Occupy Wallstreet Movement

[url=http://http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct2=us%2F0_0_s_0_0_t&bvm=grid&topic=blended&usg=AFQjCNH6LqDtHB9N1wfIzESbpQg90WZjDg&did=48c1b5913e1e7953&sig2=YxbsA-tHW7zFQR73aFgOyw&cid=8797756879308&ei=XwSJTvjAB4HuMtqYAQ&rt=HOMEPAGE&vm=STANDARD&authuser=0&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052970204612504576607303128523710.html%3Fmod%3Dgooglenews_wsj]Occupy Wall Street Protests Spread[/url]

I've been following the news a bit lately and this seems to actually be picking up steam a bit with movements beginning in more cities of america each day... I'm not sure to hopeful, inspired, or worried as it is a good message and the inevitable outcome of a government and economy with so many problems...

Anyways, I'm kind of curious to other's thoughts on the matter and lets please keep it civilized

Minorities can appear to represent majorities through organization. I support democracy, but as population densities increase and transport improves it will be easier to generate disproportional representations of democracy. In the past a big crowd meant most people must be on board with it, but not so much now.

In my opinion they have no right to interfere with other people trying to make a living... it runs the risk of creating personal conflict between locals and protestors. Protest should be done to raise awareness and to bring issues into peoples minds without causing stoppages to normal life.

I agree with your view of protests Adder.

On another hand, if it degenerated into a bank burning riot, I think you'd get a very proportionate representation of what people who aren't rioting really want.

Link not working for me...

***Double Post***

I don't live far from the occupation. I'll try and post some live pics later tonight. IT's getting a little nasty to tell the truth. In a week or so if this drags on the police are going to get ugly. Shame, those kids, while well meaning, are protesting the wrong thing in the wrong place. Governments like ours are masters at getting activists to expand great amounts of energy issues that fall short of the mark, or in this case the truth.

'..Um... Mama du Author...' Benedict piped up from the chair. Jack was skimming an article from CNN.com as Benedict read the forum, '...Do these people... really know what the protest is about? Their comments all seem... awfully vague...'

"Maybe they're really talking about the way some of the protests are progressing." Jack shrugged, looking rather like the CMC, "According to the protestors, the march is about the widening gap between the poor and the rich and all of the effects its had in our country -- economically, socially, politically, culturally, all of them. And, let's be honest about the facts: The top 1 percent of population in the country -- and that's rounding to whole numbers, too -- control 34.6 percent of our nation's wealth. The next level of wealth is only ten percent of the nation and they control 38.5 percent. And the rest, the overwhelming majority of Americans, only get the remaining 26.9 percent, according to reports on MotherJones.com and BusinessInsider.com And it shows in many other ways. Stang, I could write a whole dissertation on this, the argument is so complicated and multi-faceted."

"Now, in terms of the marches... well, if there've been arrests, then chances are that these protests are overstepping the boundaries of 'nonviolent demonstration'. And that's NOT good."

Benedict stared, wide-eyed, at the Author before she finally quieted down.

'You sound an awful lot like a fanatic, the way you were ranting all those facts a moment ago.'

"I'd rather sound like a fanatic and -- I'll even admit it, before anyone else goes pointing fingers -- a Socialist, rather than not do my research and have it show. The only way things are going to improve in this country is if we arm ourselves with facts, then face them, head on. If I was dying of lung cancer because I smoked a pack a day, I'd face it rather than try to look for studies that say smoking is GOOD for you. Same thing, here."

Benedict considered this, then shrugged and turned on Angry Birds.

See now I won't argue your facts, their just that. But where does it say in the Constitution that equal rights equate to equal results? I don't have a lot of money at all. I don't blame rich people for it. If I want to make a lot of money maybe I should reeducate myself and then work really hard instead of trying to have the government step in and "redistribute" the money that other people earned so i can feel more fulfilled without having to put the effort in. The gap in wealth isn't widening because rich people are greedy. ALL people are greedy, it's a part of the darker aspect of human nature. Requiring that people have the money they've earned taken by force to give to people that haven't earned it is just as bad as the people that hoard the money in the first place. It's too sides of the same greedy coin.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for helping the poor, but I'm not for forcing people to help the poor and keeping them in a perpetual state of poverty as has been the case in this country for the past 50 yrs or so. I think it's great that these people are off of the couch and standing up for what they believe, but in the end it's all misguided. IT's misguided because it wants a socialist model of living that has never worked in history, just ask the EU. It fails to take in to account the most important part of any mode of governance, Human nature. That's why socialism inevitably fails. It's human nature that once someone rates power they'll want more. And each successive leader will want more as their pallet becomes used to the flavor of control. That's why America worked so well in the beginning, it was a Democratic Republic. Everyone was held to the letter of law. As social programs were in acted in this country we moved from that model to something that's just about socialist. Granted it's been a slow move, but a move none the less. So instead of people fighting against the bankers, or the politicians, or the whatever, how about they start to fight the one thing that undoes every good thing man has ever invented, they should look in the mirror and protest themselves.

