Luxury Homes of the 99%

[tkhayes 126]

yea, well if you ask our Gov Rick Scott, he would say "What we you thinking? Becoming a molecular Biologist?"

http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/educationblog/2011/10/rick_scott_says_no_to_anthropo.html

Sadly, everyone has a place in society (I think) and yet so many are focused on only one thing - how much money it makes.

Humanity is about humans. Last time I checked the Constitution and the country was about people "We the People...."

Yet so many on the right wing cannot conceive that even 'normal' working people with iphones and macs CAN actually be pissed off at the system. Am I supposed to be grateful or something if I see injustice?

It's kind like like women should be thankful that they ONLY take away abortion rights and thank god they got the vote.....

ridiculous.

There are a lot of people in this country that are pissed off and there are a lot of people in this country that want change. And they are not all liberals....

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

There are a lot of people in this country that are pissed off and there are a lot of people in this country that want change. And they are not all liberals....

So how will this "occupation" help achieve change?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

There are a lot of people in this country that are pissed off and there are a lot of people in this country that want change. And they are not all liberals....

So how will this "occupation" help achieve change?

By destroying business and guaranteeing that $20/hour 'living wage' whether they're working or not?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Sadly, everyone has a place in society (I think) and yet so many are focused on only one thing - how much money it makes.

Right. This is what Occupy wall Street is all about. It focuses on Wall Street and how much money it makes. Then it apparently goes further – by wanting Wall Street’s money! I can’t think of a cartel that was more focused on greed – it’s own.

Quote

Yet so many on the right wing cannot conceive that even 'normal' working people with iphones and macs CAN actually be pissed off at the system.

Exactly. I can’t afford a $5k Mac. I don’t’ even have cable television. I don’t have a working microwave. I don’t have the toys, the gadgets. I don’t have a Play Station, don’t have the time or resources to video game. Neither does my wife. And we sure as hell don’t have the time to take our expensive gadgets and toys out for some protest.

Yeah, she and I both bitch about the system and a society that applauds these souls while we’re in the position of after taxes and student loan payments being unable to save up the scratch for a down payment on a house. Yeah, we’re pissed off that we’re working and they are bitching. Yeah, we’re pissed off that we’re being asked to do more for others when doing more for others means being able to do far less for ourselves.

So fuck you to everyone out there who thinks that we have it good from our rented house and that we should do more.

Quote

Am I supposed to be grateful or something if I see injustice?

No. The difference is that injustice is often manufactured. What’s the justice that I haven’t been able to progress with a private pilot’s license because I had the tax bill come due. I can’t just hop in any old plane and fly off. Too many of us see injustice pointed at us. We have been trying to build the American dream from fucking scratch. Think my wife enjoyed working 90 hours a week in residency for $35k per year? And there are people out there on a street getting regard for doing NOTHING except hang out and disrupt people and cover up thefts and sexual assaults.

Quote

It's kind like like women should be thankful that they ONLY take away abortion rights and thank god they got the vote.....

Or more than that, it’s lik people saying, “Why the hell did I put off a family, get an education, and not even make more than a few grand per year until I was thirty just to be told that I should be giving more?” I guess I should just be glad I am supposed to pay more in taxes because, gosh darn it, I took the opportunity to make something of myself. I’m such a fucking dumb ass for thinking that I could work my ass off for myself and my family when I should be doing it for others.

Quote

There are a lot of people in this country that are pissed off and there are a lot of people in this country that want change. And they are not all liberals....

Yes. I am mad as hell and I want stuff changed. But seeing as I have to support myself and my family, I can’t afford to fly out to New York and join in the festivities.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

There are a lot of people in this country that are pissed off and there are a lot of people in this country that want change. And they are not all liberals....

So how will this "occupation" help achieve change?

By destroying business and guaranteeing that $20/hour 'living wage' whether they're working or not?

