbent democrats and especially the president. If that is correct it leaves me in a quandary. If democrats feel so strong about crony capitalism or what I refer to as Corpocracy, why don’t they just turn on the incumbents and vote them from office? Shumer has been in place for decades. Would seem that if democrats wanted to really fight crony capitalism they would join the ranks of the independents.

Also, would agree that going physical can produce results. But, those results are going to be short lived. You would basically have to live in the streets to maintain your winning positions.

I do support this effort as I would any effort that attacks crony capitalism/corpocracy. Just like I support ‘voting incumbents from office every time’, and the press for Article V Convention. But, I’m not willing to settle for piecemeal. Doesn’t make sense to fight little skirmishes at the fringe year over year. The Corpocracy will always roll$$ you over.

I can’t stress it any stronger via keyboard; we must remove the money influence from politics/gov’t. Do that one thing, by abolishing corporate personhood and money is free speech law, and everything else falls into place. Once the money dries up incumbents/candidates will begin to address their constituents in honest. Follow up with campaign finance reform that ensures that all donations are from donor to accounting entity then bulk packaged and passed to a distribution agency, thereby breaking any audit trail, in equally funding qualified candidates.

The two organizations at the forefront of working to abolish corporate personhood and money is free speech is www.reclaimdemocracy.org and www.movetoamend.org. They are rolling along in getting cities and counties to adopt a resolution to amend the constitution. I’ll be taking it before my county within a month or so. These organizations will work with those entities that adopt the resolution in pushing/pressing the states to gin up an HR Bill based on the resolution to amend. If sufficient state legislatures adopt or ratify the resolution an Article V Convention would be called for and the Constitution would be amended at that time or, there would be one helluva commotion if congress tried to get in the way.

So, I urge the protesters, readers within my reach, to touch base with Reclaim and Move To, sign their petition, join to support and plan to broach the resolution with your local gov’t.

While I am dyed in the wool hopeful that Reclaim and Move To can follow through to an amendment of the Constitution I still believe it is wise and necessary to establish a 3rd party with a diff- - -. There are a number of issues that will need to be addressed beyond CP and MIFS that will require a 3rd party designed for the 21st century, And, if AVC should fail to produce results then we can go forth with a 3rd party to achieve an amendment.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at September 30, 2011 10:17 PM
Comment #329963


Roy, I have a love hate attitude towards unions. I realize that unions are often a part of the problem. They will side with corporations to stymie progress if they fear the progress will threaten their members jobs. On the other hand, they are the only voice that workers have. Without them, labor is silenced.

I am a life long Democrat who voted for only two Democrats in the last two election cycles, one a challenger, the other a sitting governor. The Republicans are the defenders of wealth, the Democrats are the enablers.

The Republicans say free the rich man, destroy the unions, and throw the poor into the street and America will be great again.

IMO, the Democrats have basically said yes to carte blanche for the rich man but they need more time to deal with the unions and the poor.

The corpocracy began planning for this protest four decades ago. Since then, the number of corporate investors has skyrocketed. If the protest gains momentum the corporations will roll out the propaganda machine and rouse their 401K army.

Posted by: jlw at October 1, 2011 1:09 PM
Comment #329968

I agree, jlw. The tentacles of the Corpocracy are run amongst us bigtime. I believe the large majority would agree too, but keep hanging in for the few crumbs that get thrown their way.

I watched a cspan presentation re a CofC event on immigration and jobs. I find it unreal how pervasive and how far the corpocracy is going to nail down cheap labor, here and around the world. Gist is that we couldn’t have won WWII if it weren’t for the Jewish engineers who emigrated during Hitler’s reign. And, we would not have enjoyed the great industrial revolution following WWII through the Carter admin were it not for the German eng’s who emigrated. They lambast immigration policy, too few visas, green cards and too long to citizenship and so on. The panelist have picked up the President’s theme in that we are too lazy to work or get an science-technology-engineering-math degree and how those coming to study at our universities are so bright and brainy.

They talked about 50% of the startups in silicon valley are initiated by immigrants and in the next sentence tell you that immigrants can’t legally start a US business, must be a citizen. Georgia Tech, number 4 in eng, says 40% of grad students are foreign and of those 50% are STEM’s and 60% are computer science. Business is so good GT has set up joint Univ’s in several countries.

No mention of ‘a leg up’ being proffered by the taxpayer re their education and incentives to starting a business. No mention as to the starting wage offered to the immigrant worker.

One panelist said her company had to find foreign welders as welding was just something you can’t get citizens to do. Thrust was that if we don’t get comprehensive immigration passed today we are automatically a decade behind other ‘competing’ countries. Immigration is ‘the closest thing we have to a free lunch’, etc. They are working hard to turn the black dog white and so on.

Insult to injury in that the US taxpayer is ‘paying’ companies if they will relocate back to the U.S.
O’Reilly made light of the protest on Wall Street. FOX interviewed a few mostly young inexperienced folks who didn’t seem to know why they were protesting. Made mention that George Soros is funding one of the participating orgs. FOX interviewed a Susan Sarandon, who had walked off an O’Reilly interview in the past, and she didn’t present well either. This bunch came across as ‘down with capitalism’ rather than ‘abolish corporate personhood’. Nothing in Bill’s take about abolishing corporate personhood.

I would just hope those who choose to fight at the fringe will eventually find their way to take on the larger, major issue of removing the money influence.

Sidenote – 7 banks hold 80% of deposits so if 5 of them can hold hands on the debit card fee thing they can enforce it, or anything else they may desire.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 1, 2011 8:27 PM
Comment #329969
The problem that the protesters have in gaining some measure of popular support is ignorance of the issues.

I agree with this somewhat, but not 100%, Rich. I do agree with you in the sense that this protest would likely be getting far more support if so many people didn’t tend to automatically form their opinions after listening to whatever corporately owned television tells them to think about issues — because they always give the pro-corporate, pro-Wall Street take, and are always witheringly dismissive of whatever they’ve decided to label as anti-establishment. Yet, on the other hand, is it really so very hard for people to grasp why this protest is happening right now?

As Greenwald says in the last link I put up:

Does anyone really not know what the basic message is of this protest: that Wall Street is oozing corruption and criminality and its unrestrained political power — in the form of crony capitalism and ownership of political institutions — is destroying financial security for everyone else?

I’m really getting the sense that if this protest continues and keeps growing the way it has and is, public opinion will likewise continue to evolve and support will also grow. In fact, it already has to a very significant extent as more and more groups and unions are joining and/or speaking out in support of this protest. Because people are slowly coming to realize that these protesters really do come from all walks of life (it is far from being comprised of only very young single people, even though corporate television has thus far tried very hard to make it appear that these are the only people who have showed up to protest and occupy that park.)

In that vein, here’s the latest development from today: USW Supports the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ Protest Movement

United Steelworkers Union happens to be the largest industrial union in our entire nation — 850,000 members strong.

Matt Taibbi wrote a great piece a few months ago about how Wall Street got away, figuratively, with murder in the financial collapse or 2008. “Why Isn’t Wall Street in Jail?”

I really like Taiibi’s work too, Rich - and I remember that particular article well. In fact, I commented and linked to that piece right here in this blog: http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/007421.html#319458
I heard the other day from a friend of mine that Taiibi has been down at the protests lending full support to what they’re trying to do. And btw, if you haven’t yet already read it, I highly recommend Taiibi’s book Griftopia: Bubble Machines, Vampire Squids, and the Long Con That Is Breaking America.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 1, 2011 9:08 PM
Comment #329970

Roy:

I was/am somewhat confused over the makeup of the protesters. They seem to be mostly liberal/progressives from within the Democratic Party. Yet, they are protesting the very establishment that ponies up bigtime$$ for incumbent democrats and especially the president. If that is correct it leaves me in a quandary.

You needn’t be confused Roy. Many of these people are progressives who feel (like I do) that our entire government on both sides of the political aisle have completely abandoned their duty to represent We the People — in favor of representing the interests of Big Corporate and Wall Street — because those are the people whose lobbyists grease their palms and wine and dine these politicians for legislation that will benefit them (at our expense), and when (and only when) they get their way, they also give them enormous piles of money to run their political campaigns.

But you would be very wrong to assume that the only people down at the Occupy Wall Street protests are all on the left. The other day on the livestream link I was listening to a protester speak who announced right away that he was a lifelong Republican who is now utterly disgusted with the entire American political system. I’ve also heard that there are a huge number of Ron Paul supporters coming to these protests — for presumably the very same reason.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 1, 2011 9:31 PM
Comment #329972

The corpocracy problem is that too many corporations are proxies for the ultra-wealthy, who own and control those corporations.

Possibly the biggest problem in the United States of America is that government is FOR-SALE.