That's just my 2¢ anyway so please take it with a generous helping of salt.

More money can make more money then less money can make, so those with more will be able to make more. The Fibonacci sequance was created based on growth in a rabbit population and supported the reality that the more rabbits you had the more rabbits you'd end up with.

It so happens that Fibonacci and Golden Ratio logarithmic spirals closely match and both of which resemble growth patterns throughout nature. I think the whole market system is actually designed to take advantage of maximizing compounding growth so its not unlikely that a wealth distribution chart might end up looking more like an exponential curve.

I'm not even sure its a discussion without an alternative proposal. Wealth is the market which gives everyone jobs and delivers services, and they pay huge amounts of tax to keep the government running, albeit at a lower percentage but the totals are still larger. Without peaks of high wealth you will not have breadth of moderate wealth. I think the real problem is education and baseline poverty which exists around the world but this is probably more a government concern as it seems to fall within welfare.

I think an interesting paradox is that the protests are probably more about a fall in middle class standards of living, which in turn is also the worry of the wealthy because slowdowns mean less wealth. Since 1950 the western world has been gradually becoming intoxicated with commercialism, this in turn has fuelled the wealth growth. So to me it sounds like they are protesting against taxation more then corporate wealth, in which case they should be in DC.

[Note: all the below arguments are personal views and not the views of the temple]
[Later note... just because I post my view, doesn't mean I don't enjoy debating and seeing other views]
I agree that they need to be targeting the government, as the businesses that abuse the broken system are only part of the problem.

The part that I'm a bit caught up in is the protesting of trickle economics, wealthy who succeed should be allowed to enjoy their wealth, but they should be taxed on a fair level, and those rich people who fail miserably should NOT be bailed out by the government repeatedly... look at the bank of america situation... the US gov bails them out then BoA turn around and Illegally forecloses thousands of homes. and that's only one of many instances... the government and business being separated, and many other items... last I heard there was a group begging to form in DC as well.

Being in the 30,000 a year with two jobs and $70,000 in student loans range myself, I see a problem having 2 associates and being in this situation... if the government can wipe away trillions of debt from rich folks... why not help those who are working hard, getting education and trying to work for a living...

But cutting education, and public services to give big businesses large write offs, bail outs, and such seems to make sense to someone...

These protests don't begin for no reason, and while it may be the unemployed, veterans, and youth that are the front line... I'm sure there are a fair share of us working full time with worthless degrees who are supporting this as well

Anyways, that's my inflated pair of copper pieces

@ren - shall we prepare some molotovs

'It is time for a reevaluation of values!' Tom cheered, striking a pose not unlike a famed Nobel Peace Prize winner. Everyone gave him a long stare that let him know he'd probably gotten the quote wrong.

'Nothing wrong with that, though.' James agreed, 'The way things are going now, everyone seems to have the attitude of 'I earned this, so I have to keep it' combined with 'Look out for number 1'. When I was growing up, my mom's family taught me that no man is an island, and my dad taught me that with money and power, you've also gotta assume a lot of responsibility.'

Taro nodded in sage agreement.

'After all, at the club, we do all work hard, but so do the bartenders, and the managers have to play their role, and then the owner of the club is the one who manages rights to lease a building, as well as arrangements for all of us and the advertising and clothing. It would be wrong if WE were the only ones to keep our money, and either way, it's only because of our customers that the club keeps going and we can continue to make that money.'

James pulled a face at such a typically Japanese answer coming from one of his coworkers. 'In America, guys make money by investing it in other companies, then selling their shares when the price is high and by reaping large interest sums. So, really, they're not working for their money, per se... in fact, the motto goes 'Don't work hard for your money, make your money work hard for you.' And, either way, when you've got more than your fair share, you bear a greater responsibility for the society as a whole.'