When your business is bitching, you drum up more bitching by creating more to bitch about. Hence, if you are a professional at bitching about unemployment, wouldn't you want to increase it? if you make your living off of people being in poverty, wouldn't YOU want to see poverty increasing?

Well, I'll be darned.....

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[tkhayes 126]

Quote

So how will this "occupation" help achieve change?

you're right, large numbers of people wanting change has never worked in the past.... what was i thinking....?

MLK

Women's Sufferage

slavery

Civil War

Libya

need i go on....

well need I?

[tkhayes 126]

hey mneal whatever - your post got deleted so fast i could not respond to it in time....
wonder why?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

hey mneal whatever - your post got deleted so fast i could not respond to it in time....
wonder why?

So I could verify the link...

MLK...the guy that the Portland OWS drew a swastika on.

Nice folks you're planning on hanging out with.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[tkhayes 126]

my reply was:

"It's about the people, not the one."

you focus on one, consistently, all the time

one example out of millions

and yet the article says nothing about who what when where how or why, and given the source, it must be TOTALLY credible....

again, large numbers of people making a difference.

MLK
women's suffrage,
Civil war
slavery
Libya

should I go on?

well should I?

go ahead, find another tidbit about MLK

go ahead, make my day if that is all you have.....

[lawrocket 3]

MLK - worked for change and equality under the law

Women's Sufferage - worked for change and equality under the law

slavery - fought, killed and died for change

Civil War - fought, killed and died for change

Libya - fought, killed and died for change

OWS - got around, sat on their asses or otherwise stood, stole, bitched, whined and have accomplished no change because they don't know what change they want to see.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

my reply was:

"It's about the people, not the one."

Like the *people* that drew the swastika?

Quote

go ahead, make my day if that is all you have.....

Hey, you're the one wanting to hang out with the swastika crowd, evidently...have fun with that.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 2,400]

>MLK...the guy that the Portland OWS drew a swastika on.

I know! I mean, it's fine for the Tea Party to draw swastikas on Obama. But on MLK? That's completely unacceptable.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>MLK...the guy that the Portland OWS drew a swastika on.

I know! I mean, it's fine for the Tea Party to draw swastikas on Obama. But on MLK? That's completely unacceptable.

LaRouche supporters != Tea Party.

In fact, you can find pics of them at the OWS rallies, as well.

Nice try, though.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[tkhayes 126]

Quote

OWS - got around, sat on their asses or otherwise stood, stole, bitched, whined and have accomplished no change because they don't know what change they want to see.

IYO

[tkhayes 126]

Quote

Like the *people* that drew the swastika?

It's about the people, not the one.

and certainly not about the corporations.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

MLK - worked for change and equality under the law

Women's Sufferage - worked for change and equality under the law

slavery - fought, killed and died for change

Civil War - fought, killed and died for change

Libya - fought, killed and died for change

OWS - got around, sat on their asses or otherwise stood, stole, bitched, whined and have accomplished no change because they don't know what change they want to see.

So when we go back to old school conservative wet dream heaven..... are you good with being just another of the serfs.. since you certainly do not fit in with the lords of the manor?

Of course we still have Mikee with the funny multi pointed hat entertaining everyone.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

So how will this "occupation" help achieve change?

you're right, large numbers of people wanting change has never worked in the past.... what was i thinking....?

MLK
Women's Sufferage
slavery
Civil War
Libya

need i go on....

well need I?

Yes - I asked how this will achieve change when they can't even articulate what it is they are seeking. "Protesting corporate greed" isn't an objective.

MLK and the blacks fought for equal rights. Clear objective - real voting rights, equal access to buses, restaurants, schools, etc.

The women's suffrage movement fought and earned their right to vote. Again, obvious and achievable goal.

Not sure what "slavery" refers to. Civil War was about much more than that, but if you want to simplify it that way, again it is a measurable objective of ending slavery in America.

Libya - people fought against a 40 year regime. Don't believe that is the case here - Obama was elected for the same reasons, no?