A perfect example of it is that the huge majority of 99.7% of all 200 million eligible voters are vastly out-spent by a tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make a whopping 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more!

Until that changes, these 10 major abuse will continue to destroy the nation.

Unfortunatly, that is not like to change any time soon.

The only possible built-in self-correction mechanism is possibly the pain and misery, which is bad today, but will most likey get much worse over the next decade (or decades).

We are in uncharted territory today.
The total federal debt per-person in the United States has never been worse than it is today.

As of JULY-2011, the federal National Debt per-person is $46,474 , which is about 2.1 times more than the previous record-high (which was $22,099 in year 1945, after World War II, in 2011 inflation adjusted U.S. dollars), and about 8.4 times more than the it was near the end of the Great Depression (which was $5,674 in year 1941 in 2011 inflation adjusted U.S. dollars).

The total $57 Trillion nation-wide debt per-person in the United States has never been worse than it is today, and it dwarfs the $14.7 Trillion federal national debt.
With a U.S. population of 312 Million, the debt per-person today (on average) is $182,692 per person!

The total $57 Trillion nation-wide debt is about 400% times larger than GDP, up drastically since year 1956 when nation-wide debt was 200% of GDP.

One of the results of all of this is that the wealthiest 1% who owned 20% of all wealth in the U.S. in year 1976 now own 42% of all wealth in the U.S. today.

  • 045.0% +—————————————-
  • 042.5% +—o———————————-o
  • 040.0% +-o-o—————————-o—- (over 42% of all wealth
  • 037.5% +o—-o————————o——- now owned by wealthiest 1%)
  • 035.0% +——-o———————o———
  • 032.5% +———o——o—o——-o———
  • 030.0% +———-o—o——o—-o———-
  • 027.5% +————o———o—-o———-
  • 025.0% +————————o—o———-
  • 022.5% +————————o-o————
  • 020.0% +————————-o————-
  • 017.5% +—————————————-
  • 015.0% +—————————————-
  • ————1—1—1—1—1—1—1—1—2—2
  • ————9—9—9—9—9—9—9—9—0—0
  • ————2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9—0—1
  • ————0—0—0—0—0—0—0—0—0—1 YEAR

The problem is, by the time enough people figure this all out, it will probably be too late.

There are potential solutions to our problems, but it is unlikely we will choose those solutions, and end these 10 major abuses, until refusing to do so finally becomes too painful. Too much greed, laziness, and ignorance always leads to more pain and misery, but it seems human nature is to have to re-learn that lesson over and over and over.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with perpetual re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 1, 2011 9:53 PM
Comment #329974

d.a,n, you might find this article interesting:

Why we must raise taxes on the rich
For 70 years, the wealthy have grown wealthier — but the burden on the middle class keeps worsening

From the link:

From the 1940s until 1980, the top tax income tax rate on the highest earners in America was at least 70 percent. In the 1950s, it was 91 percent. Now it’s 35 percent. Even if you include deductions and credits, the rich are now paying a far lower share of their incomes in taxes than at any time since World War II.

And, this lady does a very good job of clearly explaining why the rich really do need to be taxed at a much higher rate.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 1, 2011 10:21 PM
Comment #329975

Thanks for the numbers d.a.n. They do tell the real story with no spin. Look at the take off in wealth starting with the Regan era of ‘greed is good’.

And, his post is right in that greed, laziness and ignorance of the issues has combined to do us in economically.

Continued recession/depression is going to be miserable/painful for millions. d.a.n. is right again in that it may be too late to save the nation as we have known it. Risk to national security will ramp up for every trillion we go in the hole.

I am hopeful that we can learn a lesson from going into the streets. From that effort we may come to realize just how impervious the corpocracy is to such tactics. Then, perhaps we can turn to other methods of protests that go towards finding a solution.

Stop repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with perpetual re-election rates. Vote incumbents from office in large numbers. Will do much to turn their attention from corpocracy to their constituents.

Support the push, http://www.foavc.org, for Article V Convention. The Founders intended for the people, the states and congress to have access to amending the Constitution. But, ‘the people’ have been shut out by congress and the courts.

Support a 3rd party, www.republicsentry.com, designed for 21st century politics with an agenda to remove the money influence from politics/gov’t.

These actions represent our best shot at averting a looming disaster for the nation, IMO.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 1, 2011 10:51 PM
Comment #329976

Adrienne, that is an interesting argument.
It may have some merit.

However, I have a much more simple reason why either the the wealthy should pay a higher percentages of their total income to federal taxes, or the majority of workers should get a tax cut, or a combination of the two that meet somewhere in the middle:

  • Reason #1: In many instances, the wealthy, such as Warren Buffet, pay a much lower percentage of their income to federal taxes. Warren Buffet paid 17.7% in total federal taxes on $46 Million in year 2006 (and similar percentages in years thereafter), while his secretary paid 30% in total federal taxes on $60K.
  • Reason #2: That is because capital gains, dividences, and interest are taxed at 5%-to-15%, and are not subject to Social Security and Medicare taxes.
  • Reason #3: Social Security taxes are only on the first $108,500 of income.

The tax system should be reformed.
Why can’t all forms of income be taxed equally?
Why is labor income taxed up to 30% (i.e. 13.3% for Social Security and Medicare, and another 17% for federal income taxes) when capital gains are only taxed 5%-to-15% ?
Is that fair?
Of course it isn’t.

But FOX NEWS FAUX NEWS is going ape $#!+ trying to demonize Warren Buffet and claim accuse anyone of class warfare who seems to think the wealthy should pay an equal percentage of their income to taxes is somehow class warfare.

Bill O’Reilly’s, Steve Doocey’s, Grethen Carleson’s, Brian Meade’s, and others’ arguments on FOX NEWS FAUX NEWS are very hypocritical, and the 4 obufscations below used by FOX NEWS FAUX NEWS may be fooling similar ilk, but they are not not fooling everyone.

Also, the majority of U.S. tax-payers do not agree with FOX NEWS’ FAUX NEWS’ spin to obfuscate and twist the facts and cloud the truth.
Many polls for many years have shown that most tax-payers polled believe that a flat (equal) percentage on ALL types of income, and elimination of tax loop holes is the most fair tax system.

So, it is no wonder why some people refer to FOX NEWS’ as the FAUX NEWS.
Perhaps these 4 obfuscations about taxes is part of the reason?
FOX NEWS FAUX NEWS Obfuscation #1: The wealthy pay most of the taxes.
Rebuttal #1: True, but what is their overall federal tax rate on all federal taxes.
Warren Buffet’s was 17.7% on $46 Million (in year 2006), and has been about 17.5% for other years too.
His secretary’s total federal taxes were 29%-to-30% of her total federal taxes on her $60K salary.
Here’s the proof.
Warren Buffet makes a convincing argument, no matter how hard FOX NEWS FAUX NEWS tries to obfuscate and twist it into class warfare.

FOX NEWS FAUX NEWS Obfuscation #2: The wealthy create jobs for the rest of us.
Rebuttal #2: How lame is that?
That excuse alone proves how desperate some people are to salvage a losing argument.
And FOX NEWS trying to demonize Warren Buffet for simply revealing the facts is despicable.

FOX NEWS FAUX NEWS Obfuscation #3: Raising taxes on the wealthy is class warfare.
Rebuttal #3: How is an equal percentage unfair?
A tax increase would merely make the the overall percentage for the very wealthy close to the effective tax for all federal taxes equal to that of most middle-income tax-payers.
How is that not fair?
Why should labor income be taxed at a higher rate than capital gains income that is taxed at 5%-to-15%?
Why should a middle-income earner pay 25%-to-30% in total federal taxes on about $60K when many of the very wealthy pay a much smaller percentage in total federal taxes (e.g. out 17-to-18% on about $46 Million for Warren Buffet)?
Many polls for many years show that most tax-payers polled believe that a flat percentage on ALL types of income, and elimination of tax loop holes is the most fair tax system.

FOX NEWS FAUX NEWS Obfuscation #4: Capital Gains were already taxed and will get taxed again.
Rebuttal #4: False! The gains are taxed.
Not the original principal.
Do all of the people on FOX NEWS FAUX NEWS really believe their own slanted, circular, twisted rhetoric and spin, or are they instructed by their employer to push those obfuscations (if not outright lies) above?

