The Public is Revolting.
It's about time.
Change is finally here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Not ugly - Revolting! America fights back against extremists and corporate tyranny. Also, some light hearted commentary from your basic average dude.
94 comments:
It's about time...no kidding.
Lisa
Yes! The final nail in the coffin for any hope of an Obama re-election.
I love it!
Shades of Chicago '68.
"Those who do not learn from history...."
This is the tsunami wave I was talking about. Took a while to get it rolling but it's headed in now.
If hubby was a citizen, we'd be marching in the occupy Indy demonstration this weekend. But an arrest could jeopardize his green card status and citizenship next spring, so we won't be attending. We'll be there in spirit.
Here's my take on this. This is exactly what Obama called us to do in '08 and Andre, you don't see that because of your blind faith in whatever the conservative 'network' (media, blogs, etc) tell you to think.
What part of "Yes We Can" do you not understand? It took 3 yrs after the collapse of wall street, but the "We" has awoken realizing that unless we organize and march, nothing will change. None of wall street crooks will go to jail until we force the gov't to defend the laws already there to protect the citizens. Sadly.
Actually, I believe this awakening started when the GOP decided to declare war on the teachers, firefighters, government workers, women, and SS recipients last January. The Arab spring inspired the American autumn.
The GOP took over the House 10 months ago and have had their (job creator) tax cuts for nearly 10 yrs. Where are the jobs, Mr. Boehner? Oh wait, that's right, they don't care about the poor or jobless, they only call it 'class-war' when we defend ourselves.
Lisa
During these protests I think the Tea Party folks are going to regret cutting pay and pensions for police and fire fighters. Who's side do you think they will be on?
I did some brief reading on Chicago 68. Those protests occurred because the Democrats were divided - much the way the GOP is divided now. But that's not what is happening this year. Democrats are very much united in this fight against corporate greed. This is going to be huge!
I also think banks starting to charge fees just to have a debit card (whether you use them or not) to withdraw money from your own bank account has been the last straw for some - which i am one.
I think it's time all of these wealthy bankers and corporate execs to adjust their salary expectations as most of us workers have had to do and take a reduction in pay rather than mark up prices for consumers. It pisses me off when they find an excuse to charge fees for bullshit services just to keep their overpriced salaries.
Indeed! Talk about the straw that broke the camel's back!
"bullshit services"?
Do you really think that the convenience of ATM banking is a "bullshit" service?
Try not using your ATM card for a few weeks, and so how convenient that is.
In fact,it is an amazingly convenient service, but we are all just so spoiled by all these modern life accessories, and so used to just having instant easy access to them, that we completely take them for granted.
The reality is that these services are just that: "services" which other people provide to us. We have no inherent natural right to them. If we want them, we have to pay for them.
If you are going to be angry at anyone right now about the new $5 BofA ATM charge, be angry at the idiot Democrat politicians who made this happen. That's where all of this recent "bullshit" is originating from:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/279198/why-your-bank-charging-more-fees-john-berlau
Charging me to NOT use my debit card is a bullshit service!
Andre - the reason for these new fees is simple - and Thohea already pointed it out. President Obama and the Democrats put in legislation to protect consumers and Banks are retaliating because they won't give up their giant salaries. GREED. Plain and simple.
Let's try to understand. Banks have used technology to make it difficult - or in some cases impossible, to use cash for purchases. Then they charge for this amazing "Service" by allowing us to use their debit cards for these transactions.
I think service is the wrong word. A better word would be extortion.
I've had a credit union account for over 10 yrs. With direct deposit of payroll, no fees what so ever. I will not open an account with Chase or BOA no matter how many pre-approvals or give aways they offer me. I won't do it!
I see the protestors number more than 15k. Guess it's getting scary for those poor bankers. Criminals!
Lisa
Same here Lisa - been a credit union member for over 15 years. Presumably they manage to make a profit without all the added fees.
Thohea, I wasn't aware that some were being charged for NOT using their debit cards. That sounds pretty sucky. Who does that?.
***
Dennis, where do you get this notion that banks are somehow obligated to provide free service to you? (For that matter, where do the Dems get that idea?). I thought slavery was abolished in this country in the middle of the 19th century? What free service are you providing to them? Are you giving up some hours of sleep to go wash their lobby floors at night for no charge? Why not? Greed?
What the Democrats did was bend to the wishes of one group of big corporate donors (retailers) against the wishes of another group of big corporate donors (banks). In the process they have screwed around with the marketplace, and as usual when that happens, it is the customer who ends up with the short end of the stick.
***
Only 15,000? Oh come on, you've got to do better than that if you want to completely alienate the Independents from voting Democrat next year!
I understand why your hubby can't risk a run-in with the law, but what about you, Lisa? There's nothing preventing you from putting your body where your mouth is. I'm sure your comrades will be much comforted by your "spirit" while they are choking down mouthfuls of pepper spray out on the front lines. Stand up and be counted! To the barricades!
Heck, when I was a Leftie I was battling State Troopers at the gates of the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant in New Hampshire(still have the chipped tooth to prove it!) at 17 years old, and had multiple arrests blockading the Livernmore National Labs (nuclear weapon design center)in California,later went to jail with Daniel Ellsberg and Cecil Williams.