So again let me ask you - what are they occupying my parks for, and how will they achieve it? I can tell you with certainty that it's nearly impossible to achieve an unknown goal. If it's really them representing the 99%, who is going to notice their plight and do something about it? The 1% they blame? God?

The only intelligent tactic I've seen so far is the efforts to get people to move their bank accounts. This is a real action with real results. But aside from that, it remains a pointless exercise for people who might benefit more from bettering themselves rather than smoking dope in the park. There are jobs out there, but the recruiters are not going to be heading to the warzones to find people to give them to.

[tkhayes 126]

Google "Occupy Goals"

I found dozens of coherent articles, interviews, op-ed pieces, and blogs.

Protecting social security, more banking regulations, leveling the playing field for salaries (CEO vs worker), getting corporations out of politics, bankers to go to jail for fraud for the meltdown, ending the wars, more money for education, less for wars,

It was pretty easy actually. They might be all over the place, but perhaps that is because the country has a lot of problems that are transpiring all the way down to the lowest working man. But the bottom line is that the fat cats on Wall st are NOT looking after the people and they are (seemingly) getting all the breaks. Define it any way you want, but it is a problem and that is why they are out there.

Free ride? If you think that is all it is about, then you have turned a blind eye to the real stories out there and focused only on a narrow few, which is what most people do (even me) when they get into a politicla debate.

Now I have to go fire up an airplane for a early early cessna series of loads. That would be me, hard working American, going out to bust my ass to make a dollar, just like I am supposed to do so I can get a paycheck tomorrow, just like I am supposed to do, and I own an iphone and I own a mac, and I drive a corolla, and I am not a hippie, but I am most definitely a liberal, and I fully support the Occupy movement.

The corporations are NOT looking out for your best interests. They never were. giving them tax breaks in hopes of getting jobs out of it is a myth. And within the corporations, the executives are NOT looking out for the best interests of the corporation either, they are lining their pockets with golden parachutes. But it is the American way and everyone seems to think that is OK.

The best economic eras that we had: The rich were taxed heavily. Corporations were regulated, unions were strong and tariffs protected our manufacturing base and we had a strong middle class that oddly enough paid the large majority of taxes to the government.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Google "Occupy Goals"

I found dozens of coherent articles, interviews, op-ed pieces, and blogs.

Protecting social security, more banking regulations, leveling the playing field for salaries (CEO vs worker), getting corporations out of politics, bankers to go to jail for fraud for the meltdown, ending the wars, more money for education, less for wars,

It was pretty easy actually. They might be all over the place, but perhaps that is because the country has a lot of problems that are transpiring all the way down to the lowest working man. But the bottom line is that the fat cats on Wall st are NOT looking after the people and they are (seemingly) getting all the breaks. Define it any way you want, but it is a problem and that is why they are out there.

You still haven't identified a specific problem with a solution. You seem to be saying "fix bad stuff, there's lots of it." That's an meaningful as being for world peace. And since the design of OWS = no one in charge, there's no real way to further a specific platform. I see talk now about Labor becoming a more formal lead, but that does speak again to the problem of the people not wanting anyone in charge. Meanwhile, the chaos element is growing - the ones that just want to cause shit. Oakland will almost certainly evict them again soon because of the violence concerns.

As for your specific examples
1- SS isn't in danger. It would be safer if we weren't cutting the payroll tax right now, and if that becomes a common populist move, we would be better off with the private accounts
2- no # of banking regulations will prevent a bubble from bursting. How well did the Enron era SOX regs protect us this time?
3- CEOs will always be paid more than workers. They're a scarce commodity, like left hand pitchers.
4- corporations and unions and groups like AARP or the NRA have every right to be in politics.
5- no one has yet to identify criminal acts by bankers. Losing money is not a felony. Nor is being wrong.
6- we do seem to be ending the Iraqi war finally. But yes, this has been a bipartisan disaster. We could have left Iraq 7 years ago.
7- more money for ______. We are spending a trillion 4 in red ink each year. Personally, I think if we decide we need to spend to prop up the economy, real infrastructure is worth the red ink. But that means capital improvements, not money for teacher salaries, or any other recurring expenses.