I am not a fan of President Obama, but he is correct (and so is Warren Buffet) on the assertion that the tax system is unfair, regressive in many cases, and slanted toward the rich in a way that many wealthy pay a significantly lower tax rate in total federal taxes than most middle-income tax-payers, because capital gains are taxed at 5%-to-15% while the effective tax rate for all federal taxes on labor income is as high as 30%:

  • 35% |——————————————————————————————-
  • 33% |—————————o——-o——————————————————
  • 30% |——————o—————————o——————————————- = (30% total
  • 27% |—————-o:———————————-o———————————— federal tax for
  • 24% |—————o-:——————————————-o————————— secretay making $60K)
  • 21% |————-o—:—————————————————-o——————
  • 18% |————o—-:———————————————————————o- = (Warren Buffet’s total
  • 12% |———o——-:———————————————————————— federal taxes on
  • 09% |——-o———:———————————————————————— $46 Million in 2006)
  • 06% |——o———-:————————————————————————
  • 03% |—-o————:————————————————————————
  • 00% |ooo————-:————————————————————————
  • ____$0__30K__60K__90K_120K_150K_180K_210K_240K … … $GROSS INCOME …

It is laughable every time the talking heads on FOX NEWS FAUX NEWS try to push those circular obfuscations (above) about taxes, because it simply proves why so many people now refer to FOX NEWS as the FAUX NEWS. Feel free to send a copy of this to: friends@foxnews.com

Whatever tax system we get, tax-payers should take a careful look at the tax curve, to make sure they are not cleverly getting screwed as shown by the curve above.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with perpetual re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 1, 2011 11:04 PM
Comment #329977

Here is a simple tax system, that taxes ALL income at the same percentage, eliminates all tax loop holes, and only taxes income above the poverty level.

Why does that not exist?
Because our elected officials are mostly puppets for the puppeteers that fill up their campaign warchests.
Government is FOR-SALE, since the huge majority of 99.7% of all 200 million eligible voters are vastly out-spent by a tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make a whopping 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more!

Beware of sales and value-added taxes, because they are always regressive.
Don’t fall for the Fair Tax which is a regressive sales tax.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with perpetual re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 1, 2011 11:14 PM
Comment #329978

By the way folks, if you’re not following what’s going on, the protesters at Occupy Wall Street have already released their first official Declaration of the Occupation of New York City

Posted by: Adrienne at October 1, 2011 11:26 PM
Comment #329979

More news:

700 ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protesters arrested on Brooklyn Bridge today.

And btw, 3000 people in Boston protested outside of the Bank of America today (only 24 were arrested).

Posted by: Adrienne at October 1, 2011 11:38 PM
Comment #329980

Adrienne,

U.S. citizens are justified in being angry, and they have every right under the constitution to assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances:

    Amendment I: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
That’s a good list. A few other abuses should be added to their list.

However:

  • (1) who owns and operates the corporations?;
  • (2) government is FOR-SALE because a tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters make 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more; some of it coming from corporations since the Supreme Court has decided “free speech” = “government FOR-SALE”;
  • (3) the middle-income group of tax-payers are being systematically destroyed with these 10 major abuses;
  • (4) Congress may have 10% approval ratings, but Congress still has 77% re-election rates (down from 86% in year 2008); Whose fault is that?
That is, there are people behind those corporations.

And some corporations are merely proxies for some wealthy people who use (i.e. abuse) their vast wealth to buy the government they want.

Any way, if one examines the root cause of most of our problems, it mostly comes down to these two brutal truths:

  • (1) government is FOR-SALE, too corrupt, too incompetent, too bloated and wasteful, too fraudulent, too greedy, and too oppressive;
  • (2) but the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with perpetual re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 1, 2011 11:57 PM
Comment #329981

Roy,
Yes, Congress is blatantly violating Article V of the Constitution.

Such blatant constitutional violations should be on the list too.

Article V is key to reforms, but too few care to protest the issue, despite it having the mechanism needed for reforms via amendments.

The problem with allowing one constitutional violation is that many more consitutional violations will follow, and so will the deterioration of the society that completely abandons the rule of law.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with perpetual re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 2, 2011 12:18 AM
Comment #329982

d.a.n,

Please don’t give me your list of corporate abuses (believe me, I’ve seen you talking about them for many years!), instead, you must go and tell the General Assembly of the Occupation!
Well over a week ago I visited their site and gave them a short list of my own opinions — and I’m very happy to relate that practically every one of the things I personally considered to be among the most serious grievances that needed to be on that first declaration ended up being included!

These people honestly WANT TO KNOW what people who support what they’re doing think — so by all means, go tell them!
:^)

Posted by: Adrienne at October 2, 2011 12:19 AM
Comment #329983

Already did that.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 2, 2011 1:45 AM
Comment #329984

Sent a donation too.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 2, 2011 1:55 AM
Comment #329990

What a delicious irony that the title of the thread is “Are you ready for the next great thing?”. Plainly, the majority of us were (are) not. The OWS movement has the potential to far outshine the tea party as far as having the potential to affect the 2012 elections, and much more importantly, bring the outrage at where America has ended up. Corpocracy, fascism, whatever you want to call it, we got it.

I love the list of demands, seems like it’s a list that any sensible American can get behind. Who but the 1% could be against ending Corporate Personhood?

My political antenna started twitching madly at the onset of the OWS movement. The growth (and attendant publicity) in just the last 12 HOURS is staggering. Watch for this to be the Next Great Thing.

Posted by: steve miller at October 2, 2011 12:12 PM
Comment #329991

steve miller, I agree. There are several good points on the GA list (only a few I disagree with).

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.


Posted by: d.a.n at October 2, 2011 3:36 PM
Comment #329993

Although conservatives seem to be quiet on this issue it is as important an issue as we face today. It is time for conservatives and liberals to come together on the issues of corporate personhood and money is free speech or the citizens united decision.

“finally a revolt against the root problem that corrupts and paralyzes U.S. government. And the nascent movement might actually succeed if we stop turning ordinary Americans against each other along the tired and destructive battle lines of left vs. right.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-silver/occupy-wall-street-protests_b_991163.html

Posted by: j2t2 at October 2, 2011 9:08 PM
Comment #329994

Finally got my 2 cents in on the GA blogsite.

Roy Ellis on October 2, 2011 at 9:40 pm said:
I am hopeful this protest will take wings and get the attention of the Corpocracy. The majority believe that the money influence in politics and gov’t is THE major problem. Also, am hopeful this effort will lead to an equally serious movement toward finding and implementing solutions.

Removing, or severely restricting the money influence will require the abolishment of corporate personhood and money is free speech law. There are two organizations, Reclaim Democracy (www.reclaimdemocracy.org) and Move To Amend (www.movetoamend.org) at the forefront of the movement to abolish corporate personhood. Currently, they are calling on local and state gov’ts to adopt a ‘resolution to amend’ which, hopefully, will culminate in the states calling for an Article Five Convention as a way to amend the Constitution. Please consider giving your support for this most important effort.

Beyond supporting these organizations we can weaken the corpocracy by voting incumbents from office in large numbers. The re-election rate was 77% in 08, down from the previous election, but still needs to be way lower to begin to steer the attention of our representatives from Corpocracy to the people/voters.

We can support the movement by Friends of Article V Convention (www.foavc.org) in pressing congress and the courts to acknowledge the long denied constitutional right to Article V Convention as the intended path for citizens to amend to the Constitution.

We can support the Republic Sentry Party (www.republicsentry.com) designed for 21st century politics, established in rules to prevent co-option by the money influence and stressing a limited agenda targeting the abolishment of corporate personhood law.

There are solutions and we do have choices.

Otherwise, we have the Corpocracy we deserve.

j2t2, good url and the writer seems to be suggesting a referendum or an Article V Convention which is the method, as I understand it, Reclaim Democracy and Move To Amend are pursuing.

IMO, the best chance is to keep the agenda limited to abolishment of corporate personhood and money is free speech law.

I firmly believe the most expedient route is through a 3rd party whereby we can vote members into congressional seats with authority to pull the levers of power. But, I’m 100% behind any movement attempting to remove the money influence.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 2, 2011 10:21 PM
Comment #329995

This article gives history and describes how to take down corporations at the state level.

http://www.nancho.net/bigbody/chrtink1.html

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 2, 2011 10:50 PM
Comment #330003

J2, I doubt it would be too hard for conservatives and liberals to come together on the issues of corporate personhood and money is free speech or the citizens united decision, it’s the other declarations that make this a political rally which cuts back on support and shows the claim of representing 99% of the people, to be false.
Animal activism? Education is a human right? Created a police state? Stop capitalism? Torture? Death penalty? Anti nukes? Anti war?
Thats not even all of their ‘declarations.’

This is not about holding actual criminals accountable, it is about getting a political agenda accepted and using a particular opinion to scapegoat whoever disagree’s with them.

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2011 2:02 PM
Comment #330004

d.a.n. me too!

Steve Miller:

What a delicious irony that the title of the thread is “Are you ready for the next great thing?”.

:^) I was thinking just that when I posted the first message in this thread. I’d been waiting for some writer here to at least mention the Occupy Wall Street protests, and when no one did, I figured where better to raise the issue than in a thread talking about corpocracy?