Yeah, maybe we WERE nut-jobs, but at least we had the courage of our convictions (as misguided as they were)...I guess they just don't make Leftwing whackos like they used to!
Catching up on this whole Occupy Wall Street thing.
I honestly hadn't noticed it until today (these kind of high fashion mob street actions by middle class "Trustafarians" are so common in San Francisco, that they soon fade into the general background noise, like the honking of car horns, and the sound of firetruck sirens in the near distance...just one more slice of mod-urban ho hum).
Best analysis I've read so far:
"If you honestly think the banks are making too much money, then you should buy some bank shares. They are freely available in the open market.
And if you think all these profits are immoral, then get your friends together. Buy up lots of shares. Collect all these obscene dividends, and then: give the money to the poor and unemployed.
No, I'm not kidding. The poor are unlikely to refuse. I have the honour to live among them...and I know them. They are not shy. They will take your money. Indeed, if you get to know them yourself, you will find that they are as human as bankers, and as greedy. Just not very successful."
Read the whole column (if you've got the time, of course):
http://davidwarrenonline.com/
"....I guess they just don't make Leftwing whackos like they used to!"
Correct - all the wackos have moved to the Tea Party. Like you Andre.
As for the rest of your comments - on both of these recent posts, I'll let the readers decide how much sense it makes. I can't find any sense in it at all. You live in a fantasy world where greed doesn't exist - or worse - is accepted and celebrated. No thank you - I'll stay on the side of sharing and compassion.
I stand with the 99%. Keith Olberman read their purpose last night and it was brilliant.
I can't go alone to the march! My hubby is my life partner and there is no one else that knows me or my heart more than him. If he can't go, then I have to stay with him.
Gotta run. I am transferring my IRA today. Trying to salvage what's left of it anyway.
Cheers.
Lisa
Compare the seriousness, dignity, and just plain good manners of last years Tea Party rallies, with the frothingingly hateful and incomprehensible antics of these unwashed Leftist Tea party wannabe's , and I think you will have a hell of a time seriously trying to make the case to anyone that the wackos are anywhere else but out on Wall Street right now.
***
“We are the 99%,” the signs read. Not really — they are a thousand people in a public park. The 99% are swarming around them, getting on with their lives... even as Leftist protests go, this is a damp squib, the importance of which has been dramatically overstated because of its famous location and the ubiquity of media outlets looking for a narrative. Far from being the Lexington of the Left’s revolution, Zuccotti Park has become the stage for something quite different: It is the first posthumous Grateful Dead concert.."
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/279373/what-i-saw-revolution-charles-c-w-cooke
Text of the 99%ers.
“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.
Continued
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.
They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.
They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give executives exorbitant bonuses.
They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in workplaces based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender
identity, and sexual orientation.
They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.
They have profited off the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless animals, and actively hide these practices.
They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.
They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is, itself, a human right.
They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut worker’s health care and pay.
They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people with none of the culpability or responsibility.
They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams, but look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health
insurance.
They have sold our privacy as a commodity.
They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press.
They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products, endangering lives in pursuit of profit.
They determine economic policy despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.
They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them.
They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.
They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives, or provide relief in order to protect
investments that have
already turned a substantial profit.
They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit.
They purposefully kept people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.
They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners, even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt.
They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad.
They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas.
They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts.
To the people of the world,
We, the New York City general assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert your power.
Exercise your right to peaceably assemble, occupy public space, create a process to address the problems we face, and
generate solutions accessible to everyone.
To all communities that take action and form groups in the spirit of direct democracy, we offer support, documentation, and
all of the resources at our disposal.
Join us and make your voices heard.
Lisa:
"None of wall street crooks will go to jail until we force the gov't to defend the laws already there..."
Andre:
One thing that's really interesting, and yet so far as I can see, is going almost completely uncommented upon, are all the areas of substantial agreement between the Tea Party and the Occupy Wallstreet folk.
Two weeks ago on the Ricochet Podcast, Rob Long went off an a beautiful rant about how screwed up it is that so many of the "crooks" who caused the recent financial meltdown paid no price personally. He says they should be "selling apples on the street" now.
Check it out. You might be surprised to find out how much you agree with him. He begins to go off at about the 1:01:48 mark:
http://ricochet.com/ricochet-podcast/Barbour-Barone-and-Missoni
(Unfortunately, the Tea Party is composed of mostly reasonable people, with a few crazies, and the Occupy Wall Street is composed of mostly crazies, with a few reasonable folk).
I'm confused Andre - I thought you said this was all just the free market working as it should?
I have an opinion and the 'We are the 99%' say everything that seems to be Anti-Tea Party. For example, age, race and sexual discrimination is mentioned which is NOT what the Tea Party stands for. They are the white racist club. Gay rights? Women's rights? Over 50 hiring? Forgetaboutit! They are Power-to-the-Corporations: Let them Eat Cake crowd. And that's what is wrong with this country.
Did you see there is a judicial clause that may overturn Citizen's United? Check out KO's Current TV Page.
Cheers,
Lisa
P.s. Back to the interwebs to spread my leftist hippy agenda. :-)
"I'm confused Andre"
Yes, I know.
That much, at least, is often painfully obvious.
hardy har har Andre - you are such a kidder. My only source of confusion is you.