'Such as politics, Lock-kun?' Tensora-san asked, leaning against the wall and scribbling in his ledger, 'In perfect enactment of Aristotle's vision, the lower classes must spend all their time devoted to menial tasks, just to earn their way. And after that, what time do they have to think, or engage in politics, or educate themselves? None. They become disenfranchised -- I must also note that 'franchise' is one of the paradigms of the Jedi -- and pass that on to their children, who start to grow up not knowing and not caring about politics. The rich, on the other hand, have time to watch the news, understand what's going on, and their children learn from them, just as well. And, of course, as only the very rich have the leisure and time to engage and vote, they become the majority, or they foster connections with political parties, and then laws are put through that don't benefit the people as a whole -- either on purpose, or because the masses are so disenfranchised, they simply don't realize it. It's a cycle and a system, and any student of social justice will tell you that in a heartbeat.'

'Yeah, it's easy for YOU guys to say that -- you all come from a 'We' culture. America is more of an 'I' culture.' James groused. Tensora-san raised his eyebrows, glanced at Tom -- whom had gone full-out into a Martin Luther King Jr impression -- and then back to James.

'How did the Jeff Goldblum character put it in the first Jurassic Park movie? 'They were so preoccupied with whether they could that they didn't stop to think if they SHOULD.' Just because you CAN make a ton of money by investing and not really do any hard work -- and that's what they can and do do -- it's not the morally right option. Don't activists for worldwide philanthropy often ask people 'Do you really NEED those hundred dollar shoes, when that hundred dollars could help pay for a school in Uganda' or something like that.' And that was Akitaro, somehow managing to sound like he was criticizing his lover, even if they were technically on the same side.

'Perhaps Tomathy put it best...' Tensora-san mused, 'It IS time for a revolution of values. A revolution that this protest might just be endorsing, if you look beneath the surface.'

IT's misguided because it wants a socialist model of living that has never worked in history, just ask the EU. It fails to take in to account the most important part of any mode of governance, Human nature. That's why socialism inevitably fails.

the EU's doing perfectly fine thanks. And a lot better off with a socialist system than it did before... Do not mix bureaucracy and socialism. One is a problem the other isn't. As to your comment about human nature, I think it applies to (real) communism. going the extra mile has to be rewarding, otherwise no-one does it. Socialism does not prevent that

I'd like to point out that in the 50s, the max tax rate in the US was above 90%, and I hardly believe the gvt considered itself socialist at that time.


The real problem, the real reason for the demos is that the banks and insurance companies were fucking around ( some of the practices were absolutely mad ) and that it is normal people with normal jobs who lost everything, not the banks.

***EDIT****

To each his own. I really don't see the EU as doing fine right now as their in more risk of sovereign dealt than we are right now. But again, to each his own.

Eurozone external debt: 13.72 trillion USD (2010)
US external debt: 13.98 trillion USD (2010)

Eurozone has more people, lower GDP, many social programmes and for some reason less debt than the US. Ah and the euro is doing quite fine compared to the US dollar. Go figure.

EDIT: I do not pretend to know everything about the US and EU economies but from what I've learned I just posted some key economic aspects of both. I posted about those only because others had done so before me. If you want to respond to my post then please focus more on what I said after, because that is far more important.

ren wrote: the EU's doing perfectly fine thanks. And a lot better off with a socialist system than it did before... Do not mix bureaucracy and socialism. One is a problem the other isn't. As to your comment about human nature, I think it applies to (real) communism. going the extra mile has to be rewarding, otherwise no-one does it. Socialism does not prevent that

I am an economically far right extreme liberal. That is to say I believe completely in the role of free markets and the freedom of choice for each individual.

For those of you who may not be aware of the current crises and say that capitalism doesn't work well I just have to say "Capitalism?! What Capitalism?!!" I see no capitalism in what is happening!

Government bails out banks - not capitalist.

Interventionist and socialist (Keynesian) economists base their theory on the formula of C+I+G+(X-M) = GDP. However they equate that GDP to equalling Economy. C+I+G+(X-M)=GDP BUT /= Economy. It tells you nothing about the state of the economy which leads exactly to problems such as this one.

This right-wing economist Peter Schiff predicted that there would be a recession.

The problem is that over the last decade it isn't 'real wealth' that has increased it is the availability of credit that has increased. It isn't the productive capacity that increased and lead to people being richer it was speculation that caused the value of stocks and real estate to increase and hence the illusion of wealth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnekzRuu8wo

It is not just Greece that has a problem. Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain are all on the verge of collapse BECAUSE of socialism. Perhaps the greatest factor resulting in their decline is their lack of competitiveness on an international market. They are protected from competition by tariffs on external items (which the EU itself puts in place) and hence why should they bother competing?

They don't have to try hard, because they have no need to. That means that they become economically inefficient which is exposed when things get really bad. The weak links in their uncompetitive economy collapse.