Plainly, the majority of us were (are) not. The OWS movement has the potential to far outshine the tea party as far as having the potential to affect the 2012 elections, and much more importantly, bring the outrage at where America has ended up. Corpocracy, fascism, whatever you want to call it, we got it.

That is where we are — yet this is NOT about political ideology. There are actually members of the Tea Party who are coming to these protests in ever greater numbers. Because this is actually much bigger than political ideology. It’s about acknowledging the fact the vast majority of Americans need to finally rise up against the Corporate Criminal Class who have become our overlords because they have bought off our government, now control almost everything, and have been screwing 99% of We the People over.

I love the list of demands, seems like it’s a list that any sensible American can get behind. Who but the 1% could be against ending Corporate Personhood?

Exactly! Those who would defend the Corporate Criminals of Wall Street are either of the 1%, or have have been bought off by the 1%, or are merely too ignorant/duped to grasp what this protest is about.

j2t2:

Although conservatives seem to be quiet on this issue it is as important an issue as we face today. It is time for conservatives and liberals to come together on the issues of corporate personhood and money is free speech or the citizens united decision.

Spot on — this is not a left vs. right issue. This is about We the People setting aside our various political ideologies and rising up together; exercising our first amendment rights to acknowledge and confront the fact that our government (both left and right) has been thoroughly corrupted and that a Corporate Criminal Class is now in reality running this nation.
And, we are watching as hundreds of our fellow citizens (of all political stripes) who are peacefully marching in protest against this outrageous state of affairs are being arrested for jaywalking, when not a single criminal from the financial industry has yet been arrested for blowing up our nation’s (and the entire world’s) economy!

[quoting Josh Silver:]
“finally a revolt against the root problem that corrupts and paralyzes U.S. government. And the nascent movement might actually succeed if we stop turning ordinary Americans against each other along the tired and destructive battle lines of left vs. right.”

Yes. And not only corrupts and paralyzes government — but is causing widespread suffering amongst We the People. WE are the ones losing our jobs and our pensions in old age, losing the roofs over our heads, getting sick but too poor to afford health care, having the social security and medicare benefits we’ve already paid for be slashed by millionaire politicians — all of whom are assured of getting full pensions and full healthcare at our expense for the rest of their lives while they bail out Criminal Corporations with our tax dollars, and at the same time talk about how everyone must be willing to suffer severe austerity measures due to the failed economy that they and their criminal cronies created.
It is TOTAL HORSESH*T.
And it’s long past time for the American people to stand up and take a stand together.

Here’s a little something for kctim and Royal Flush, since with their comments in this thread they’ve exposed themselves as being pathetically ignorant of what this protest is actually all about:
The American Dream

Posted by: Adrienne at October 3, 2011 2:35 PM
Comment #330007

Adrienne
Instead of posting the opinions of a comic, maybe you could post the ‘declarations’ of what OWS is actually all about?
Why do you choose to ignore the ‘capitalism is evil’ sentiment of these protests? Is it for the same reason you failed to mention that the Ron Paul followers were protesting the Fed, not Wall Street?
Maybe you would care to tell us if, exercising our first amendment rights to acknowledge and confront the fact that our government (both left and right) has been thoroughly corrupted, then why on earth do you hold such hatred for Tea Party members and never attend their protests?

Sorry Adrienne, stating facts is not ‘pathetically ignorant,’ ignoring them is.

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2011 3:04 PM
Comment #330008

I’ve posted many links above, including a link to the OWS website with Declaration they put out the other day above.

I don’t attend Tea Party protests because I don’t agree with the vast majority of what they’ve been selling, and I also don’t like the fact that they’ve been duped and funded for the most part by the Corporate Criminal Class.
Occupy Wall Street is being seen by many on the right as a chance for those within the Tea Party who haven’t really liked much of what it has come to represent to start fresh — and with a lot of other Americans who can at least agree on one very important thing:
American government has obviously been bought off by a Corporate Criminal Class and this country is now being run by and for that weathy 1% who wrecked the nation’s ecconomy.

Btw, you haven’t stated any facts that I’m aware of.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 3, 2011 3:16 PM
Comment #330010
Why do you choose to ignore the ‘capitalism is evil’ sentiment of these protests?

Because this protest is not for the most part made up of people who are anti-capitalist. It is mostly made up of people who are anti Big $$$ Corporate and their control of our government. That is what this protest is about, and people who claim otherwise clearly don’t know what they’re talking about.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 3, 2011 3:28 PM
Comment #330012

You have not posted all of the declarations though, have you Adrienne? Nope.
Could it be because, like yourself, most people don’t agree with the vast majority of what is being sold? That the OWS has a better chance of being successful if people don’t know all the declarations that have nothing to do with Wall Street?

Fact: They have ‘declarations’ about animal rights, torture, the death penalty, no wars etc…
Signs say ‘capitalism is evil’ and ‘stop capitalism.’
This is no longer about holding Wall Street accountable for what some of them did wrong.

Oh, and btw, many on the right have been warning of the wealthy and their power for decades, but yet certain people are just now starting to care.
Go figure.

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2011 3:52 PM
Comment #330013

“That is what this protest is about, and people who claim otherwise clearly don’t know what they’re talking about”

Then why do the websites support such claims?

That’s right Adrienne, I actually visit their sites. I read their blogs. I look at their pictures.
IF this was only about the actual criminals on Wall Street, I would support it.

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2011 3:57 PM
Comment #330015

You know what kctim, if you keep this up, I’m going to start thinking that you’re being paid by the 1% to blog. Paid bloggers for the status quo has been a reality on the internet for years — and we all know that some people are so desperate for money at the moment that they’re willing to do practically anything (up to and including hurt themselves and everyone they know) in order to make a buck.

You have not posted all of the declarations though, have you Adrienne? Nope.

What??? You’re simply too lazy to click on the link I provided above and simply read it for yourself?

Could it be because, like yourself, most people don’t agree with the vast majority of what is being sold? That the OWS has a better chance of being successful if people don’t know all the declarations that have nothing to do with Wall Street?

Oh dear. This is SO stupid. Do I really have to explain that this is a Declaration that was voted upon by MANY MANY PEOPLE through direct democracy at this protest? And that therefore there is NO WAY IN HELL EVERYONE PROTESTING IS GOING TO AGREE WITH EVERY SINGLE THING THAT APPEARS ON IT???

Fact: They have ‘declarations’ about animal rights, torture, the death penalty, no wars etc…

RIGHT — THERE’S PLENTY OF THINGS ON IT THAT PEOPLE AREN’T GOING TO AGREE WITH — THAT’S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE VOTE ON THINGS IN A DEMOCRATIC FASHION.

Signs say ‘capitalism is evil’ and ‘stop capitalism.’

Yeah. The signs being held at this protest say LOTS and LOTS of things. Including things that I don’t agree with at all. Did YOU really expect that every person’s sign at a grassroots protest like this were all going to say the exact same thing? If so that would be a really idiotic assumption.

This is no longer about holding Wall Street accountable for what some of them did wrong.

YES, IT IS. And there aren’t enough paid bloggers in the world who can possibly spread enough disinformation to crush what’s building right now. The people have awakened to what they need to do, so disinformation is not going to work. This movement of people standing up has grown larger and larger with every passing day — because holding the Wealthy Criminals on Wall Street accountable for their obvious crimes as well as for their widespread control of our corrupt government can no longer be ignored.

Oh, and btw, many on the right have been warning of the wealthy and their power for decades, but yet certain people are just now starting to care. Go figure.

So have people on the left, for decades. Now that people left and right have finally joined forces, we will undoubtedly have the numbers to force things to change for the better.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 3, 2011 4:30 PM
Comment #330016

Adrienne
If they pay people to tell the truth, then please tell me where to sign up. Seeing how I do not depend on the government to live my life, I can’t say that I need the money, but I sure as hell wouldn’t pass it up for telling the truth.

I HAVE clicked on your links and read them all myself, that is why I know that this is not ONLY about holding actual Wall Street criminals accountable. In fact, YOU actually agree that people are protesting for different things.

Let’s see now. We have a protest against Wall Street but its declarations and some of its people are protesting against other things, but it’s really about just Wall Street and everybody should get behind it?
You are right: That is SO stupid.

The signs don’t have to say the same thing, but if you are going to claim it is a protest against Wall Street and you want to be taken seriously, maybe the signs should reference the corruption. Not to crazy of an idea is it?

“Now that people left and right have finally joined forces, we will undoubtedly have the numbers to force things to change for the better”

Could the numbers not be even larger if this was only about Wall Street, with no politics involved at all? How many people sit at home saying I would join them, but what the hell does Wall Street have to do with Troy Davis, Iraq, terrorists, animals etc…?
They had an Occupy KC here and some liberals turned away because they saw that the Ron Paul supporters were there.

How can the 99% claim to represent all when they don’t allow all to speak?

Posted by: kctim at October 3, 2011 5:28 PM
Comment #330017

Don’t listen to the LIES!
EVERYONE is allowed to speak out at the Occupy Wall Street protests, and people of every political stripe are invited and encouraged to show up! If you think that our government has been corrupted and that the criminal 1% of wealthy people on Wall Street is now calling the shots you can support this protest. However, whomever has been so poisoned by politics that they cannot even bear to stand beside a person of another political stripe should probably steer clear of this protest — because such people only want to sow arguments and discontent amongst people who actually do agree on this point, and are trying very hard to work together.

The Declaration of the Occupation begins with this statement:

As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.

As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known.

It then follows with a long list of grievances that people at this protest hold against corporations. Not all people at enormous protests like this one are going to agree upon each and every thing they personally think is a grievance — but all are allowed to voice what they personally think.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 3, 2011 5:51 PM
Comment #330020

Tim,
If you clicked on the declaration and read it, then you know that anyone may vote for which demands are to be included……and which are to be jettisoned. I agree that capitalism-AS IT HAS EVOLVED- sucks. But I don’t think that should be part of OWS’s agenda. Nor many of the other things. I think we should stick with ending Corporate personhood and one or two other things. Say……accountability?

Posted by: steve miller at October 3, 2011 6:43 PM
Comment #330021

Latest development [Yay!!!]:

Semper Fi: Marines Coming To Protect Protesters On Wall Street

From the link:

“I’m heading up there tonight in my dress blues. So far, 15 of my fellow marine buddies are meeting me there, also in Uniform. I want to send the following message to Wall St and Congress: I didn’t fight for Wall St. I fought for America. Now it’s Congress’ turn.

My true hope, though, is that we Veterans can act as first line of defense between the police and the protester. If they want to get to some protesters so they can mace them, they will have to get through the Fucking Marine Corps first. Let’s see a cop mace a bunch of decorated war vets. I apologize now for typos and errors.

Typing this on iPhone whilst heading to NYC. We can organize once we’re there. That’s what we do best.If you see someone in uniform, gather together.

A formation will be held tonight at 10PM.

We all took an oath to uphold, protect and defend the constitution of this country. That’s what we will be doing.


Hope to see you there!!”

Posted by: Adrienne at October 3, 2011 6:45 PM
Comment #330022

Oh. Adrienne…………….great job of bringing a clear message, and standing against some who seem determined to pooh pooh a REAL people’s movement. A movement that is very unlike the phony-ass, big-money backed tea partiers.

Posted by: steve miller at October 3, 2011 6:47 PM
Comment #330023

Ooops — too excited! That blockquote should have covered the whole end of my last post.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 3, 2011 6:48 PM
Comment #330025

Here’s an excellent article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/edward-murray/occupy-wall-street-protest_b_988341.html

Adrienne, I read the Marine’s FB post from yesterday….I certainly hope it’s true. Have you seen any evidence of Marines (or other service people) in uniform at any protests?

Posted by: steve miller at October 3, 2011 7:10 PM
Comment #330027

Steve,
Thanks for posting that Huffington Post article! Here’s a link that was within it that people really need to look at:
We Are the 99%

As for the Marines, I think these may be some photos of the Marines who have gone down to join the Occupation of Wall Street.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 3, 2011 8:34 PM
Comment #330032

Adrienne, I was thinking that during my military days in the 50-60’s we would not have been allowed to participate in a civil protest or anything that would appear negative toward gov’t while representing the military, in uniform etc.

If that is correct then your group is making a HUGE statement.

I was watching Ken Burn’s ‘Prohibition’ on PBS last couple of days and that era and the 18th amendment reminds me of corporate personhood and its adverse affect on the nation. Cronyism, corruption, Corpocracy rampant.

Excerpt from Santa Clara Blues: “The Civil War accelerated the growth of manufacturing and the power of the men who owned the corporations. After the war corporations began a campaign to throw off the legal shackles that had held them in check. The systematic bribing of Congress was instituted by Mark Hanna, sugar trust magnate Henry Havemeyer, and Senator Nelson Aldrich and their associates. [Jonathan Shepard Fast and Luzviminda Bartolome Francisco, Conspiracy For Empire, Big Business, Corruption and the Politics of Imperialism in America, 1876-1907 (Quezon City, Foundation for Nationalist Studies, 1985), p. 92-97] Most Supreme Court judges who were appointed were former corporate lawyers.”

And.

“The need to be freed from legislative and judicial constraints, combined with the use of the word “person” in the U.S. Constitution and the concept of the “artificial person,” led to the argument that these “artificial persons” were “persons” with an inconsequential “artificial” adjective appended. If it could be made so, if the courts would accept that corporations were among the “persons” talked about by the U.S. Constitution, then the corporations would gain considerably more leverage against legal restraint.
These arguments were made by corporate lawyers at the State level, in court after court, and many judges, being former corporate attorneys and usually at least moderately wealthy themselves, were sympathetic to any argument that would strengthen corporations. There was a national campaign to get the legal establishment to accept that corporations were persons. This cumulated in the Santa Clara decision of 1886, which has been used as the precedent for all rulings about corporate personhood since then.

Though it is not yet clear who hatched this plan or where the campaign began, the early cases mainly concerned railroads. In the late 1800’s railroads were the most powerful corporations in the country. Most of the nation’s farmers were dependent on them to haul their produce; even the manufacturing corporations were at their mercy when they needed coal, iron ore, finished iron, or any other materials transported. That the lawyers for the railway corporations had planned a national campaign to make corporations full, unqualified legal persons is demonstrated by the Supreme Court making several decisions in which this was an issue in 1877. In four cases that reached the Supreme Court [94 U.S. 155, 94 U.S. 164, 94 U.S. 179, 94 U.S. 180 (1877)] it was argued by the railroads that they were protected by the 14th Amendment from states regulating the maximum rates they could charge. In each case the Court did not render an opinion as to whether corporations were persons covered by the 14th Amendment. Bypassing that issue, they said that the 14th Amendment was not meant to prevent states from regulating commerce.

Similarly, in 1877, in Munn v. Illinois [94 U.S. 113 (1876)], the Supreme Court decided that the 14th Amendment did not prevent the State of Illinois from regulating charges for use of a business’s grain elevators, ignoring the question of whether Munn & Scott was a person. Later, in Northwestern Nat Life Ins. Co. v. Riggs [203 U.S. 243 (1906)], having accepted that corporations are people, the court still ruled that the 14th Amendment was not a bar to many state laws that effectively limited a corporations right to contract business as it pleases.

Calling silence a victory, from 1877 to 1886 corporate lawyers assumed that corporations were persons, and their opponents argued that they were not. In Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company [118 U.S. 394 (1886)], at the lower court levels the question of whether corporations were persons had been argued, and these arguments were submitted in writing to the Court. However, before oral argument took place, Chief Justice Waite announced: “The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does.”

It is not half as strange that the Supreme Court judges would render such an opinion, given their allegiance to the propertied class, as the way that they rendered it. These guys loved to write long-winded, complex opinions; look at any Supreme Court opinion of the time (or any time) and you’ll see that. This question had never been covered in a Supreme Court decision; it had been avoided. Here was the perfect chance for any of nine Supreme Court judges to make his place in history. All declined. No one wanted to explain how an amendment about ex-slaves had converted artificial entities into the legal equivalent of natural persons.

This opinion without explanation, given before argument had even been heard, became the law of the United States of America. No state or federal legislature passed it or even discussed; no Amendment to the Constitution was deemed necessary; the citizens were simply informed that they had a mistaken view about corporations, if they were informed at all. Future Supreme Courts refused to even consider the question, preferring to build on it, though occasionally future justices would try to raise the question again.” End Excerpt.

Seems there is no law to repeal re corporate personhood. Judges just started making law based on the above and Stare Decisis. “One of the most important doctrines in Western law is that of stare decisis, a Latin term of art which means “to stand by decided cases; to uphold precedents; to maintain former adjudications”.[1] In modern jurisprudence, however, it has come to take on a life of its own, with all precedents being presumed to be well-founded, unbiased legal decisions, rather than political decisions, and presumed to have both the authority of the constitutional enactments on which they are based, plus that of the precedents on which they are based, so that later precedents are presumed to be more authoritative than earlier ones.”

We do have our work cut out for us.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 3, 2011 11:54 PM
Comment #330037

Roy:

Adrienne, I was thinking that during my military days in the 50-60’s we would not have been allowed to participate in a civil protest or anything that would appear negative toward gov’t while representing the military, in uniform etc.

