What is Occupy Wallstreet?

[Taem]

Taken from another thread.

Does it surprise you, if these things have nothing to do with each other, that they are all operating under the same brand (Occupy Wherever), complaining about the same things (bailouts for the rich, cutbacks for the poor) and are happening at the same time?

[…]

I think it's pretty clear the economy sucks, people are suffering, and they're sick of seeing the "rescue" being something reserved for AIG and Goldman Sachs. Tax policy is some piece of this, but mostly, it's about the response to the crisis: Save the rich, let the poor go hang.

And, it's hilarious how mad these people are at the banks. The banks are suffering the most and are all about to go under due to new cash reserve requirements, zero percent interest and the imposition of Dodd/Frank restricting their income.

I don't have television, so I get my news from the internet from the following sites: NPR News (center) and Fox News (far left) and CNN (right). Between the three, I feel fairly informed about most issues. The issue I'm having now is with Occupy Wallstreet. It was a vaguely mentioned movement in the last few weeks of almost unknown purpose which has had the ability to attract many followers.

So it finally hit home. Ventura and Santa Barbara counties are hosting Occupy [City Name] rallies in the courthouse parks in both county cities and I have to drive by them to make deposits at my works banks. They [many of the protesters] are holding up signs saying their tuition is too high. From my own personal observations, many of these protesters are college age students. Do they know it's the privatized (non-government) banks that hold your loans for banks? And that you can go to an non-accredited school for like 1/100th of the cost? Are they complaining about the fee the government charges the schools to get accreditation, or the fees the [private] (non-government) universities charge for their schooling, which has nothing to do with the government... If their issue is with the schools themselves, or perhaps the teachers and their pay rates, then why protest against the government? Perhaps their beef is with the banks that hold their student loans, but student loans are traditionally much lower than standard loans, and with current interest rates... WTF are they [student protesters] protesting about anyhow??? I don't get it!

Seems like others in the crowd are/were protesting the way Congress can't seem to agree on anything in this lame-duck season.

Again, others seem to be protesting bank fees and how your money is invested.

Others seem to be protesting the way Wallstreet runs, from hedge funds, to the system as a whole.

And others seem to be protesting the government giving money to banks.

While these systems share the common thread of money, they couldn't be more separate in terms of who runs them. Just because the government regulates certain aspects of each of these institutions does not make them the owners of said institutions.

It's pretty much pandemonium from what I can gather! No clear voice, just much dissidence aimed at nothing in-particular - perhaps people angry because they are out of work? I had a nice talk with my brother-in-law today whom told me he went to a rally in Santa Barbara yesterday to support the opposition to higher taxes and tuition fees. We had a nice talk about the tuition fee part, to which he yielded that the protest against the fees didn't make much sense in the overall spirit of what he feels is "the movement" (no more government controlling privatized institutions). Is this what Occupy Wallstreet is really all about? I don't know. I hoping someone here can explain it better to me, because at this point, it honestly just seems like a bunch of wankers on a worldwide scale.

[FireIceTalon]

Taken from another thread.

Does it surprise you, if these things have nothing to do with each other, that they are all operating under the same brand (Occupy Wherever), complaining about the same things (bailouts for the rich, cutbacks for the poor) and are happening at the same time?

[…]

I think it's pretty clear the economy sucks, people are suffering, and they're sick of seeing the "rescue" being something reserved for AIG and Goldman Sachs. Tax policy is some piece of this, but mostly, it's about the response to the crisis: Save the rich, let the poor go hang.

And, it's hilarious how mad these people are at the banks. The banks are suffering the most and are all about to go under due to new cash reserve requirements, zero percent interest and the imposition of Dodd/Frank restricting their income.

I don't have television, so I get my news from the internet from the following sites: NPR News (center) and Fox News (far left) and CNN (right). Between the three, I feel fairly informed about most issues. The issue I'm having now is with Occupy Wallstreet. It was a vaguely mentioned movement in the last few weeks of almost unknown purpose which has had the ability to attract many followers.

So it finally hit home. Ventura and Santa Barbara counties are hosting Occupy [City Name] rallies in the courthouse parks in both county cities and I have to drive by them to make deposits at my works banks. They [many of the protesters] are holding up signs saying their tuition is too high. From my own personal observations, many of these protesters are college age students. Do they know it's the privatized (non-government) banks that hold your loans for banks? And that you can go to an non-accredited school for like 1/100th of the cost? Are they complaining about the fee the government charges the schools to get accreditation, or the fees the [private] (non-government) universities charge for their schooling, which has nothing to do with the government... If their issue is with the schools themselves, or perhaps the teachers and their pay rates, then why protest against the government? Perhaps their beef is with the banks that hold their student loans, but student loans are traditionally much lower than standard loans, and with current interest rates... WTF are they [student protesters] protesting about anyhow??? I don't get it!