President Obama was asked today why none of the Wall Street players were put on trial for crashing the economy. He replied that most of them technically didn't do anything illegal. Yet somehow they managed to throw the entire country into a depression. If the Bush Admin hadn't reversed previous regulation would they then actually have done something illegal? Is that the free market working as it should? Are questionable things like derivatives (whatever those are) a normal part of the market?
Greed is real and an ugly and unfair part of the market. There must be controls to protect the consumer and the market as a whole.
Meanwhile the Tea Party wants less regulation. Go figure.
I don't necessarily want any of them to go to jail (wouldn't break my heart though if some of them did...let's start with Barney Frank).
I agree with what Rob Long said in that Richochet podcast that I linked above: I just want them to have lost all (or most) of their money, without having been bailed out by the tax payers.
" Is that the free market working as it should?"
NO! That's the whole point! Don't forget (or ignore) that the Tea Party movement was born out of grass roots anger at the Wall Street and Home Mortgage bailouts.
"Greed is real and an ugly and unfair part of the market. There must be controls to protect the consumer and the market as a whole."
That's right, and as Rob Long said, the best control is the fear that if you make a stupid (and/or greedy) business decision and fall flat on your face, you loose everything. What happened in recent years is that we so screwed up the system that we removed any fear of failure (by federal guarantees) that we actually made it a RATIONAL decision for these people to behave recklessly, because we so rigged the system that they had no down side to their foolish (and/or greedy) decision making.
Listen to the Rob Long piece (make the time!).
That link is an hour and 15 min. long! I don't even have 5 extra minutes in my day let alone an hour to listen to backward conservative BS. Sheesh!
I didn't ask you to listen to the whole thing, you knuckle head!
I said that the part I'm talking about begins around the 1:01:48 mark, and it only last for probably about 15 minutes (max).
You see, this is why you are so confused all the time: you don't take the time to LISTEN.
Slow down.
Take a breath.
Listen.
Think.
It will do you good.
That Barney Frank is one amazing person. Brought down the entire housing bubble all by himself! Right.
I said I didn't even have 5 min. I guess you didn't listen to that either.
Yeah well, understanding complex issues requires time.
You decide what's important to you and you allocate your time accordingly.
I'm just trying to expose you to another point of view. If your not interested, you're not interested.
What else is there to say?
Too funny:
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2011/10/07/some-%E2%80%98occupy-sacramento%E2%80%99-protesters-lash-out-at-questions/
Favorite part:
Reporter: "What's your message?"
Occupay Sacramento Activist: "Well, that's a little vague right now, but we have a Message Comittee working on it."
Priceless.
Lisa's comment did not get posted - here it is:
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Occupy America":
to correct denbec's previous comment about Bush's deregulation...actually that was passed in 1999. Here's the wiki link that shows that Clinton signed the bill and we all know that there was a republican majority congress back then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act
And I believe that Rick Santelli's rant on Feb 19, 2009 was the beginning of the Tea Party hysterics. Here's the CNBC link to that one -
http://www.cnbc.com/id/29283701/Rick_Santelli_s_Shout_Heard_Round_the_World
Hubby and I were in Germany and just so happened to watch that one live - unbelievable!
Wednesday, I checked the web site of the Occupy Together site and there were 400+ scheduled gatherings across the country. Yesterday it had doubled in size to 800+ and today it is totaling 927 cities. Holy Cow!
If this movement is a bunch of unwashed hippies it sure isn't showing any of those signs! This thing is going global. Check out the map of the organized marches here.
http://www.meetup.com/occupytogether/
Whoo Hoo!
Lisa
Oh look! There are now 1040 cities set with OWS marches!
Lisa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QTfNEDgusQ&feature=player_embedded
All of you should read this (it should take you less than one minute):
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203633104576623083437396142.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
The Washington Post has an interview with the 'founder' of OWS in the Oct 12th issue.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/occupy-wall-street-an-interview-with-kalle-lasn-the-man-behind-it-all/2011/10/12/gIQAC81xfL_blog.html?tid=sm_twitter_washingtonpost
Q. What kind of demands?
A. I think people want a Robin Hood tax on all trades, they want to bring back the Glass-Steagall Act, to ban high-frequency flash trading, implement banking reform, clean up corruption in Washington, and down the road, a third party may spring up.
Andre: I read your link and herein lies the crux of the problem.
"Accordingly, by the mid-2000s, investors had begun to notice that securities based on subprime mortgages were producing the high yields, but not showing the large number of defaults, that are usually associated with subprime loans. This triggered strong investor demand for these securities, causing the growth of the first significant private market for MBS based on subprime and other risky mortgages.
By 2008, Mr. Pinto has shown, this market consisted of about 7.8 million subprime loans, somewhat less than one-third of the 27 million that were then outstanding. The private financial sector must certainly share some blame for the financial crisis, but it cannot fairly be accused of causing that crisis when only a small minority of subprime and other risky mortgages outstanding in 2008 were the result of that private activity.
When the bubble deflated in 2007, an unprecedented number of weak mortgages went into default, driving down housing prices throughout the U.S. and throwing Fannie and Freddie into insolvency. Seeing these sudden losses, investors fled from the market for privately issued MBS, and mark-to-market accounting required banks and others to write down the value of their mortgage-backed assets to the distress levels in a market that now had few buyers. This raised questions about the solvency and liquidity of the largest financial institutions and began a period of great investor anxiety."
If I understand you correctly, you don't believe these financial institutions should be held liable when that is exactly what this article states. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Later.
Lisa
"...you don't believe these financial institutions should be held liable when that is exactly what this article states."
As I read it, the article states the exact opposite of what you are claiming it states:
"The private financial sector...cannot fairly be accused of causing that crisis..."
In the description of events that you quoted above, these institutions acted legally and rationally under the rules of the game; rules which they did not write, but which were dictated to them by Washington politicians (of both parties).
It seems to me that if the rules (Laws) were unwise, then the largest share of blame should go to those lawmakers who wrote and voted for those laws, not to the law-abiding private institutions that operated in their own rational self-interest completely within the parameters of those laws (any actual instances of law breaking activity should be fully prosecuted, of course).
As Rob Long illustrates in the link I posted above (which everyone here is just far too busy to bother taking ten minutes to listen to), if you give someone your credit card to go gambling with in Las Vegas, on the understanding that they will get to keep 70% of any winnings, but that they will not be held responsible for any of the losses, then you can be pretty sure that they are going to go crazy in the casinos, and why not? Given those parameters, that would be a perfectly rational behavior for them to engage in.
In a truly (or even just a reasonably) free market, there would be no need to be talking about criminal prosecutions right now, because many of these bankers would have gone broke, and, again in Rob Long's colorful phraseology, they would be out "selling apples on the street". Instead, we created an artificial system where they were allowed to go "crazy in the casino" on our credit card.
Sure, I'm angry at them for doing that, but I'm a hell of a lot more pissed off at the idiot politicians who handed them our credit card in the first place.
Good Grief Andre, get a grip. The mortgages aren't the only reason our economy is in this state! Read the link here and THIS is the reason our economy is in the tank.
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10?op=1
There are numerous charts and graphs that show the decline over the past couple of decades and beyond. I do agree with you that politicians wrote laws that allowed this to happen.
Lisa in Indy
I'm back from my vacation. :)
Long story short - a truly free market can never exist because of one word.
GREED
Corporate greed can only be controlled (slightly) by the correct type of regulations - and apparently more labor unions. I think that is what we will see evolve from the Occupy protests - which have now gone world wide.
I don't think that you really understand what a free market is or how it operates.
The level of "greed" that my corner grocer may have is completely irrelevant to the operation of the marketplace in which I buy my food. If he is motivated by his excessive greed to price bananas at a $100/lb., he is free to do that.
I will then merely go to any of dozens of other grocers in my immediate marketplace and pay 49cents/lb. (and what if they all, through some kind of mass-psychosis decide to charge $100/lb. for bananas? Then I get into the banana business as fast as I can, charge far less than them, quickly corner the market, and get fabulously wealthy!)
Notice, these other grocers may be every bit as greedy, but it is exactly the marketplace that contains and controls their greed.
When I get screwed is when Government regulators decide, in their infinite wisdom, that they know better than the marketplace what the price of bananas should be.
After all, we all know that government regulators and union boss's are never greedy, right?
Welcome back.
I don't think you know what greed is - or how it operates.
You are wrong.
Trust me on this one, Greed and I are old acquaintances.
We go back a long, long way (though not quite as far back as Lust, Sloth, and Gluttony!)
Good Grief.
The OWS crowd is about Corporate Greed and the unfairness that has occurred to the working class. Take a few minutes and go to the business insider link that I posted. All of the graphs show the decades long scam against the middle class by greedy corporate owners that have funded the RW Propaganda machine that owns the MSM.
Sheesh.
Lisa
Andre - you say that as if you have somehow moved past the greed, sloth and lust. Yet all of your postings and association with the Tea Party indicate you still support these things. In your mind you have been "saved". In our eyes you have been consumed by greed. It is the Republican way. They want it all for themselves and don't want to help those less fortunate. That's greed. Look it up.
Clearly one of us has it backward. I doubt very much it is me because I live in a reality where most Americans are kept from wealth by the very greed we speak of. In your fantasy world everyone has every resource available to them equally. That simply isn't true. Republicans think people are poor because they are lazy. In reality most people are poor because no matter how hard they try, there are circumstances beyond their control that block their success. Bad things happen to good people - frequently. That is reality.
Lisa;
"There are numerous charts and graphs that show the decline over the past couple of decades and beyond."
Andre;
Yes, but all of those charts and graphs are wrong:
http://blog.american.com/2011/10/5-reasons-why-income-inequality-is-a-myth-and-occupy-wall-street-is-wrong/
Den, I think you may have just set a personal record for the greatest number of absurdly false claims that you are able to make in a single paragraph!
1. "Americans are kept from wealth by the very greed we speak of."
Really? How does that work? I know many wealthy people, and almost all of them began life either poor, or at least far less well off than they are now. But according to you that isn't even possible: none of them should have ever been able to become wealthy because the "greed" of all the previously wealthy people should have kept them forever poor. Not only is your claim obviously and demonstrably false, but it is extravagantly false.
2. "In your fantasy world everyone has every resource available to them equally."
Actually, my personal "fantasy world" is populated almost exclusively of outrageously beautiful women (and in that fantasy world they are most definitely NOT equally accessible to everyone!), but I realize you were not referring to my personal "personal fantasy world" but to what you imagine to be my political "personal fantasy world".