But moving away from real world politics and onto my own thoughts.

I find it hard to understand how someone can morally stand in front of me and say "I will STEAL your wealth from you." Your money is forcibly taken away from you. If you have problems seeing this just ask yourself what happens if you decide not to pay your taxes

The arrogance of socialism is that the government knows how to spend your own money better than you do. Just read that sentence again. How can that possibly be true?!

I will not say whether America or any western country truly promotes freedom or whether or not there is a great deal of corruption that causes the system to function poorly.

But what I will say is that if a law is put in place that you do not agree with morally -and given the assumption that you would be considered as morally sound- then the law should not exist. With the highest morality I can possibly think of ever conceiving of in my mind being the right to freedom.

I doubt you would ever dream of stealing. But would you manipulate your income tax returns to avoid paying more tax?

Both are crimes but which one would make you be considered as immoral? Taking something that isn't yours? Or stopping someone from taking something that isn't theirs?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-7oMOxPjNE

EDIT: I don't want this to turn into a massive argument so in case anyone is wondering my tone is not angry (in any posts) and please take no offence at what I say as I am not asking or stating anything maliciously. Lets keep this all respectful like it has been up until now.

ren wrote: Eurozone external debt: 13.72 trillion USD (2010)
US external debt: 13.98 trillion USD (2010)

Eurozone has more people, lower GDP,

That means that each person is poorer on average. In addition it also means that (given by the values you just posted) the Eurozone has a higher percentage debt than the US.

I'm not having a go or anything but I just thought I'd post and ask you how that supports your argument.

ren wrote: Eurozone external debt: 13.72 trillion USD (2010)
US external debt: 13.98 trillion USD (2010)

Eurozone has more people, lower GDP, many social programmes and for some reason less debt than the US. Ah and the euro is doing quite fine compared to the US dollar. Go figure.

On a side note, I wonder how much of the US debt is war related.

the external debt is not that of the government, but the debt privately held (by individuals or companies) to foreign creditors.

That means that each person is poorer on average.

Wealth isn't measured in gdp. eurozone citizens do not pay for their healthcare, do not pay for their university. start working late and finish early.

I find it hard to understand how someone can morally stand in front of me and say "I will STEAL your wealth from you." Your money is forcibly taken away from you. If you have problems seeing this just ask yourself what happens if you decide not to pay your taxes

No public education, no army, no police, no healthcare. You would effectively have to deal with hordes of violent diseased morons. The amount of BS bureaucracy I have to pay for is humongous and pisses me off, however, I'm still happy to pay it. Go to some place where the government has no money to pay anyone to do anything and you'll see if you like it better there.

And people who don't want to pay tax can go live elsewhere. They choose to remain in taxed places, because, strangely, these places are significantly better. Sure there's the odd ones out, tiny countries with loads of natural resources, but they are completely dependant on their export.

I was at OccupyPortland today. Probably one of the coolest things I've done. We marched through the city chanting and then reached the park where the occupation will take place. It was just such a positive experience, being around so many people who were so excited to finally stand up and let their voices be heard. It was like a population of depressed people had woken up from their stupor with a new, rejuvenated life in them. I felt it in myself as well. So exhilierating. After I left I was wishing everyone I ran into a wonderful day, something i SHOULD feel everyday. I guess I learned a lesson today

Unlike a number of you folks, I am left sitting on the sidelines and observing.
From what I have seen, this is an evolved form of anonymous campaigning that has been seen in the past (habbo, Scientology, wikileaks etc). I am not entirely surprised by the diverse messages being sent. The fundamental message seems clear enough that people have finally had enough with the actions of the last 10-20 years (30 years if you count the initial de-regulation brought on by Reagan) which have led us to this point.

However, as someone who can only sit to the side and watch (Even if I were in the states I could only be a spectator due to my job) I have to say I support any populist movement which acts to see that things change to benefit the whole and not a "privileged few".

I, therefore, put forth that such movements (Even if it were the Tea partiers) actually are an embodiment of the code in its own right. That being the selfless motion of helping others and acting for a greater betterment.

I understand entirely and agree that what they espouse may not be whats in the best interests for all. Certainly there are conflicting views on what is best for all.

What has to be kept in mind, I think is that what is important is that a bigger view of what is best for all not be left in the hands of bureaucracy and 11th hour budget battles. Unity in understanding and a consensus from all sides must be reached. If we shrug off the very notion of selflessness, we are left with consolidation of power and the misguided notion of "Peace through security".

Those are just my thoughts. I just hope that all sides of any political spectrum can at least come together to agree on something and push past partisanship for just one moment.