Roy, I can’t claim to know all the legality of this, but judging from that Marine’s comments, the impression is that these guys see their role as coming to the aid of our people when they’re being wrongfully brutalized and arrested simply for exercising their First Amendment rights. And after all, people in the military do take their oath very seriously:

“…to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.”

It is really pretty bizarre when you consider the fact the NYPD are obviously going quite far out of their way to corral (trap) and arrest literally hundreds of peaceful protesters, rather than going after the actual criminals who wrecked this nation’s economy.

An attorney who is part of the OWS legal working group is saying that this being done by the police in an attempt to intimidate the people.

Quote from the link:

“So, kind of giving the impression that where ever you go, you are not safe from potential arrest, and I think it is a potential message to people around the country, who are continuing to organize, that if you go out in the street, if you go on the sidewalk, there’s really nowhere where you could potentially be safe if you want to exercise your right to protest and to organize.”

Btw, I don’t think all the members of the military who are going to the protests are serving active duty. Although in this video, this particular Marine claims that some of the military members down at the protest are.

If that is correct then your group is making a HUGE statement.

MY group, Roy? No my brother, this is OUR group! These people are OUR fellow Americans — and just like you and I have found common cause, all of these folks know damn well they must speak out, and protest against the corpocracy! :^)

As for the rest of your post, that’s interesting info.
It looks like we do indeed have our work cut out for us. I’m wondering if a Constitutional Amendment might be the best way to go? What are your thoughts? Could We the People repeal corporate personhood if we made a serious and concerted attempt to do this on a state by state basis?

Posted by: Adrienne at October 4, 2011 1:30 AM
Comment #330038

Occupy Wall Street: LIST OF PROPOSED “DEMANDS FOR CONGRESS”

Posted by: Adrienne at October 4, 2011 2:58 AM
Comment #330043

Adrienne are you sure this is the correct list? I couldn’t find anything about animal rights, torture, anti war etc. It seems to me OWS have put together a decent list of demands.

kctim wall street represents why we are in the mess we are in today. Capitalism is interfering with the representative democracy of our country. Capitalism as currently practiced has become a bit of a problem and is deserving of the lack of respect it is receiving. Even though it is not capitalism but some capitalist that are the problem they have given capitalism a bad name.

Most on the right have been strangely silent on the issues surrounding OWS. It is ok to disagree with wall street and the plundering of the country guys. It doesn’t make you communist.

Since those on the right claim to have “been warning of the wealthy and their power for decades,” one has to wonder why the reluctance to join in with those on the left and center to rectify the problem. It is easy to claim “yet certain people are just now starting to care.” when this has been a progressive cause for many years.

When exactly did the Tea Party raise this as an issue? The answer is the Tea Party is supported by some of the worse offenders. It is time to get rid of the worse offenders, stop accepting their bribes and become a real grass roots organization Tea Party.


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/64957.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/02/koch-industries-expose-in_n_991364.html



Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2011 9:18 AM
Comment #330044

kctim and the righties, perhaps you are mistaken capitalism for global corporatism…

“For true American patriots who believe in a vibrant free market economy, it is time to recognize we’ve been sold a bill of goods. The real enemy in the battle for American capitalism is not socialism; it is global corporatism. For true patriots, conservatives and liberals alike, the stakes could not be higher.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/catherine-crier/capitalists-of-america—u_b_992786.html

Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2011 9:34 AM
Comment #330045

Steve
“I think we should stick with ending Corporate personhood and one or two other things. Say……accountability?”

That would be great and the people who say they represent 99% would have a much more credible reason to call themselves the 99%. But, as Adrienne and the websites all clearly point out, this is not only about Wall Street corruption anymore, politics have been thrown into the mix to grow the crowds and push ideology.

I think protests are good. I believe they are a needed tool that the people can use. But if that protest is going to falsely claim that it represents 99% of the people, I am going to speak my mind and point out the facts to show just how wrong they are. Because I am one of that 99% and there is no way in hell that I share their opinions on the death penalty, animal rights etc…

Posted by: kctim at October 4, 2011 9:40 AM
Comment #330046

“When exactly did the Tea Party raise this as an issue?”

j2t2,

To be fair, a large percentage of Tea Party supporters opposed the Wall Street bailout. It was one of the rallying issues for the Tea Party. The exact reasons for the opposition varied. However, a good percentage of Tea Party types felt that the capital markets should have been allowed to follow their natural course without government intervention. Financial corporations and investors should have been allowed to fail and to realize their losses. By propping up the failed financial sector, government has interfered in the cleansing power of the free markets and perpetuated a type of crony capitalism favoring an elite group of investors and corporations.

So, in my opinion, there is some agreement on the TBTF issue. Neither group is satisfied with the outcome of the bailouts which resulted in the same TBTF corporations back in business and their elite investors being paid every dime on failed investments at the expense of taxpayers.

Posted by: Rich at October 4, 2011 10:01 AM
Comment #330047

O’Reilly gave the protest short shift last evening, as much as inferring they are idiots or commies.

Adrienne, absolutely we can repeal corporate personhood. I’ll gin up an article relating what Move To Amend and Reclaim Democracy are planning in that regad.

A good and well used chant for ‘our’ group; ‘Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Corporate Personhood has got to go’.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 4, 2011 10:08 AM
Comment #330049
To be fair, a large percentage of Tea Party supporters opposed the Wall Street bailout.

Yes they did Rich. Once they got into office they found the time to try to repeal “Obamacare” but little time to fix “to big to fail”. Now is the chance for TP supporters to do the right thing.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2011 11:57 AM
Comment #330050

Tim, I believe the OWS (or, as I like to call ‘em, the We Party{you heard it here first} needs to streamline the message, or wither. The more inclusive the better as far as political message goes. I think there are several major points we can all agree on: Taking money out of the election process, reversing Citizens United, holding corporations and banks that broke laws accountable. Maybe making some changes to the tax codes so that companies turning billion dollar profits would pay a fair share of taxes………

Posted by: steve miller at October 4, 2011 1:20 PM
Comment #330051


Roy, both Move to Amend and Reclaim Democracy support the protests.

A meeting has taken place between representatives of the tea party and the progressive movement to discuss the possibility of joining forces to promote a Constitutional Convention; to check undue corporate power in elections and government.

Tea party supporters opposed the bailouts? Yes, and can claim that by eliminating the governments ability to bailout corporations they weaken them. But the tea party also supports the Small Plan, small government, small regulation and small taxes, which increases the power of wealth and it’s corporations at the expense of nearly all the rest of us.

Posted by: jlw at October 4, 2011 2:06 PM
Comment #330056

Hey folks, here’s the latest OWS news:

Communications Workers of America Endorses Occupy Wall Street Movement

Yay! CWA is Union that is 700,000 workers strong!

On the flip side of such good news, there’s also some bad news.

It appears that JP Morgan Chase decided to buy themselves 4.6 million dollars worth of protection from the NYPD a few months back — just after the announcement to Occupy Wall Street first went out. According to the link it was an “unprecedented” amount of money, and oh how sweet! “New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly sent CEO and Chairman Jamie Dimon a note expressing “profound gratitude” for the company’s donation.”
Such “profound gratitude” for this oh-so-sudden windfall (payoff) might explain a lot of the harassment, brutality and unconstitutional entrapment and arrests we’ve been seeing all during this ongoing protest, and why the NYPD would be so much more motivated to defend the big bankers and CEOs who collapsed the economy and stole billions of dollars from the American people.

After hearing this news, I find myself hoping that many more Marines and other members of military will decide to join the Occupation…

j2:

Adrienne are you sure this is the correct list? I couldn’t find anything about animal rights, torture, anti war etc. It seems to me OWS have put together a decent list of demands.

It is a good list. And actually, if you click on where it says “To Vote on All #Revolution Demands” you’ll note that there are 2 pages of demands that people can choose to vote for. And you’ll also see that not every one of those options are being voted on by people who have been visiting those pages — some demands seem to be taking precedence over others.

wall street represents why we are in the mess we are in today. Capitalism is interfering with the representative democracy of our country.

Exactly. These protests would not be growing as they have (and are) if people didn’t see and truly understand that our government “representatives” only cater to the 1% and have utterly abandoned their duty to We the People (the 99%).

Capitalism as currently practiced has become a bit of a problem and is deserving of the lack of respect it is receiving.

Well personally, I think it’s become an enormously HUGE problem.

Quoting Catherine Crier: “The real enemy in the battle for American capitalism is not socialism; it is global corporatism.


Yes, I agree with this completely. And let’s be clear: it is a crime (right and left) that our government has allowed and encouraged global corporatism to run roughshod over We the People every single step of the way.

kctim:

That would be great and the people who say they represent 99% would have a much more credible reason to call themselves the 99%. But, as Adrienne and the websites all clearly point out, this is not only about Wall Street corruption anymore, politics have been thrown into the mix to grow the crowds and push ideology.