Unfortunately, you are even more in error in that context: if you knew anything about Conservative political philosophy (which quite clearly you do not) you would know that one of it's most basic and foundational premises is the empirical observation that every "resource" is most emphatically NOT equally available to everyone. No one ever begins life on "an equal playing field". From the moment of birth, we are all endowed with different and widely varying levels of talent, intelligence, and abilities. In addition to our natural personal gifts and attributes, we are all also born into widely varying levels of material and cultural wealth. That is the way it has always been in human history, and that is the way it always will be (luckily, we are blessed to be born into one of the most socially mobile societies in human history).
Paris Hilton was born into great wealth and privilege and she has squandered it(IMHO)...Ronald Reagan was not born into great wealth and privilege (other than the greatest privilege of being born a citizen of a free country)and he freed half of Europe from totalitarian tyranny, and thus liberated the hopes and dreams of millions of people who might otherwise still be little better than slaves, if Reagan had just despaired and given up after early set-backs.
Continued in next post...
continued...
3. “Republicans think people are poor because they are lazy.”
A more accurate statement would be that Republicans believe that a poor person who also happens to be lazy will have a much more difficult time escaping poverty than a poor person who is energetic and motivated to succeed. This is so obviously true, that I suspect that most Democrats also believe it, even if many of them are forced by their twisted and self-defeating ideology into denying it.
4.” In reality most people are poor because no matter how hard they try, there are circumstances beyond their control that block their success.”
Absolute bullshit . Most people are poor because they have made a series of bad decisions in their lives. Look around you. Take an honest look at anyone that you know (or are in a position to observe) who is “poor”. Can you honestly say that the material conditions of their lives wouldn’t be considerably improved if they had previously made different (and better) decisions in their lives? If they had stayed in school, or partied less, or not indulged in pre-marital sex and gotten pregnant at 15 or 16? If they had worked a little harder, saved a little more? Avoided running up large credit card debt on unnecessary luxuries?
When I look at all the people I know in my own life (including myself) who are less economically successful than they might have been, there are undeniably some who were held back by “circumstances beyond their control” (primarily physical and mental health related issues), but the vast majority of them have held themselves back economically (however successful they may be in other areas of their lives) by unwise choices and decisions they have made. Most of them can admit that to themselves. A few of them can’t and insist on blaming others, but I know no one who can honestly and legitimately say that they failed financially because of the actions or “greed: of anyone other than themselves. That is just lame excuse making.
5. “Bad things happen to good people - frequently.”
Finally, a true claim! Too bad you draw the wrong lesson from it. Yes, bad things happen to good people all the time, but some of those good people go on to prosper, while other good people continue to fail. What differentiates the two is that those who are able to persevere and overcome the setbacks will generally succeed, at least more than those who surrender and allow the setbacks to defeat them.
There is no shame and dishonor in failing, if you have truly tried your best and given it your all. But I think there is great shame and dishonor in constantly blaming others for your own failings and shortcomings (or just plain old bad luck).
A "hypothetical" example:
A guy we will call David does everything right - gets a good education, has a nice Christian family and works hard - gets a job at Corporation S where he is well liked and works closely with the Executive staff - even going to their homes to set up private networks long after normal working hours. Company S learns that they can get a considerable tax break if they take advantage of incentives offered by nearby community that is trying to lure business to the area. The tax breaks are based on certain hiring standards to ensure job growth for the community. Company S does a massive layoff just prior to making this move so they can re-hire new people thereby fulfilling the tax break requirements. David is one of the many unfortunate people let go - even though he has been with the company for several years. In the current economy he will likely unemployed for a very long time and will likely have to take a drastic pay cut when he is finally hired again. He may lose his house and car on top of the health insurance he had with Company S.
Is it David's fault? Did he make bad decisions? Did he not try hard enough? Is he lazy?
Is this acceptable ethical behavior of a corporation?
Is this the free market working as it should?
Is this a rare business decision or does it happen all the time? Is it right?
More evidence that Lisa's (and most of OWS's) perspective is distorted and misleadingly incomplete:
http://blog.american.com/2011/10/fed-study-finds-three-decades-of-broad-based-u-s-income-gains/
Well Andre I guess we can all feel much better knowing your charts show we are just fine and dandy. Too bad my bank accounts don't seem to agree. What really counts - charts and graphs that can be manipulated in any way to prove one's point or the clear reality of reality?
I noticed you skipped right over my little example of corporate greed.
"Is it David's fault? Did he make bad decisions? Did he not try hard enough? Is he lazy?"
Answer: No, at least not based on the details presented. He is also not poor, and is almost certainly not going to end up poor. His income may fluctuate up and down over the course of his life, but there is no reason to believe that, given his talents and work ethic as described, he will not be able to maintain a standard of living unequaled by most of his historical predecessors (assuming of course, that Obama is NOT re-elected next year...then all bets are off). "David" goes back into the labor market, not to skid row. It might be a bum deal for him at the time,and an unfortunate occurrence, but the odds are highly unlikely that such an unusual and hypothetical event would befall any reasonably skilled or semi-skilled worker more than once or twice in the course of their entire working lifetime.
"Is this acceptable ethical behavior of a corporation?"