Seems like others in the crowd are/were protesting the way Congress can't seem to agree on anything in this lame-duck season.

Again, others seem to be protesting bank fees and how your money is invested.

Others seem to be protesting the way Wallstreet runs, from hedge funds, to the system as a whole.

And others seem to be protesting the government giving money to banks.

While these systems share the common thread of money, they couldn't be more separate in terms of who runs them. Just because the government regulates certain aspects of each of these institutions does not make them the owners of said institutions.

It's pretty much pandemonium from what I can gather! No clear voice, just much dissidence aimed at nothing in-particular - perhaps people angry because they are out of work? I had a nice talk with my brother-in-law today whom told me he went to a rally in Santa Barbara yesterday to support the opposition to higher taxes and tuition fees. We had a nice talk about the tuition fee part, to which he yielded that the protest against the fees didn't make much sense in the overall spirit of what he feels is "the movement" (no more government controlling privatized institutions). Is this what Occupy Wallstreet is really all about? I don't know. I hoping someone here can explain it better to me, because at this point, it honestly just seems like a bunch of wankers on a worldwide scale.

Its a grassroots movement against the corporate take over of our government, and thus the erosion of our democracy. They are protesting the fact Wall Street (and other corporations) continue to get tax breaks and bailouts while the rest of us get, well, diddly squat. I guess you could say it is a reaction to the transnationals privatizing profits and socializing losses with taxpayer dollars. They basically want economic and social justice, and an end to the corporate oligarchy that now runs our country. Unless you are somehow extremely wealthy, you should support their cause, even if it needs a more fixed direction or message.

The banks are not suffering. It is business as usual for them, raking in exorbitant profits while normal citizens struggle from paycheck to paycheck. Fox News, btw, is not left-wing, but rather is the far right, and it is no wonder you do not support the Occupy movement. Faux, er, Fox News is pretty much the vanguard for corporate kleptocracy, and is pretty much in contrast to what this movement represents.

It really comes down to this:

When you cut taxes for billionaires by 3 trillion or so over the course of a decade, Bailout Wall Street to the tune of almost a trillion, and putting 2 wars on a credit card in the name of global empire/capitalistic expansion and nation building/counter-terrorism to make oil companies and the military industrial complex richer while telling blind, patriotic 18-year old boys getting their head blown off in Afghanistan is an honorable duty for their country, not realizing they are fighting not for their country; but for enriching the cartel of banks, oil companies, weapons contract companies like BlackWater, and politicians. Not to mention outsourcing millions of jobs to China than selling their wage slave/pennies on the dollar earned, non tariff products at Wal-Mart so kids employed by them for minimum wage can sell them to try and merely pay the interest on their 50k-100k+ student loans each month after graduating (if they even graduate) that they most likely will be paying for the rest of their lives. There is now more student loan debt out there than there is on all the credit cards in the nation. Its one big ponzi-scheme system, designed to shell out wage slave after wage slave to create a caste system of serfs and/or indentured servants to fund the war and oil machine, so politicians, bankers/hedge-fund managers, and transnational corporations continue suck the blood of the poor and what is left of the middle class (not much). Rocket science it isnt. The American public is being duped, and most of them don't know it, because we are too busy watching sports, being consumers, and worrying about who Britany Spears is dating, among other mindless trivial issues; and not paying attention to politics. But I, and others like me, know better and see right through this system for what it is. I guess this rant could summarize the cause of the Occupy [city] Movement. The christian right wants to privatize every service under the sun, because anything that is socialized is money out of the elites hands.

Damn, that was probably the most anti-american/unpatriotic, Marxist post ever. And I make no apologies about it. Cause its the truth.

[Quark]

It's pretty much pandemonium from what I can gather! No clear voice, just much dissidence aimed at nothing in-particular - perhaps people angry because they are out of work? I had a nice talk with my brother-in-law today whom told me he went to a rally in Santa Barbara yesterday to support the opposition to higher taxes and tuition fees. We had a nice talk about the tuition fee part, to which he yielded that the protest against the fees didn't make much sense in the overall spirit of what he feels is "the movement" (no more government controlling privatized institutions). Is this what Occupy Wallstreet is really all about? I don't know. I hoping someone here can explain it better to me, because at this point, it honestly just seems like a bunch of wankers on a worldwide scale.

Read this:
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall...11-10?op=1

If you don't understand how our economic balance is absolutely horrible after reading that post, I don't know what to tell you. And no, I'm not touching the other thread. Kandrathe is in it.