NO, IT IS ABOUT WALL STREET CORRUPTION.
But you know what Tim? It is such a f**king joke that you keep demanding that there can’t be any traces of politics at this protest. Did anyone on the right demand a complete lack of political viewpoints should be expressed at Tea Party rallies? NO, THEY DIDN’T. Your problem seems to be the fact that it is the Left who has started this OWS movement and has done a very good job of growing it by making the conscious choice to be inclusive, friendly, polite, gracious and respectful towards all people who may hold differing political views than their own, yet still share their belief that the criminal 1% is calling the shots for our corrupt American government.
I think your real problem is that you know deep down that the Left HAD to be the one to start this movement and invite people of differing political stripes to join them — because the sad and very obvious fact of the matter is, the Tea Party really couldn’t have done this. All that these Corporately-funded TP groups have managed to do is viciously divide this nation by demonstrating complete contempt and a total lack of respect for everyone who stands on the left — because after all, we’re not supposed to be “Real Americans.”

Well that’s utter crap — and Occupy Wall Street is proving each and every day that we’re ALL REAL AMERICANS, and that folks on the left and right ARE capable of working together when we really try. Indeed, I think we’re going to prove that together we can build something greater than the sum of our various political parts: a government that truly is by and for ALL THE PEOPLE, not just for the disgustingly callous and greedy 1%.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 4, 2011 4:56 PM
Comment #330058

Steve
“…needs to streamline the message”

That is what I have been saying, but apparently 99% of the country believes they are truly represented by the OWS protests, so what and all their ‘declaration,’ so what do I know.

Oh, you do realize that you are now considered a paid blogger who has been duped, right?

Posted by: kctim at October 4, 2011 5:14 PM
Comment #330059
It is a good list. And actually, if you click on where it says “To Vote on All #Revolution Demands” you’ll note that there are 2 pages of demands that people can choose to vote for.

I have visited and voted and donated Adrienne. I was being a bit factious when I said that.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2011 5:17 PM
Comment #330060

err um, facetious I mean to say.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2011 5:19 PM
Comment #330061

Adrienne
The Tea Party said it represented the majority of Americans and guess what? They too were wrong. At least they weren’t so full of themselves to believe their views represented 99% of Americans.

My “problem” is that the leftists who started these little protests are falsely claiming that they represent 99% of Americans, and that is nothing but blatant propaganda. They tried to get support against Wall Street, but when that support didn’t appear, they added other leftist positions and diluted the message.
A thousand Republicans and a thousand Democrats would have much more of an affect than 500 liberals and progressives.

The Tea Party attempted to do this very thing. They wanted all Americans to cross Party lines and join them in protesting high taxes and all the corruption in government. You guys laugh at them, call them names and mock their ideals because you would rather have a corrupt government taking from a corrupt Wall Street and giving it to you.

“Indeed, I think we’re going to prove that together we can build something greater than the sum of our various political parts: a government that truly is by and for ALL THE PEOPLE, not just for the disgustingly callous and greedy 1%”

I think you are dreaming and living in a fantasy land. First of all, liberals and progressives are the ones who make up 90+% of the protesters. Secondly, all of the people are NOT going to let them be the ones who define what a government that truly is by and for ALL THE PEOPLE. They will use the Constitution for that and we will be back to square one.

You want this to be about all the people? Then do what Steve said and narrow it down to what all the people can agree on: corruption.

Until then, we may watch this thing grow to about 10 or 20 thousand liberals and progressives and then it will fizzle out.

Posted by: kctim at October 4, 2011 5:40 PM
Comment #330080
Adrienne wrote: … anti Big $$$ Corporate and their control of our government.
Right!!!

That is probably the BIGGEST problem in the United States of America today. That seems like the OWSGA’s loudest message, though there are many others too.

Government is FOR-SALE !!!

A perfect example of it is that the huge majority of 99.7% of all 200 million eligible voters are vastly out-spent by a tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make a whopping 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more!

Until that changes, these 10 major abuses will continue to destroy the nation.

One potential solution is to divide all campaign donations, and media exposure equally amongst the candidates and the incumbents. That might also simplify the FEC’s job.

Money in politics and government makes it rotten to the core.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 4, 2011 11:10 PM
Comment #330081

Liberals are not always wrong.
Neither are conservatives.

The problem is mostly wiht the extremists from both ends of the spectrum:

  • Extreme #1: One extreme wants regressive taxation, unfettered capitalism and freedom to explore and wallow in every manifestation of unchecked greed (which we have seen plenty of lately).
  • Extreme #2: The other extreme wants a nanny-state with citizens increasingly dependent on the government; with massive cradle-to-grave government programs (which are usually severely mismanaged) that nurture a sense of entitlement and dependency on government; wants to grow government ever larger (despite the already current nightmare proportions); rewards failure and laziness; disguises jealousy and envy as demands for equality; and perpetuates the myth that we can somehow all live at the expense of everyone else.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, repeatedly rewarding the duopoly, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress (who perpetuate these abuses) with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 4, 2011 11:16 PM
Comment #330089

Tim,
I don’t know that the OWS folks are saying that they represent the views of all of the 99% of Americans. It seems to me they are just saying that they are NOT the 1% that is calling the shots and has the deck stacked in their favor. I still maintain that the primary demands are very simple, and that most of us could easily get behind them.

Why don’t you go to their list of demands, and vote for the ones you agree with? And vote AGAINST those you don’t?

This is too important to quibble over (the otherwise important issues such as) torture and the like. Why not focus on what we can all agree on first?

Posted by: steve miller at October 5, 2011 10:08 AM
Comment #330093

Steve:

I don’t know that the OWS folks are saying that they represent the views of all of the 99% of Americans. It seems to me they are just saying that they are NOT the 1% that is calling the shots and has the deck stacked in their favor.

I think Tim already knows this, Steve. I think he just wants to b*tch about this movement because people on the left started this ball rolling. He also knows that OWS is organizing themselves without any tainted windfall of Corporate cash, and are doing something extremely good for American democracy.
Over a week ago Tim was claiming that no one had showed up, and nonsensically he’s still trying to claim this, even though this movement has very obviously grown by enormous leaps and bounds and shows no signs of slowing any time soon.
I think he also knows the Tea Party (whose supporters up until the OWS movement really had no alternate avenue to move down) has been run on dirty, ill-gotten Corporate cash and has only managed to elect a bunch of elitists to Congress who have offered absolutely no solutions for the plight of struggling average Americans other than to talk in a super-folksy manner while claiming that the rich 1% just haven’t been given enough breaks.
He also knows that OWS have been totally inclusive of people from all walks of life and every political stripe in order to actually attempt to represent everyone who isn’t in the 99% — people who have already shown that it is possible for all of our people to work well together and contribute collectively to craft some intelligent demands for much-needed change.
He additionally knows that the TP wasn’t interested in building a movement for everyone. In fact, he has to know that huge numbers of folks in the TP merely stood around baring their teeth at everyone on the left, waving obnoxious and off-putting signs, childishly and rudely shouted down their fellow citizens at town hall meetings, flashed their guns as a threat at every opportunity, went far out of their way to insult and alienate everyone who isn’t far rightwing reactionary and christian, whilst sporting lots of silly red, white, and blue costumes and totally absurd headgear.

I think he knows all these things — but it seems pretty obvious that from the first time he commented in this thread he had already decided he was simply going to parrot the intentionally negative narrative that Corporate Television (owned by the 1%) would naturally try to sell to this nation’s people about all the protesters who are occupying Wall Street.
Some people just always fall in line with what the oligarchic status quo tells them to think, even when they may deep-down suspect they’re only hurting themselves to do so.

Sad, but it’s their loss (and on many levels), really.

Anyway, just wanted to share an interesting video of a famous person describing what he’s seen at OWS, and his admiration for the fact that it has indeed transcended political ideologies.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 5, 2011 2:47 PM
Comment #330094

Steve, they call themselves the 99%. Yes, the primary reason they started this was pretty simple, but that drew hundreds instead of the tens of thousands they foolishly thought would support them.

I HAVE been to their websites AND I have been watching them on livestream. In fact, just got done watching Livestream LA and it too is no where near being representative of the majority of Americans or their beliefs.

“Why not focus on what we can all agree on first?”

I am focusing on what the majority of us could possibly agree on. That is why I am saying this should be about corruption, not ideology.

Posted by: kctim at October 5, 2011 3:48 PM
Comment #330097

Ah, Ms Adrienne

I only b*tch because I actually take the time to know what is going on, instead of letting you and others tell me. I only b*tch because a bunch of ‘give me’ people are not representative of the majority of Americans or our representative Republic principles.