Yes. A corporation's primary fiduciary and ethical responsibilities are to it's share-holders. They are ethically (and legally) obligated to protect the interest of their shareholders. If the potential increase in profit was so significant to justify such a drastic move, they might be in breach of that responsibility if they failed to act.
"Is this the free market working as it should?"
Of course it is. States compete against other states to attract business and economic development, in the same way that business's compete against other business's to attract customers. ( When you switch wireless carriers to get a better deal, you are potentially threatening the jobs of those who work for the company you are leaving. Does that make your cost savings behavior unethical on your part?).
"Is this a rare business decision or does it happen all the time?"
Fairly rare. It is a major effort, expense, and disruption of business to make such a radical uprooting of operations for one location to another. The potential payback would have to be quite significant.
"Is it right?"
See all above.
PS: It is interesting that in this scenario, you have completely ignored and overlooked the main "villain" of the play; if the taxing authorities of the original location had remained competitive (not been so "greedy") then there would have been no motivation for David's company to relocate in the first place. It is actually a good example of how market pressure helps naturally constrain, or correct for, the excessive greed of local politicians and tax boards.
"Too bad my bank accounts don't seem to agree."
Chart your accounts over the last three decades, and I think that you will find that your bank accounts do substantially agree.
We are currently crawling our of a particularly severe recession...it will definitely show as a down dip and the graph of your lifetimes earnings, but there is no compelling reason to believe that the overall trend line will not be upward over the course of your entire life.
"I guess we can all feel much better knowing your charts show we are just fine and dandy."
1. They are not "my" charts, they are from a study done by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
2. They do not show that "we are just fine and dandy." (we're not). They just show what they show, which includes that Lisa's misleadingly hyped up scare scenario of an across the board losing of ground by the middle and working class in this country over the last few decades does not reflect the historical reality.
http://www.readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/7845-the-seven-biggest-economic-lies
Well Andre you have made your point perfectly clear. You and the GOP will choose to screw the people and support the corporation at any cost. There is a total disrespect for PEOPLE's lives.
Do we exist to support corporations - or do corporations exist to support us?
"Do we exist to support corporations - or do corporations exist to support us?"
No, and no.
"They just show what they show, which includes that Lisa's misleadingly hyped up scare scenario of an across the board losing of ground by the middle and working class in this country over the last few decades does not reflect the historical reality."
Yeah, Facts SUCK don't they Andre? FACTS VS OPINION. No HYPE, just FACTS. And you're on the slippery slope of backing the GOP which is against the reality of life in these United States. You're on the losing side now. Hope you enjoy your free fall.
We are the 99%.
Lisa
So..........corporations do not exist to support us?? I guess that would be correct. They exist to support "them".
This is why the Occupy Movement is happening. We are not objects to be manipulated for profit. We are people. We are the 99% that are not "them"
"...corporations do not exist to support us?? I guess that would be correct. They exist to support "them".
Of course.
I think maybe some of your confusion lies in not clearly differentiating between the end for which corporations exist, and the means which they use to achieve that end.
Corporations exist to generate profit. Period. End of story (this obviously does not include so called "non-profit" corporations, which can exist for reasons other than the pursuit of profit).
"For-Profit" Corporations (at least the successful ones) achieve this end by providing goods and services that people need and/or desire.
Fulfilling and satisfying those needs and desires, is thus not the end for which a corporation exists, it is instead both the means and the socially beneficial by-product of it's actual (and proper) end goal(the pursuit of profit).
Thus questions based on false premises, such as "Do we exist to support corporations - or do corporations exist to support us?", tend to confuse rather than clarify the issue.
I think you have been confused by the notion that corporations are people. In fact a corporation is not a functioning entity at all. It is a collection of people who are operating to achieve a common goal - financial reward. A corporation with billions in assets is completely worthless without people to make it function. Corporations exist because people need finances to purchase basic necessities. Without the financial need of all the people working for the corporation - the corporation has no purpose. It cannot exist. It is not the profit of the corporation that is the goal - it is the profit of the people.
It's like a church. The building is completely benign and useless without the congregation. No matter how large and majestic the structure - it has no purpose or meaning without the people.
You must support the people - not the corporation.
"You're on the losing side now. Hope you enjoy your free fall."
Earth to Lisa, time for a reality check.
Simplifying just slightly for the sake of commbox space considerations, we can say that OWS blames "Wall Street" for most of our problems and the Tea Parties blame Washington.
Who's winning that argument?
"Americans are more than twice as likely to blame the federal government in Washington (64%) for the economic problems facing the United States as they are the financial institutions on Wall Street (30%)." -Gallop, Oct 19, 2011
http://www.gallup.com/poll/150191/Americans-Blame-Gov-Wall-Street-Economy.aspx
Last year, thanks largely to the Tea Parties, the Republicans won one of the largest mid-term victories in the last hundred years. All indications are that they are on course to win an equally large, or larger, victory next year. They will almost certainly hold the House, likely win control of the Senate, and quite possibly take back the White House (something we only dreamed about a little over a year ago).
What has OWC accomplished so far? I mean besides running up millions of dollars in police overtime bills for recession hurting localities, doing hundreds of thousands of dollars in property damage to both public and private property, and threatening the survival of numerous struggling small business's unfortunate enough to be caught in one of their "occupation" zones?
This time next year OWC will be nothing more than a footnote in the story of Obama's electoral destruction of the Democratic Party.
Andre:
You are missing one glaring SIGN of the OWS movement; It went GLOBAL in less than 30 days.
This giant has nothing to do with the tea partiers and has everything to do with the inequity of our capitalist system. It isn't about Rep or Dem, it's about humans. But keep believing what you want and get left behind. The rest of us will leave you in the dust.
bub bye
Lisa
I find it so entertaining that the Tea Party folks can't grasp the concept of OWS. TPN blames the government for all our problems when, in most cases, the government is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. Meanwhile, OWS recognizes that it is the corporations and associated greed that have put us where we are. It's the simple fact, as I mentioned in my last comment, that PEOPLE are no longer supported in this economy. Corporations have all the protections and power while the people have been stripped of our voice and rights - who wouldn't revolt over that?! We want our voice back. We want our protections back. And most of all we want our paychecks back.
I would also like to agree with Lisa on the election part. Whether or not you understand OWS - they have gone global. They are HUGE and getting larger. Are the OWS folks Republicans? Maybe a few but it's not likely. President Obama won the last election in part by his global support. He still has that - and it is stronger than ever. The rest of the world likes or President as much as those of us who voted for him the first time. And the rest of the world is watching the GOP debates, as I am, as if watching a 3 ring circus. It's actually quite entertaining - but none of them have a chance against President Obama. Most of the developed nations are more liberal than conservative.
You guys are nuts.
Completely self-deluded.
OWS is a tiny movement of professional protesters and left wing crackpots.
I noticed that the movement recently won the enthusiastic endorsement of the American Nazi Party, the American Communist Party, and the Chinese Communist Party.
You must be so proud.
Andre - it would be easier for you to list who does not support the OWS movement. Let me do the list for you:
Tea Party.
Fin.
LOL.
Lisa
An unusually warm October night here in San Francisco, so I decided to hop on my bicycle and head down Market Street to Justin Herman Plaza across from the Ferry Building where our local OWS crowd are encamped, and check out the reality of the scene for myself.
What an oddly sad and depressing sight...first of all I was struck by the ugly and shabby grubbiness of it all. Tucked into a underused corner of the Plaza, dirty tarps were halfheartedly strung up, along with a few dozen old Coleman tents that had seen much better days. It looked mostly like one of those impromptu homeless encampments that you sometimes see sprouting up under free-way overpasses.
The crowd was right out of central casting; it was like traveling in time back into the early 80's outside of the Bill Graham Civic Auditorium when the Grateful Dead were playing: lots of older guys with straggly gray beards wearing tie-die shirts and strumming acoustic guitars, and barefoot girls dancing in the dirt to the inevitable and ever cliched beat of tribal drums. If it wasn't a bunch of old hippies then it was a cast of extras from a Hollywood movie about a bunch of old hippies...mixed with a dollop of extras from the Mad Max sequel that must be shooting on an adjacent sound-set. On this warm Indian summer evening, the air was pungent with the odor of weed, B.O. and, was I just imagining it, or was that Patchouli? Yes, I believe it was.
Two bored San Francisco police officers patrolled disinterestedly around the tiny perimeter.
I strolled over to glance at the Information table, where, right next to the 9-11 Truther broad sheets was a stack of notices advertizing an upcoming, and judging from the bold and colorful fonts, an apparently much anticipated, "Marxist Conference".
I couldn't help but think about what a perfect metaphor that Info table was for the Fellini-esque carnival of narcissistic self-delusion that was playing out around me.
I pedaled a few blocks back up Market Street to the Powell Street Plaza where the cable cars turn around, where a far far larger crowd of tourists and locals were out enjoying the evening, strolling among the shops and eateries, completely oblivious to the Leftist street theater I had just left.
I don't know how representative "Occupy San Francisco" and "Occupy Oakland" are of the OWS movement in general, but from the pictures and videos that I have seen, and the article that I have read, I don't think they are too far off the mark.
If that is the case, then it's clear to me what a joke and fraud this "movement" truly is. A fraud presented by a left-wing media desperate for a reply to the wildly politically successful Tea-parties of last year.
After all, how successful can a movement be, in which such a large proportion of it's most committed members can't even master the challenge of regularly wearing clean underwear?
How many of these folks actually voted last year? How many of them will vote next year? I don't see this crowd donating money to political campaigns, or manning phone-banks on election day, or going door to door in get-out-the-vote drives. Drumming and dancing, maybe..leading a political revolution, not so much.
The Republic is safe.
I believe it is called a "peaceful protest" Andre. Last week you were complaining that they were too rowdy and uncivilized - now you think they are too boring. I'm pretty sure they are not out there to make you happy - but they did get you to notice didn't they. Mission accomplished.
"...now you think they are too boring."
No, the whole class envy thing has been boring since at least the French Revolution. Intellectually, Leftism is as about as stimulating as Charlie Sheen's "Winning" tour. What I was commenting on was how aesthetically grubby it all seemed.
Tastes vary, of course("One's man's meat is another man's poison").
Mission accomplished?
My, we are lowering the bar, aren't we?
Last week it was about remaking capitalism and transforming the world, and now, as the freak show novelty quickly begins to feel ever more frayed and tired, it has devolved to just about trying to maintain the public's attention and stay in the evening news cycle?
I give it another two weeks, max.
There is a good morality tale in basic human nature here though, as the anti-corruption crusaders themselves become the corrupted:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/they_want_lice_of_the_occu_pie_9xKCxcI4aectFYkafMb8UJ
Ann Coulter had dubbed OWS the "flea party", but I predict that in the days and weeks to come it will more and more begin to resemble The Lord of the Flies.
Oh that Ann Coulter is just so cleaver. Not much of a poet though.
Well, I don't know how "cleaver" she is, but she sure is clever!
I guess you could say that her razor sharp wit cleaves through all the Liberal BS.
(sorry, couldn't resist...even though I'm prone to multiple typos and misspellings myself,it was just too funny to ignore this one, especially given the context).
That was a TERRIBLE typo - I don't even want to think about Ann's cleav-anything!
LOL...good one.
(although I've always had the sneaking suspicion that she might be a tranny)
A rare agreement. :)
Results are starting:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/credit/story/2011-10-31/suntrust-drops-debit-card-fees/51018838/1
Gee, I was wrong: OWS is effecting some change:
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/11/01/milk-street-cafe-owner-sacks-21-employees-as-consequence-of-occupy-wall-street-demonstration/
Great job, guys. Take a bow.
Andre - Thank you for providing a perfect example of corporate greed in action. Rather than wait out what is certainly a temporary business slow-down, they just immediately lay off workers - with no regard to the workers lives or obligations. Clearly this business owner could survive this slump and in fact could possibly increase business by marketing to the occupiers or some other clever business strategy. Yet they just put the entire burden on the employees.
And - It appears he is doing this clearly as a symbolic act against the movement.
No regard for the employees is the reason for the occupation. This business owner has proven the occupy movements point.
"Rather than wait out what is certainly a temporary business slow-down,..."
Whoa! Stop the presses! Did Dennis just predict the imminent abandonment of the OWS squat?
That's news.
Of course it will end. But I didn't say when. It could go on for a year or end next week. Whatever it takes.
"Whatever it takes" to do what exactly?
This has been my main problem with the whole Sit In The Park strategy...where does it lead to?
The Tea Party led to a complete revitalization of the Republican Party and a mid-term election victory of historic proportions.
Like I said once before, I just don't see your average OWS squatter manning phone banks or going door to door in moderate swing states getting out the vote on election night.
The longer Sit In The Park drags on, the more of a potential net negative I see it becoming for the Democratic Party establishment (which of course, is fine by me).
But already it's starting to feel more and more like old news.
If they were smart, they would declare "victory" and go home.
Based on what I've seen so far, I don't think they are very smart.
It is not a "Democratic" movement. It is a movement about corporate greed. This is just so hard for the Tea Party to understand! For them everything is Government.
The movement is evolving. It's difficult to find an answer to greed. However, if I had to guess the outcome, I would say more employee unions, some consumer protections, and a few more regulations. But those are old answers. The movement will come up with some new answers as well. That's what it's all about.
Corporations have tried to stifle our rights and our voices. The movement will get those back.......somehow.
You are right, I do tend to view this whole story primarily through the lens of how it will, if at all, effect National election results.
But it's not that I don't "understand" that many of the participants don't consider it to be primarily about that; it's more that I don't really care about that aspect of it. It's the political impact on the composition of the Congress that this movement may or may not have that I am most interested in. Other than that,for me, there is not really much of a story here.
The rest is just left over 1960's hippy-dippy Utopianism and youthful ignorance and naivete. That part of it doesn't attract my interest very much (people who find the words to John Lennon's Imagine to be "profound" bore my socks off).
And that doesn't mean that for me "everything is Government", far from it. It's just that this happens to be a political story, so that's how I consider it. It's not a philosophy story or a theology story. Despite it's pretensions, it's not even big enough to merit being considered a historical or "sociological" story...although some have taken a good shot at it. See particularly:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/2011/10/31/a-marxist-take-on-ows/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=a-marxist-take-on-ows
Sometimes, it's also just a hugely gut busting comedy story too:
http://www.breitbart.tv/never-ending-supply-howard-stern-exposes-more-idiots-at-occupywallstreet/
***
"..more employee unions, some consumer protections, and a few more regulations."
Zzzzzzzz.
"But those are old answers"
Ya think?
"The movement will come up with some new answers as well."
Oh goodie, I can hardly wait!
Spoken like a true Republican - no compassion.
The government has very little to do with employee salaries and benefits, consumer pricing, or bank fees - except to set some very minimal standards like minimum wage. I have no idea why the Tea Party insists on making the OWS movement political. It's as if they can not argue against it unless it is connected to the government somehow.
Hippies are hip again - I love it!
"Hippies are hip again..."
I thought you said they weren't hippies? (maybe that was Lisa)
In my opinion, the world would be a much better place if hippies were in charge and not corporations.
Move to San Francisco or Berkeley or Oakland...the hippies ARE in charge!
Last night, 60% of OccupyOakland General Assembly vote to authorize violent tactics.
Never again can this movement be described as "peaceful".
http://www.salon.com/2011/11/14/on_the_eve_of_destruction/
I find it interesting (and disturbing) that the protesters are being forcibly removed from their camps and then are being condemned for leaving a mess. It is not the protesters fault they were not given time to clean up.
I'm sure most of the garbage was probably planted there by the police after the fact.
Post a Comment