[Zarathustra]

It's pretty much pandemonium from what I can gather! No clear voice, just much dissidence aimed at nothing in-particular - perhaps people angry because they are out of work? I had a nice talk with my brother-in-law today whom told me he went to a rally in Santa Barbara yesterday to support the opposition to higher taxes and tuition fees. We had a nice talk about the tuition fee part, to which he yielded that the protest against the fees didn't make much sense in the overall spirit of what he feels is "the movement" (no more government controlling privatized institutions). Is this what Occupy Wallstreet is really all about? I don't know. I hoping someone here can explain it better to me, because at this point, it honestly just seems like a bunch of wankers on a worldwide scale.

Read this:
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall...11-10?op=1

If you don't understand how our economic balance is absolutely horrible after reading that post, I don't know what to tell you. And no, I'm not touching the other thread. Kandrathe is in it.

Quark, I think anyone can see the problems with the economic balance. But I'm in the same boat as Taem in that, looking from outside and reading what I can in the news, the Occupy <insert here> movement seems chaotic, disorganized, and without clear goals. They are not yet unified and while some of the protesters are making very good points, there are a large number who are just "there" and have fringe goals that are unrealistic or just plain wrong.

I'm not saying everything is rainbows and sunshine. Everyone has a right to express his opinions and the Occupiers are exercising that right. I just can't really get behind them if they don't have a "demand" for their "occupation".

[Quark]

Viator has done a great summary on this in the EJ's Benefactor Bar forum. I don't have time now, but I'll try to gather up some of his posts later.

[shoju]

I wanted to have something positive to say about occupy wall street, because I am more in line with their rationale than not. But then, here in Ohio, they decided to have an "Occupy Day" at the capital buildings and state house.


On Columbus Day.

And that is when I realized that while I agree a lot with what they are saying... Idiocy runs just as rampant in this 'demonstration' as it does in what they are demonstrating against.

[FireIceTalon]

Never understood why people make a big deal about Columbus Day. Basically a day dedicated to a guy that lead a bunch of Christian Spaniards here and ended up slaughtering the Indians because they wouldnt convert to Christianity. *shrugs* So I see it as good of a day as any other to protest.

[Tal]

*shrugs* So I see it as good of a day as any other to protest.

Because the State House and other Capital Buildings were closed for the Holiday. Perhaps they could have a follow-up protest at the Banks during the middle of the night.

[shoju]

NVM Tal beat me to it.

[Ashock]

It's a bunch of cretins who think that they are entitled to free *insert anything here*, without actually working for it or earning it.

They think that to get money or more money, they need to not work or to stop working, start protesting, and convince their friends to do the same, instead of working harder or redoubling their efforts to look for gainful enployement.

Coincidentally, that is also the difference between communists and capitalists.

BTW, I am 100% sure, that many of these people if given power, would kill countless others to enrish themselves.

After all, it's been done before.

[Taem]

Its one big ponzi-scheme system, designed to shell out wage slave after wage slave to create a caste system of serfs and/or indentured servants to fund the war and oil machine, so politicians, bankers/hedge-fund managers, and transnational corporations continue suck the blood of the poor and what is left of the middle class (not much).

You do realize, don't you, that there has never been a time in America's [discovered] history where we haven't "used" a lower class of people to do our dirty work? From the native Americans, to negro slaves, to Mexican immigrants, to exporting business overseas. What your preaching is nothing new. So now the lower class wants to be elitists also with the coming of the twitter age? Well our economy was built on slaves and a lower-class, that much you will have to live with rather you like it or not. Altering that formula can and will result in catastrophic imbalance leading into Communism IMO. There must always be a lower-working class to support a higher-class. It has always been that way throughout history, and will always be that way. Everyone cannot be equal unfortunately, and forcing equality in wage pay, taxes, and other subsidiaries IS the heart and soul of Communism, and we all know how well that works out. Is that really what these Occupy Wallstreet gurus are asking for? Because the more I think about it, the more I read the posts here trying to explain what Occupy Wallstreet is all about, the more that is what it's sounding like. A ploy at equality equating to nothing more than Communism, plain and simple. Am I wrong?

EDIT: Sometimes I rant, and it all sounds good to me in the moment, but after an hour or two, I come back and read what I wrote and realize I was too brash. I apologize FireIceTalon if I came across as such. I was not trying to single you or your opinion out and I am grateful that you shared your example of the Occupy movement with me.

[Taem]

It's a bunch of cretins who think that they are entitled to free *insert anything here*, without actually working for it or earning it.

They think that to get money or more money, they need to not work or to stop working, start protesting, and convince their friends to do the same, instead of working harder or redoubling their efforts to look for gainful enployement.

Coincidentally, that is also the difference between communists and capitalists.

BTW, I am 100% sure, that many of these people if given power, would kill countless others to enrish themselves.

After all, it's been done before.