And, over a week ago I did claim no one was showing up and that the cause would mean nothing without support from The People. Well, now it is growing but it is mostly the standard ‘give me’ liberals and progressives who are growing it, and as we all know, liberals and progressives are no where near being representative of the majority of Americans.
If it helps your hopes any, I believe it will probably keep growing for a while longer still. But even if it does, it will still only be a liberal/progressive protest as long as they keep the same agenda.

I am afraid you, just like the OWS protesters, overestimate your own biased opinions.
What made the Tea Party successful was not the large rallies, it was the small ones that were in towns all across the nation, and you are sadly mistaken if you narrowmindedly believe the Koch brothers sent millions of dollars to all of them.

“He also knows that OWS have been totally inclusive of people from all walks of life and every political stripe in order to actually attempt to represent everyone”

Then why the demands for change that most do not agree with? Oh thats right, we are supposed to pretend those demands do not exist.

“He additionally knows that the TP wasn’t interested in building a movement for everyone.”

EVERYONE who believes in lower taxes is and was encouraged to join their movement.

“In fact, he has to know that huge numbers of folks in the TP merely stood around baring their teeth at everyone on the left”

So you have never attended a Tea Party rally.

“waving obnoxious and off-putting signs, childishly and rudely shouted down their fellow citizens at town hall meetings”

Like ‘stop capitalism,’ ‘capitalism is evil?’ Or maybe you are talking about the inevitable ‘Jump you Fu**ers’ sign we will surely see?

“flashed their guns as a threat at every opportunity”

Really? Were they carrying them or flashing them? How many incidents were reported? How many people were arrested for breaking a law?

“went far out of their way to insult and alienate everyone who isn’t far rightwing reactionary and christian, whilst sporting lots of silly red, white, and blue costumes and totally absurd headgear.”

Now we are getting somewhere. So you are saying, because the Tea Party did not stick with a primary agenda of lower taxes and ending corruption, that because they added other things from the far right wing platform, their support did not grow as it could. That their support would be only those who already supported all the ‘declarations’ they made?
You may be onto something there.

Ah yes, the good ole ‘corporate media owns you’ bit. LOL! But hell, even if that was true, it is still a hundred times better than being owned, controlled and dependent on government.

“Some people just always fall in line with what the oligarchic status quo tells them to think, even when they may deep-down suspect they’re only hurting themselves to do so”

I see. Told what to think. Hmmm?
Would that be like being told how to retire and falling in line with social security? Being told what to fear and falling in line with gun control? Maybe being told who to care for and falling in line with welfare, universal health care? Being told you are entitled to that of others and falling in line with higher and higher taxes?

Believe me, I know what would hurt myself and my family, and those jokers at OWC are begging for the exact opposite.

Posted by: kctim at October 5, 2011 4:33 PM
Comment #330118

I stand corrected on my assumption of this being nothing more than a liberal/progressive political rally/protest.

The Republican unions, Republican pundit Van Jones, Republican financer Soros, Republican celebrities and Republican council members all across the nation, have all now given their support to the OWS crowd.

Sorry for jumping the gun and not listening to those who know what is best for me.

Posted by: kctim at October 6, 2011 9:55 AM
Comment #330121

Another white-shirted police lieutenant randomly brutalizing OWS protesters. Seems the NYPD is doing a great job of “serving and protecting” the Wall Street Criminals who collapsed the economy and stole billions of dollars from the American people.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 6, 2011 12:55 PM
Comment #330122

Yep, no politics involved at all

“It has become the embodiment of longstanding progressive hopes…”

Posted by: kctim at October 6, 2011 1:09 PM
Comment #330126

Hilarious! Thanks for being honest Tim! At least you’re finally admitting that the main problem you have with this protest is that there are simply too many people on the left who are involved in it!

This Daily Show segment about OWS movement is incredibly funny too:
Parks and Demonstration

Posted by: Adrienne at October 6, 2011 2:43 PM
Comment #330127

Another NYPD cop (sociopath) who should be fired.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 6, 2011 3:48 PM
Comment #330132


Kctim, perhaps if we take the protesters demands one at a time and poll the people on them we can get a feel for which ones the people agree with and which ones they don’t.

Otherwise, we are just presenting our personal opinions we we say we know what the people want.

The tea party likes to say that the people support the cuts in social spending. The polls revealed the opposite.

18% favor cuts in Social Security.

28% favor cuts in Medicare and Medicaid.

The Wall Street protesters have done one great thing already, no one can deny anymore the the Republican Party exists to represent wealth and only wealth.

51% favor cuts in military spending.

Americans favor a Constitutional Amendment to correct the Citizens United decision by a 2 to 1 margin.

The people will listen to what the tea party has to say and they will listen to what the Wall Street protesters have to say, if Fair and Balanced allows it, and they will choose what they are willing to do from both.

I am not calling out Fox, but all the so called Free Press that has woefully performed their job of informing the public of the actions and proposals of the peoples Congress and in a way that they can understand; and which has become more and more partisan.

What I think the people want and what you think they want is irrelevant.

As a matter of fact, what the American people think has become, for the most part irrelevant to the politicians and their corporate handlers because they know that they know what is best for us all.

Do you believe or are you certain that a majority of Americans favor the tea parties agenda of social conservatism and laissez fair economic liberalism?

Posted by: jlw at October 6, 2011 5:39 PM
Comment #330133


Kctim, perhaps if we take the protesters demands one at a time and poll the people on them we can get a feel for which ones the people agree with and which ones they don’t.

Otherwise, we are just presenting our personal opinions we we say we know what the people want.

The tea party likes to say that the people support the cuts in social spending. The polls revealed the opposite.

18% favor cuts in Social Security.

28% favor cuts in Medicare and Medicaid.

The Wall Street protesters have done one great thing already, no one can deny anymore the the Republican Party exists to represent wealth and only wealth.

51% favor cuts in military spending.

Americans favor a Constitutional Amendment to correct the Citizens United decision by a 2 to 1 margin.

The people will listen to what the tea party has to say and they will listen to what the Wall Street protesters have to say, if Fair and Balanced allows it, and they will choose what they are willing to do from both.

I am not calling out Fox, but all the so called Free Press that has woefully performed their job of informing the public of the actions and proposals of the peoples Congress and in a way that they can understand; and which has become more and more partisan.

What I think the people want and what you think they want is irrelevant.

As a matter of fact, what the American people think has become, for the most part irrelevant to the politicians and their corporate handlers because they know that they know what is best for us all.

Do you believe or are you certain that a majority of Americans favor the tea parties agenda of social conservatism and laissez fair economic liberalism?

Posted by: jlw at October 6, 2011 5:42 PM
Comment #330137

Adrienne

From the very beginning, I have been saying that I had NO problem whatsoever with the protests other than that they were falsely claiming to represent 99% of Americans.

This is liberal/progressive political protest that would be a hundreds times more effective IF it was only about corruption.

Hilarious? No.
Predictable? Yes, VERY MUCH SO!

Posted by: kctim at October 6, 2011 6:02 PM
Comment #330146
This is liberal/progressive political protest that would be a hundreds times more effective IF it was only about corruption.

It IS about the corruption of Wall Street, this why they’re protesting near you know, Wall Street. But whatever, Tim. Think whatever you like about OWS — I’m sick of arguing with you because I fail to see you making any logical points. You want to dismiss this massive protest as “ineffective” because there are too many on the left involved? Fine.
But maybe instead of repeating this in WB you should go relate your theory that this really isn’t about Wall Street corruption to all the Ron Paul supporters (and btw, Ron Paul is now supporting the protest because they’re calling out the actions of the Federal Reserve.) that were maced and got the crap beat out of them by the NYPD last night — right alongside of all the “ineffective” liberals and progressives.

But you know what? I didn’t come here to argue with you. I’m really here to share this really good Truthout article with anyone who wants to read it:

Got Class Warfare? Occupy Wall Street Now!

Posted by: Adrienne at October 6, 2011 9:05 PM
Comment #330159

Ah yes, emotions most certainly do make one totally miss logical points.

I neither dismissed nor claimed the protests would be ineffective. We do have a liberal President afterall.
What I did say however, was that these protests would be MORE effective IF they represented the majority of Americans, instead of a minority.
It really is common sense: a hundred million Americans from the left and right would accomplish a thousand times more than a hundred thousand with a political agenda.

I don’t have to relay anything to the Paul supporters for I firmly believe the future of these protests and the next elections will support what I am saying.
I will make you one promise though, I will gladly admit I was wrong when progressives control 99% of our government start implementing their progressive agenda.

FWIW, I come here to engage and debate the facts, not argue. It’s more educational and alot more fun.

Posted by: kctim at October 7, 2011 11:07 AM
Post a comment