Other suggestions out there
1- cancel all underwater mortgage debt. Who pays for this? The tax payers? Those who funded the mortgages? What will this mean for future lending? Like many of the proposals, it shows no long term thinking.
2- tax the rich. Possible, but vague. Also doesn't produce money for the various wants when our deficit is so bad.

[tkhayes 126]

Quote

You still haven't identified a specific problem with a solution.

You never asked me for that - you originally asked :

Quote

So how will this "occupation" help achieve change?

and I answered it.

Yes there is no one 'in charge' and perhaps the movement is not well defined. Yet.

The examples I gave were examples throughout history that also had no one in charge and perhaps no clear goals in the beginning.

There are pissed off people, and if you poo-poo the issues by saying something like "well if you cannot define specifically and exactly what the one issue is that we could possibly address and then represent that with a clear leader...." then you are just being a politician yourself and ignoring the trees because you can only see a forest.

As for your specific issues:

1- SS isn't in danger. It would be safer if we weren't cutting the payroll tax right now, and if that becomes a common populist move, we would be better off with the private accounts No it's not in danger per se, but we might get to a point where we raise taxes to pay for wars while we cut SS benefits and we are still borrowing hugely to pay for everything. So SS and EVERYTHING is actually in danger unless we get the house in order

2- no # of banking regulations will prevent a bubble from bursting. How well did the Enron era SOX regs protect us this time? Wrong and only your opinion. Regulations used to prevent the types of worthless securities that were being sold and repackaged, and a more powerful overseeing agency might have realized that and possibly whistle-blown that these things were worthless and that the banks were also buying the insurance for when they went bust. Example, Canada - no bust to speak of - heavy regulations.

3- CEOs will always be paid more than workers. They're a scarce commodity, like left hand pitchers. Yes they will, but their pay is accelerating while everyone else's is remaining flat. that pisses people off and whether it is right or wrong is only a matter of opinion. CEO's get bonuses for moving jobs overseas and firing people. that is wrong IMO

4- corporations and unions and groups like AARP or the NRA have every right to be in politics. AARP and NRA are not unions. And yes, under the current laws, they do have a right to be in politics. I am suggested that the law be changed to prevent that. Completely, totally and unequivocally. And so is OWS

5- no one has yet to identify criminal acts by bankers. Losing money is not a felony. Nor is being wrong. IYO again. Lots of allegations have been made, a few investigations here and there, but a wonderful opportunity to write a few new laws to make sure they fucking well go to jail next time. When you lose your life's savings to an investment bank and the CEO walks away with hundreds of millions in salary, you probably want some fucker to hang for that. sounds reasonable to me.

6- we do seem to be ending the Iraqi war finally. But yes, this has been a bipartisan disaster. We could have left Iraq 7 years ago. agreed, and now we are telling everyone we need to continue to fund the war machine to save jobs.....really? get your fucking head screwed on right.

7- more money for ______. We are spending a trillion 4 in red ink each year. Personally, I think if we decide we need to spend to prop up the economy, real infrastructure is worth the red ink. But that means capital improvements, not money for teacher salaries, or any other recurring expenses.
agree to a point, but we have a big country and it costs money to run. Everyone expects the government to run at 115% efficiency and every dime wasted is a dime stolen from the taxpayer. It's not actually reality. It costs money to run a country. figure out what you want, put the programs in place, tax the citizens to pay for it. simple. Tax bills should have line items for what you are paying for - we'd never fight another war again and we'd probably see some very large changes in education and healthcare/welfare too.
And I consider education to be "infrastructure" but all you and others talk about is teachers salaries like that is the only part of the cost. We need education. Lots of it, and cheap.

your other "suggestions":