So far after doing some more research, I'm in agreement with you, however there are some valid points at the heart of the Occupy movement, mainly separating Government from all forms of the privatized industry, making The Man as transparent as possible. As Kathandrake has pointed out before, I'd even go so far as to remove them from the DMV, Healthcare, all sectors except judicial, foreign policy, and military.**

I think it is equally as important to give more power back to the states and to take it away from the Feds. Each state needs their own militia back as per the Constitution, not just a reserve corp the feds can use at their whim! Each state should be able to make their own laws, such as California's medical marijuana laws. Each state should have the power they were granted in the original Constitution of the United States where each state was viewed as a separate, yet unified entity (i.e. country).

**EDIT: I wanted to add to this. I think regulation is still a government function (such as the FDA, EPA, etc) to protect the citizens nationally. Let the industries do their thing, but give them guidelines.

[shoju]

Yes and No.

The heart of the movement started with the fact that people are infuriated that the government bailed financial institutions after the financial institutions took advantage of people, and it all imploded.

I'm not wanting something for nothing, or something for free, but I am pretty pissed that my government decided to bail out banks and what not because they screwed up. I saw those enticing home loans. I shopped for a home. When I looked at how sketchy those interest rates would be in 5 years, I backed out, walked away, and I'm working to get there on my own. Not everyone stopped to read the fine print, because the fine print painted a definitively more terrible picture than what the realtors, bankers, and finance guys were selling.

And that is only part of the mess. The bail out money has in some cases been misappropriated, and a few of the very places that got bailed out are now still floundering.

People are mad, angry, and a movement that was about the anger regarding the bailouts has attracted similar people with far reaching agendas. Its been muddied up terribly, and there is no clearly defined "goal" that will cover everyone protesting anymore.

[Taem]

In regards to the bailout, if I'm not mistaken, haven't most of the big banks repaid the feds? And having said that, if the feds didn't step in when the did and instead let the banks default, then I think we'd be much closer to a Great Depression part 2 instead of the current stagnant status quo because, well, money would loose it's value as everyone who had bank accounts would now have nothing instead of something when the banks sank. The banks had bad practices to be sure, and it sucks the feds had to step in the save them, but if they didn't.... Any theories as to what might of happened if the feds didn't step in?

[kandrathe]

...

They [many of the protesters] are holding up signs saying their tuition is too high. From my own personal observations, many of these protesters are college age students. Do they know it's the privatized (non-government) banks that hold your loans for banks?

Actually, the government has mostly taken over the student loan business (subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford). They are mostly Direct Student Loans now. Parents can get PLUS loans from the government too, and as a last resort a student might consider a private student loan.


Some older data, but the trend is still true.* Non-Federal would include state based loan programs and private loans. Stafford and PLUS are entirely the Feds directly acting as the banker. Private loans tend to be used for private programs not approved under Title IV (e.g. the Cordon Blah cooking school, or Automotive Repair Academy).

* correction: The number of private loans has fallen markedly since this chart was made. For the 07-08 year, the number of private loans was down to ~13% of the total, and I would guess with the government take over of the student loan business and the tightening of lending, that the trend has continued.

And that you can go to an non-accredited school for like 1/100th of the cost? Are they complaining about the fee the government charges the schools to get accreditation, or the fees the [private] (non-government) universities charge for their schooling, which has nothing to do with the government... If their issue is with the schools themselves, or perhaps the teachers and their pay rates, then why protest against the government?

Most schools need to be accredited in order to participate in Title IV, and state based aid programs. Without that accreditation, and/or a huge endowment, a post-secondary institution would be hard pressed to compete for students. Our average discount rate is upwards of 36%, but we are competing with some places where the discount is 45-50% depending on SAT/ACT and secondary school characteristics.

Tuition rates are directly tied to the benefits the student receives in paying for the amenities they desire, maintenance of the buildings, and the wages of the staff and faculty. Our inflation rates is about 4-5% per year, and we are a not for profit institution. In my state, the colleges and universities affiliated with the government have experienced a higher inflation rate, more like 6-8%. Namely, heating, cooling, and technology are a big concern.

Perhaps their beef is with the banks that hold their student loans, but student loans are traditionally much lower than standard loans, and with current interest rates... WTF are they [student protesters] protesting about anyhow??? I don't get it!

Many of the student protesters in my area are the same ones who started protesting in the 60's. It's cool to be socially active, and it was for me, when I was young, energized and affiliated with the peace movement at my college. Although, we didn't protest. Instead, we would hold rallies, and we'd go meet with government officials to plead our position and ask for their help in supporting peace.

Seems like others in the crowd are/were protesting the way Congress can't seem to agree on anything in this lame-duck season.

And, how is this different from the past 20 years?

Again, others seem to be protesting bank fees and how your money is invested.

There is a direct relationship to bank fees and interest rates. Banks cannot make much money lending money, so they are moving more and more into fees. Interest rates are pegged to zero by the Federal Reserve. In the BI article linked to by Quark, they mention the interest paid for excess reserves... which is a complaint I voiced some months ago. This is a new policy enacted by Bernanke, and it has the direct consequence of allowing banks to earn money off the government and not lend it to "risky" ventures. There is an unholy alliance between the government (including Congress, the Executive, and Treasury), the Federal Reserve, and the banks. This alliance hurts corporations, small businesses, and individuals.

Others seem to be protesting the way Wallstreet runs, from hedge funds, to the system as a whole.

It's complicated. They don't understand it, so it must be evil. Grab your pitchfork...

And others seem to be protesting the government giving money to banks.

Well, not really giving... TARP needs to be repaid, and the government became the insurer of last resort for FDIC, and the Federal Reserve -- via the Treasury printing money to expand reserve currency. But, here is the weird part... How is this different than what the Tea Party was protesting in 2010 -- weren't they also against TARP, and against bailouts? But, yes, they differ in that the TP also wants to trim back the size of all government largess and subsequently reduce everyones taxes.

While these systems share the common thread of money, they couldn't be more separate in terms of who runs them. Just because the government regulates certain aspects of each of these institutions does not make them the owners of said institutions.

We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore. Now, who is hateful that I can direct my anger toward? How about the evil Koch family? Yeah, they are hateful. They made a whole bunch of money speculating on oil prices being higher.

I understand being angry about specific policies and those who brought them about, but one of my "radical" friends who supports the "occupy" movement said, "Corporations are just the head of the snake." So, yup, I think it's time to gather the villagers and march on the castle. Dr. Frankenstein is up to his old tricks messing up the laws of the economy again.

[kandrathe]

It has always been that way throughout history, and will always be that way.

The one thing that is different now is in our ability to improve our lot. Social mobility is on the decline, meaning that it's increasingly harder to be successful enough to raise your standard of living, or that of your progeny. That is the American Dream denied. That leads to wage slavery, an entrenched entitlement class and hopelessness.

And no, I'm not touching the other thread. Kandrathe is in it.

Sorry to ruin your day.

[Taem]

Some older data, but the trend is still true. Non-Federal would include state based loan programs and private loans. Stafford and PLUS are entirely the Feds directly acting as the banker. Private loans tend to be used for private programs not approved under Title IV (e.g. the Cordon Blah cooking school, or Automotive Repair Academy).

I wasn't aware. Thank you for sharing that, else I might've been giving out misinformation myself. So now I understand why students are involved and their role.

Most schools need to be accredited in order to participate in Title IV, and state based aid programs.

I have always felt that each institution should do on the job training internship. Once that level of education has been completed, the trainee gets hired at the bottom level tier and can work their way up by taking paid for classes that come directly out of their paycheck. The training classes would be offered through the company and focus primarily on the role the position requires, thus training the student would cost the company nothing, and the student, having such personalized and direct instruction, could learn what they needed to know is less than a years time, perhaps even just a couple months.

It's nice to hire someone with a well rounded education, but it's sad when 50% of the information they [students] learn they will forget in a few years time anyway because it's irrelevant to their current job. Also, training cost money, and if your trainee is skittish, well that cost can add up. Honestly, what better way to train than on the job training as a non-paid internship program? Then perhaps a two, or even one year [mandatory] college for the general education portion before entering the job market. Yeah, I know it's a pipe dream, but one that could solve a lot of monetary problems for students and employers alike. But who would pay for it? Since the fed currently requires K-12 schooling, why not make it K-14? But if we are talking removing the fed from the school system altogether, then I have no idea.

I'm getting really hungry and the words are starting to get jumbled, lol. I'll post this before I go out to eat anyways because too much good stuff to not post.

There is a direct relationship to bank fees and interest rates. Banks cannot make much money lending money, so they are moving more and more into fees. Interest rates are pegged to zero by the Federal Reserve.

I never thought this was a good idea [low interest rate]. The fed trying to stir the populace into spending money, the populace trying to get loans to stir the economy, the banks saying NO because they aren't making any money on the deal because the interest rates are too low. Makes no sense! But this is a problem brought on by the Obama administration, why bring protest against the system as a whole?

So, yup, I think it's time to gather the villagers and march on the castle. Dr. Frankenstein is up to his old tricks messing up the laws of the economy again.

Are you serious or being sarcastic? If your serious, why do you support the Occupy movement in its current form and what would you like to see their effect have on the fed?

---

It has always been that way throughout history, and will always be that way.

The one thing that is different now is in our ability to improve our lot. Social mobility is on the decline, meaning that it's increasingly harder to be successful enough to raise your standard of living, or that of your progeny. That is the American Dream denied. That leads to wage slavery, an entrenched entitlement class and hopelessness.

Do you see any other way? Everyone cannot be equal! Even now, we outsource as many jobs as we can to countries where the minimum wage is less than a dollar an hour to save money! If suddenly there became a one-world government and perfect equality in minimum wage, do you have any clue how many business would either completely tank, or suddenly charge exorbitant rates on their products, products that would suddenly become only for the elite. This would cause another system of control and power no different that what we have now with the mega-rich still holding all the cards, but the majority still poor as hell, or poorer than they were before! I am in total disagreement on this. There HAS to be a lower-class for the world to move. It sucks, but it's true!

[FireIceTalon]

Its one big ponzi-scheme system, designed to shell out wage slave after wage slave to create a caste system of serfs and/or indentured servants to fund the war and oil machine, so politicians, bankers/hedge-fund managers, and transnational corporations continue suck the blood of the poor and what is left of the middle class (not much).

You do realize, don't you, that there has never been a time in America's [discovered] history where we haven't "used" a lower class of people to do our dirty work? From the native Americans, to negro slaves, to Mexican immigrants, to exporting business overseas. What your preaching is nothing new. So now the lower class wants to be elitists also with the coming of the twitter age? Well our economy was built on slaves and a lower-class, that much you will have to live with rather you like it or not. Altering that formula can and will result in catastrophic imbalance leading into Communism IMO. There must always be a lower-working class to support a higher-class. It has always been that way throughout history, and will always be that way. Everyone cannot be equal unfortunately, and forcing equality in wage pay, taxes, and other subsidiaries IS the heart and soul of Communism, and we all know how well that works out. Is that really what these Occupy Wallstreet gurus are asking for? Because the more I think about it, the more I read the posts here trying to explain what Occupy Wallstreet is all about, the more that is what it's sounding like. A ploy at equality equating to nothing more than Communism, plain and simple. Am I wrong?

EDIT: Sometimes I rant, and it all sounds good to me in the moment, but after an hour or two, I come back and read what I wrote and realize I was too brash. I apologize FireIceTalon if I came across as such. I was not trying to single you or your opinion out and I am grateful that you shared your example of the Occupy movement with me.

NP, I am the same way when it comes to politics. At heart, I am a w/o any doubt a commie, my signature probably gives that away. But I'm more Marxist in the sense that I am staunch critic of capitalism and the unnecessary inequality it produces, rather than a revolutionary calling for a communist dictatorship by the state, so I don't blindly agree with the Manifesto word for word. It is rather Marx's arbitrary concepts of class consciousness, alienation, materialism, economic determinism, and false consciousness that I am interested in. But that said, my objections to capitalism are FAR more than simple economic principles or inequality, but I won't get into that right now. Regarding the Occupy movement...

I don't get the impression that Occupy Wall Street is even asking for handouts, much less being a Marxist movement (though it can be argued they are an indirect product of some of the concepts of Marxism that I mentioned above). They are, however, extremely upset by the financial bailouts that have shown our system for what it truly is: an oligarchic corporate dictatorship that uses the capitalistic system to privatize profits and socialize losses with working class and middle class taxpayer dollars. This is called FRAUD, and if me or you did it, we'd be in jail in seconds. Yet not a single Banker or hedge fund manager has been arrested yet. Kind of gives one the impression that we have welfare for billionaires, Ayn Rand social darwinism for everyone else, you know? That is one of their primary concerns. Its one thing to have inequality, but its another thing when the top 5% of the population owns more wealth than the bottom 95% combined. We like to think we are a meritocracy, but we are not. While hard work and diligence CAN pay off, the social class you are born into, who you know, and your access to education and other important social and cultural capitals play are much larger role in determining social and economic mobility. The movement wants fairness more than pure equality. In other words, they want millionaires and billionaires to start paying their fair share in taxes and not have some sort of corporate welfare that allows any level of risk in our so-called capitalistic system. And yes, I know the capitalists will argue that what we have now is a perverted form of capitalism, but that will not wash with me. There is no such thing as "good" and "bad" capitalism, it is one or the other depending on your perspective and how you view the world. From my perspective, it can only lead to what we have now, no matter how good it starts, therefore, I reject it. Simply put, capitalism and democracy are an incompatible relationship as I see it. As one of the Rothchilds said, "give me control of a nations wealth, and I care not who makes it laws". There only needs to be a class of indentured servants from the perspective of the wealthy and powerful, because the wealthy and powerful want the slaves to do their work for them but paying them less than what their labor is worth to increase that evil p-word called profits. It is an excuse for them to justify slavery, and nothing more.

They also want political justice. Why should those who have more money to pay and contribute to campaigns have any more political clout than those of us who have to speak at the ballot box, or do as these citizens are, through protest? The Citizens United decision needs to be overturned. Money does NOT equal free speech, and corporations are NOT people. These two things have completely undermined American democracy.

---

It's a bunch of cretins who think that they are entitled to free *insert anything here*, without actually working for it or earning it.

They think that to get money or more money, they need to not work or to stop working, start protesting, and convince their friends to do the same, instead of working harder or redoubling their efforts to look for gainful enployement.

Coincidentally, that is also the difference between communists and capitalists.

BTW, I am 100% sure, that many of these people if given power, would kill countless others to enrish themselves.

After all, it's been done before.

So far after doing some more research, I'm in agreement with you, however there are some valid points at the heart of the Occupy movement, mainly separating Government from all forms of the privatized industry, making The Man as transparent as possible. As Kathandrake has pointed out before, I'd even go so far as to remove them from the DMV, Healthcare, all sectors except judicial, foreign policy, and military.**

I think it is equally as important to give more power back to the states and to take it away from the Feds. Each state needs their own militia back as per the Constitution, not just a reserve corp the feds can use at their whim! Each state should be able to make their own laws, such as California's medical marijuana laws. Each state should have the power they were granted in the original Constitution of the United States where each state was viewed as a separate, yet unified entity (i.e. country).

**EDIT: I wanted to add to this. I think regulation is still a government function (such as the FDA, EPA, etc) to protect the citizens nationally. Let the industries do their thing, but give them guidelines.

So you want us to return to the Articles of Confederation? I don't know if that is what you are implying, but I sure hope not. That would be a complete disaster. Devolution would be suicide, if that happens, you can kiss all your civil rights and liberties goodbye.

[kandrathe]

I have always felt that each institution should do on the job training internship. Once that level of education has been completed, the trainee gets hired at the bottom level tier and can work their way up by taking paid for classes that come directly out of their paycheck. The training classes would be offered through the company and focus primarily on the role the position requires, thus training the student would cost the company nothing, and the student, having such personalized and direct instruction, could learn what they needed to know is less than a years time, perhaps even just a couple months.

We don't promote vocational education much anymore, and it's relegated to what I would consider the more "blood sucking" private schools. It is hard to work full-time and take schooling part-time, so I guess I'm fine with the concept of schooling full-time, then work after schooling.

A BA/BS - 4 year, college education is often confused with a vocational training program. Ultimately the aims should be slightly different, and the BA/BS route has been over sold. There are more good paying jobs available in directed vocational studies, such as CNC programmers, manufacturing robotics, etc. These positions require less than an engineering degree, but much more than a high school diploma. In the US, the typical high school student is much more likely to attempt college, but much less likely to complete it. This results in a waste of resources, and a frustrated student who now has debt they counted on having the credential of a degree to help pay off. For many students, it's just a bad fit, and they should be steered into a vocation and training for that vocation that will be a good fit for them.

And, I would add that companies do not help by requiring a college degree for entry level work that doesn't require a college degree. It causes a high school graduate to believe that not having a college degree is a barrier to the world of work, and so prepared or not, they hurl themselves into academia and often fail.

I never thought this was a good idea [low interest rate]. The fed trying to stir the populace into spending money, the populace trying to get loans to stir the economy, the banks saying NO because they aren't making any money on the deal because the interest rates are too low. Makes no sense! But this is a problem brought on by the Obama administration, why bring protest against the system as a whole?

People will tend to do what they get incentives to do. For policy makers, its the unintended consequences that nail us every time. Every law gives incentives or disincentives for people or companies which creates an unnatural tension in the system. This can be good if you know what you are doing, but extremely bad when its done haphazardly or based purely on emotion or unfounded beliefs. Ethanol subsidies sounded good for the environment, until you dig into who gets them, the lack of efficiency of the fuel produced, and ultimately what they are doing bad to the environment.

I've heard bankers call for a floor to the Fed rate of 1%. It leaves just a little room for loan profit, and would be in a better position to curb inflation once it inevitably rears its ugly head again. The rate paid for excess reserves should be well below the fed rate if not zero.

Are you serious or being sarcastic?

No, I'm not serious about storming the castle. I think we all need to have serious discussions about what we think is good for the economy, and I think we need to start removing the barriers that the lower and middle classes face in upward mobility. But, to do that, we need to get the government to face up to some of the statistics that Quark's BI article posted.

The unemployment rate is not just the rate of those actively seeking a job, it includes all the people who would work if given the chance to work.

The CPI is not a good predictor of the inflation that we are experiencing. Yes, I can buy a Chinese toaster for a 1$, but my health care, tuition, and fresh produce are too expensive.

The unprecedented increase in productivity since the 1970's has left more and more workers unemployed, or under-employed. And, it has consolidated more and more wealth into the pockets of fewer and fewer people, relegating the bulk of society to entitlement programs. How can we create a new vision for our society where more people are allowed to participate, and are expected to shoulder more of a burden and reap more of a reward? What corporations are really saying to workers is... we don't need you (at least not 20% of you). Most of the companies I've worked with in the past 10 years have used logistics, computers and the Internet to move quite a number of skilled and professional jobs to less expensive workers in other countries.

Do you see any other way? Everyone cannot be equal!

Yes, and no. Everyone is not equal in abilities, and so even if we leveled the playing field, within months it'd be uneven again. We can create a more equal rulebook. I think where Obama and Congress blew it, was in failing to communicate on what they were doing for the average person. The financial and corporate bailouts were spectacularly over blown, and probably important in slowing down the crash. My reaction at the time was that I argued against them, saying that failures should fail, but Jester partially convinced me they may have been a little necessary to avoid a worldwide economic collapse. I'm still a little half-heartedly against them for principles sake.

Even now, we outsource as many jobs as we can to countries where the minimum wage is less than a dollar an hour to save money!

That was an inevitability after WWII, that eventually the rest of the world would recover and begin to compete with the US for the production of everything. Some day, wages and prices will equalize around the globe. Some day, if given the same set of laws to abide by (environmental, labor, safety, etc.) things would equalize around the globe. Until then, the US will need to compromise some to maintain whatever it can of it's dwindling market share. But, the heydays of being the only undamaged production economy are over.

If suddenly there became a one-world government ...

Yes, but, if the Euro crisis has taught us anything... Unity is not that easy. It is in fact, much easier to break apart into smaller and smaller factions.

There HAS to be a lower-class for the world to move. It sucks, but it's true!

Actually, Puerto Rico is a good example of a mini-nation state that has traditionally maintained mostly a middle and upper middle class. They have an unusually high GDP per capita, compared with other similar nation-states. I don't really believe in the class system... I used to be unskilled, then I went to school, and became a professional, then I went into management and I became wealthy, now I've decided get my life back, and so I'm in academia giving back a little to humanity, but I don't make as much so I'm back to professional, but I've got a life... so I'm happier.

You may have unskilled, skilled, professional, and wealthy, all in the same family. Consider an unskilled high school graduate who runs a lawn service, living with a highly paid union machinist, and his wife the dentist, and they built their home on the property bought from and adjacent to grandpa and grandma who are retired professionals who made good investments for 40 years.

[FireIceTalon]

It's a bunch of cretins who think that they are entitled to free *insert anything here*, without actually working for it or earning it.

They think that to get money or more money, they need to not work or to stop working, start protesting, and convince their friends to do the same, instead of working harder or redoubling their efforts to look for gainful enployement.

Coincidentally, that is also the difference between communists and capitalists.

BTW, I am 100% sure, that many of these people if given power, would kill countless others to enrish themselves.

After all, it's been done before.

All straw-man arguments and assumptions, which I will now take pleasure in shutting down.

You imply that poor people do not work hard, and it is this very shallow mentality that is ruining this country. I'm middle class, and even I can say poor and working class people probably work harder than anyone else. Many of them work 2-3 jobs and night shifts to support their families, or put themselves through college if they have the resources to do it. And that of course is assuming one can find a job, which outside of Wal-Mart and McDonalds, isn't the easiest thing to do at the moment considering the current economy.

My mom is also middle class, but is a commie at heart, and is one of the hardest working people I know. She has worked as an escrow officer for 25 years+ now, usually 10-12 hours per day and sometimes weekends. She hasn't had a raise in 6 years, has taken a pay cut due to the economic situation of the country right now, and while she isnt poor, she certainly does not have the money to take any substantial vacations that would allow her to travel. Well, she could put it on a credit card, but who wants to be a debt slave to the banks, especially when they are trying to retire? So according to your warped philosophy, she just needs to work harder than she does and things will get better. Bullshit. And ill be damned if I let you sit here and label people as having merit or not based on ASSUMPTIONS of their political views that you disagree with. You have been spoon fed by corporate media and social discourse to shun the less fortunate, or Horatio-Alger was your childhood hero, or maybe you are just a spoiled rich boy/trust fund baby. I don't know. But your way of thinking is absolutely ridiculous, and I could just as easily say that every commie is a harder worker than any capitalist, but that too, would be a straw man argument. So, your post, to put it nicely, is full of shit. Good game, thanks for playing. You lose, better luck next time.

And you are not 100% certain of anything, but your own indoctrinated assumptions. You can put this in your pipe, and smoke it.

Sorry for the rant guys, but this kid struck a nerve with me, and had to be put in his place, lol.