1- cancel all underwater mortgage debt. Who pays for this? The tax payers? Those who funded the mortgages? What will this mean for future lending? Like many of the proposals, it shows no long term thinking. whether you do or don't, these losses pretty much always filter down to the public anyway. some money on a mortgage is better than no money, or at least you would think the banks would see it that way. My neighbor is foreclosed. They have not paid a dime in mortgage for 2 years, so they now have cash to buy another place outright. On the way out, they sold everything including the kitchen cabinets and the AC system and they are rolling up 600' of chain-link fence. The bank will lose the entire amount of the mortgage because the house will eventually be bulldozed. They would be better off to find a way to keep the house and the payments coming in rather than end up with a condemned property that is worthless. Not is every case, but in lots of them.

2- tax the rich. Possible, but vague. Also doesn't produce money for the various wants when our deficit is so bad. Not vague at all. If 1% have 95% of the wealth, there is a huge imbalance and their taxes would help to reduce the deficit and provide operating money and they would also still be extremely rich. Plus it would be a popular political move and would get almost any leader elected by an overwhelming majority. But it will not happen because the campaigns are funded by those wealthy people. Hence why I stated in my original and earlier posts:

Large numbers of people can and will make a difference

And eventually if the gov't does not listen and act, we will have a revolution event.

My guess is a Republican majority for the next 8 years. Complete control of the country by the right wing. All the ideological policies that the right wants will be implemented to some degree and the situation with jobs will worsen, the economy will not improve and the public distaste and resentment will heighten even further.

Republicans will actually be the ones to then implement universal healthcare and sweeping sociological changes (education, taxes) else they will be annihilated in the next election after that. And I am assuming that they will see that coming, 'cause I don't think they are that stupid, but they are currently on an ideological 'binge'

It happened in Canada 25 years ago. The PC govt was so blind to the people after being so fucking arrogant and wrong for so many years that they were wiped out in one election. They are back in now, but not before making sweeping internal changes to their own mandates.

Of course Canada ain't perfect either, politicians everywhere are assholes, liars and answer only to a few. That is why we have revolutions every few hundred years.

here endeth the lesson.

[normiss 622]

Quote

Yes there is no one 'in charge' and perhaps the movement is not well defined. Yet.

Few more deaths, couple of rapes here and there, some more drug arrests....it should be pretty well defined now.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

- no one has yet to identify criminal acts by bankers. Losing money is not a felony. Nor is being wrong. IYO again. Lots of allegations have been made, a few investigations here and there, but a wonderful opportunity to write a few new laws to make sure they fucking well go to jail next time. When you lose your life's savings to an investment bank and the CEO walks away with hundreds of millions in salary, you probably want some fucker to hang for that. sounds reasonable to me.

Several banks have been fined by the SEC for fraudulent actions related to the securities they peddled.

Even conservative guru Charlie Krauthammer stated he was in favor of a few hangings of bank execs.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

here endeth the lesson.

more like the sermon. Lots of wrong stuff. Tonight I'll try to respond, but too much to write to do now.

[Channman 2]

Quote

Quote

There are a lot of people in this country that are pissed off and there are a lot of people in this country that want change. And they are not all liberals....

So how will this "occupation" help achieve change?

How about these Asshats Occupy a Job.

[weekender 0]

>2- no # of banking regulations will prevent a bubble from bursting. How well did the Enron era SOX regs protect us this time? Wrong and only your opinion. Regulations used to prevent the types of worthless securities that were being sold and repackaged, and a more powerful overseeing agency might have realized that and possibly whistle-blown that these things were worthless and that the banks were also buying the insurance for when they went bust. Example, Canada - no bust to speak of - heavy regulations.

what regulations use to prevent these types of securities? when were these derivatives ever regulated? when were they deregulated? I'll give you a hint, the answers are none, never, never.

derivatives are not regulated like other securities because they trade on contracts. in other words, each one is unique. there is no organization big enough to regulate all the contracts. they trade in an unregulated OTC market. by definition, they are unregulated. always have been and always will be.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante