Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
We kick the ass of the ruling class

The 99% visit Governor Walker

Posted 3 years ago on Nov. 4, 2011, 10:16 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

834 Comments

834 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 15 points by JesusChrist (81) 3 years ago

Jesus Christ approved.

[-] -1 points by Perspective (-243) 3 years ago

So now you speak for Jesus Christ? Wow,kind of arrogant isn't that?

[-] 4 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

Yeah, we all know Republicans speak for Christ. Cut it out.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

What makes you think all republicans are Christian?

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 3 years ago

Cut what out? I never professed to speak for Jesus,an OWS person did.

[-] 3 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

There's not a Republican running for office today who doesn't invoke Christ to further Satans' agenda. These people have obviously never read the bible they're thumping on. Even the prodigal son was allowed to return to his father's home, but Republicans would have you believe everyone who has to accept unemployment or welfare brought the action on themselves and deserves what they get. Not only is this the farthest thing from reality, it does not comport with the teachings of Christ.

[-] -2 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

I'm not a Republican. But your portrait of Republicans is very distorted to say the least.

[-] 3 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

No, it's very accurate.

[-] 1 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

But they are a huge fraction of the 99%. Do you intend to mock and hate them into your point of view? Is this really a good plan?

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

The Republicans who are in the running for the next presidential election ARE Bible thumpers. I hate what Republicans stand for.

[-] -1 points by Perspective (-243) 3 years ago

What's that? Freedom and personal responsibility?

[-] 3 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

They have earned that perception.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

I like to give credit where it is due. Republicans ended slavery. Republicans are forcing the government to address the fact that it is out of money. Democrats can no longer get credit for "good intentions" when in fact THEY are participants in the corruption of government. The more bankrupt the government becomes due to overspending, the more sway that outside influencers will have. We need to clean up the government cesspool, and that includes shutting down the (predominantly Democrat) vote buying machine.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

The problem isn't overspending, It's underecollecting (from Corporations). Our country grew and prospered just fine when we used to make them pay their fair share. It started decling when we let them off the hook.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Have you seen how much money we are spending as a percent of GDP?

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

The Republicans who ended slavery were VERY DIFFERENT from the current Republicans. Republicans are the ones who put the country deep into debt (Bush and co.). Ignoring these things is lying.

[-] 1 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

I have news for you, there's no such thing as money. It's fictional. It has the value I assign to it. If the fed comes out tomorrow and says every American greenback is now worth 10, that's what it's worth. Saying we can't help people in need because we "don't have the money," is a cop-out.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Yes, if the Fed inflates the money, that is a problem. However, it is equally a problem if they do that to "help people in need". It hurts EVERYONE. Please live in the real world so you can effect positive change.

[-] 2 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

Here in the real world, we know that piece of paper is just that, a piece of paper. Please join us. In fact, it's so much like any other piece of paper, they had to stamp it with instructions telling everyone it was indeed, legal tender. I could just as easily stampt that on a rock.

[-] 2 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

No one said any such thing. I simply said it's worthless and we need to stop using it as a crutch to support our bad and unethical decisions. If you don't want to help the poor, and unemployed, that's your choice. Say you disagree with the principle. Don't tell me it's because we don't have enough of a fictional tool. That's dishonest.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Are you such a Luddite that you want to get rid of money? You realize it was invented thousands of years ago for a reason, don't you? You realize if you got rid of it, it would be re-invented the next day, don't you?

Please get a grip on reality.

[-] 1 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

Really? They didn't vote to bail out bankers and wall street and then vote to cut-off unemployment benefits for poeple who continue to be unable to find work? They don't contiually bring up for votes legislation that would end the welfare system and, literally take the food out of the mouths of babes while continuing to give tax breaks to Companies like GE, who made 10 billion in profits,not revenue, profits but paid not one dime in taxes?

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

I believe their point, which was valid, was that to extend unemployment benefits their had to be an identified way to pay for it. In any case, in a direct democracy it would be the PEOPLE - charity - who took care of one another.

As for GE - they are Obama's crony capitalist favorite. The current administration is the most corrupted by capitalism in history.

[-] 1 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

So, in other words, helping those in need simply would have cost too much. I believe that's why the wise ruler left Christ saddened, wasn't it? He couldn't give up his wealth, donate to the poor, pick up his cross and follow Christ, because he was indeed a wealthy man and that would have required great sacrefice. These are political decisions and they are going to be made. That's life. My point is, don't invoke Christ's name while you're committing unGodly acts.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

No, it is not that it would cost too much, it is that there is no money to pay for it. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?

I try not to live in cartoon land, to be honest. Republicans are not running around invoking Jesus any more than the other party. When you focus all of your energy on responding to party propaganda - from either side - you allow them to win.

As for Jesus, he never advocated that the government should "love their neighbor", that is the PEOPLE's role.

[-] 1 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

I don't know where you grew up, but in America, the government, IS the people. The government is simply the tool by which individuals effect the change together, they could not acheive alone.

[-] 1 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

It's facsist to think that I should require companies that make 10 billion a year to pay taxes when my company grosses 250,00 a year and pays taxes every quarter? And you're right alot of people don't support the same causes. They should stop "professing" to be Christians and start acting like it. The path to hell is wide open.

[-] -1 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

The government is only mandated to enact the will of the people. Lots of people do not support the same causes as you. That's why private charity exists. Why do you feel that you have the power to dictate to, say, the 50% of the population that is conservative that they support your causes and beliefs? That's why the government is limited by the Constitution, and that's why we have the freedom to form and support our own causes. Your way leads to fascism. Jesus was not a fascist. You are on the wrong path, my friend.

[-] -2 points by WillBill (9) 3 years ago

Then Jesus should burn in his own kindom - HELL

[-] 12 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

This was BEAUTIFUL. Keep this up.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

Agreed. Awsome! Congress, Senate, and corporate headquarters are next! :)

Please read my new contribution:

The "Free-Ride" Society

The right-wingers often tend to look at taxes as a way of stealing the friuts of other people´s labor, that people are being taxed so that other can enjoy a free ride. Well they´re way off. First of all, the ones who are really stealing the friuts of our labor are the financial elite who has been making billions by pushing a few buttons on a computer at the stock exchange and exploiting people in the US and all over the world. And secondly, the ”friuts” of one´s labor can´t be measured in an advanced moderen society.

We now live in a complex, highly advanced technological society built up by generations of people thru hundreds of years. People have been building infrastructure, contributed to science, developed technology, developed efficient ways of manufacturing etc etc. Because of all this effort we now enjoy a more wealthy, advanced and efficient society than ever. All of this, lots of it built and created long before we were even born, we’re now enjoying despite having little or nothing to do with contributing to it ourselves. In other words, our contributions, no matter what we do, are microscopic compared to what we receive from society. We’re enjoying the results of generations of people’s work gradually building a modern society – an enormous free ride.

Now, there are people, certainly in third world countries, but also in the West, who are struggling to get by and do not feel that they´re enjoying all these goods. I totally understand that but that has to do with the unfortunate concentration of wealth. I`m talking about the society as a whole. The western countries are more efficient and wealthy as ever, the problem is that we have a system that allows for more and more accumulation of wealth. That is one of the reasons why we have to abolish Capitalism and replace it with democracy.

Now, what´s really interesting about this ”free ride” - debate is that even though the rich, which the right-wing tend to support, are becoming increasingly wealthy by doing less, the right always turn to the poor and working class when they want to give a speech about getting free rides and stealing the friuts of other people´s labor. Citibank first recieved their taxpayer bailout back in the 80s from Reagan and have since that, along with an increasing number of other corporations received an enormous sum of taxmoney. Is that not staling the friuts of other people´s labor? And what about, let´s say, indonesian facory girls working 12 hours a day for 50 cents an hour at a Nike- factory so that Phil Knight and the rest of them can sell shoes and equipment for huge profits. Is that not getting a free ride?? Why isn´t this theft adressed by the right-wing? The rich, which have become rich mostly by pushing a few buttons at a computer at Wall Street, and/or exploiting workers in the US and all over the world, which isn`t exactly hard work, are being given more and more tax breaks and benefits by politicians, yet the right wing have the balls to criticize sick people for getting their medical bills covered by the government. To put it this way, as long as the wealthy are getting more and more recourses into their hands by doing very little, people should have no right lecturing the working class and poor for asking for welfare programs.

So how should we organize a complex highly advanced wealthy society? Make it more democratic! Make the workplaces democratic, make the communities democratic. Organize society so that people can be in control over their own lives. Create a society where we focus on peoples needs instead of short term profit. End the system we have today, which encourages greed and unsustainable and pointless consumption, and instead create a society where true human characteristics and feelings like engagement and solidarity will come to the fore. Create a decent civilized society where everyone can enjoy a decent life. Create a world where we all can enjoy the ”Free Ride” Society.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu8J_UKKa-c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YftlB3AxBws


further readings:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/strategies-and-expectations/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/replace-capitalism-with-democracy/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/


[-] 3 points by mserfas (652) from Ashland, PA 3 years ago

As Michael Moore says in "Capitalism: A Love Story", there was a time when we had a 90% tax rate for the highest earners. Yet that was regarded as capitalism. What is important, really, is not capitalism or communism, but rather, developing a set of positive rights people can count on. Our society has a few of these - we support the old on Social Security and the young with foster care - but we have left a lot of gaps. We don't need to have a communist revolution and overthrow the government in order to set up a system to ensure that the unemployment rate for every possible minority or other identifiable group stays below 3% by subsidizing employers who hire them. We would simply need to tax a little more to pay for it - tax companies that make a profit without hiring people to fund those which make a profit while sharing it with employees. Not radical stuff, except to the Party of No.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

If you by "communism" mean a form of leninist, or leninist-type society with a central powerful state, I agree, we don´t have to chose between capitalism and communism. There is another alternative : democracy- a society based on anarcho-syndicalst, or left libertarian principles with democratic workplaces and communities in which people don´t have to act like cogs in a machine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WveI_vgmPz8

Please read my post The Society We Should Strive For + the links.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

There is a real alternative to capitalism!

[-] 2 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Is our movement now against "the rich"? I am becoming more and more disappointed in the lack of focus, and the obvious co-opting of the movement by the left wing elements. Aren't "the rich" a major source of philanthropy? Isn't this movement funded by "the rich"? Where are we going with this?

[-] 2 points by Decoy4924 (44) 3 years ago

Less about anti-rich more about paying your fair share and having the people have a voice instead of corporations. That's my take and Im part of 99% we all are.

[-] -2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

I agree to a certain degree:) remember that the more rich people we have in society, the less democracy we have (the rich are not democratically elected) Read more here:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/replace-capitalism-with-democracy/

The society we should strive for:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

solidarity and greetings from Norway sff

[-] 1 points by Decoy4924 (44) 3 years ago

Though interesting Im not sure such significant change is viable due to the level of change needed. I find your system in theory very interesting but without starting a country on these core ideals it cannot be implemented. Thank you for your insight you have given me something to ponder.

[-] 0 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

youre very welcome. I hope you´ll eventually see that there is nothing radical about a libertarian left /anarcho-syndicalist society. It´s just pure logic. People should be able to particiapte in the affairs theyre apart of and that affect them, like the economic institutions - their workplace, their local communities etc.

Make sure you check out all the links under my posts as well :)

And remember, there are losts of examples of countries radically changing their policies for the better!

[-] 1 points by Decoy4924 (44) 3 years ago

Already did very interesting and thought provoking but sadly what is logical and what is, rarely match up. Hey what are your thoughts on low cost index funds 789junior pointed them out and they seem like a effective tactic vs Wall Street.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-04/occupy-my-wallet-moving-money-off-wall-street.html

As always thank you for your insight it gives much to think over and causing thought is always good.

[-] 1 points by hmmm (52) 3 years ago

Mutual funds are actually on their way out, from what i gather. I've read a little bit about the topic, and it seems that most mutual funds under-perform the market indexes. On top of that, they take larger percentages from whatever they make for you, and when they buy and sell shares, you pay the capital gains tax from it.

Low cost ETFs (exchange traded funds) can be a good option. There are also ETFs that follow specific areas, such as clean energy (although i'd love a wider range of ethical options).

Of course, you should take your own financial situation into account before doing anything. Stocks can be risky in the short term, etc etc. Take care of your future!

[-] 2 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

As far as I know, you don't get the same voting rights when you own an ETF or a mutual fund. To me at least, this seems unfair. If Fidelity is holding millions of peoples' money in a stock, what do they do with the voting rights??

It almost seems to me that this might be a big part of the problem we're protesting. I've looked for disclosure as to how they vote and can't find anything.

[-] 1 points by hmmm (52) 3 years ago

That is a very good point, i didn't think about voting rights.

I've noticed that HOLDRs are similar to ETFs, and give voting rights. They seem to be a Merryl Lynch product, though...

You're right, it is a minefield, and the message they're putting out seems to be "it's very complicated, don't worry, we'll take care of your money for you <wolfish grin>"

[-] 2 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

I found it. It's in an SEC form called N-PX. I looked a Fidelity Series 1 mutual fund for an example and while it's somewhat interesting, it's basically a couple hundred pages long. It includes tables with the specific company, and a list of what is being voted on in the first column. How the management recommend they vote(For or Against) in the second column and their actual vote in the third column.

The most interesting thing that I found is that all votes on whether to disclose contributions to political candidates or involving politics at all, they vote to "Abstain". Also, they do it so consistently that I'm inclined to think that they're legally required to.

[-] 1 points by Decoy4924 (44) 3 years ago

That is sad to hear I was hoping for a more viable way to protest on another front. Thank you for looking into it maybe there is something else along these lines we can use.

[-] 1 points by hmmm (52) 3 years ago

I was thinking of looking into some individual companies with good social and environmental values, but not everyone has the capacity to purchase stocks, and they can be quite risky. I would hate to have any part in jeopardizing someone's financial future.

The low cost Index ETF is still a good idea, as it does deprive big bank stock-pickers of the commission fees they charge. A mutual fund is like a portfolio that's actively managed by a a bunch of analysts. An ETF is like a basket of stocks that might be slightly adjusted once a year. Index ETFs generally have better returns; go figure.

[-] 1 points by Decoy4924 (44) 3 years ago

Individuals may not be able to invest but if we pool our efforts in organized way we could cause a stir. Those bonuses are one of the reasons they like making a volatile economy because of the short term gains. We effected the banks by simply moving our money from there banks how much more do you think we could do by changing the way we invest in our futures, Thank you for the info and your insight I think I will look into this further.

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Must hold to an anti-corruption philosophy to maintain support.

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 3 years ago

Sorry you are so confused. No this is not funded by the rich. This is the people. This is a movement against corporate greed and government corruption. They feed on each other to protect the 1% against the interests of the 99%. Most people get that without needing a personal explanation. But, happy to help...

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

OWS has amassed close to a million dollars. This came from people who have money; it is not yet the stuff you plan to print on your own.

I'm sorry you suffer from delusions. They have medications for that, you know.

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 3 years ago

Oh, I see, you were not confused, you are just stupid and do not even know math. According to reports, this site has had over 4 million unique users. If everyone gave 25 cents, that is 1 million bucks. Say only 100,000 of the 4 milion users gave anything. How much would they have to give (on average) to raise 1 million? I'll let you try to figure it out for a little bit and give you the answer later...

[-] -1 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

50% of donations come from those making $75K or more. That took me 30 seconds to find out. In other words, the people who have money. These people were once for the movement, but I doubt many of them are left, except those who go along with the movement evolving into yet another hard-left agitation group.

By the way, I have forgotten more math than you will ever learn.

[-] 1 points by hmmm (52) 3 years ago

Um, people who earn $75k are part of the 99%.

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 3 years ago

The financial reports are on this site. You have not presented any data to back up your assertion about the financial characteristics of those donating. In terms of who is and was for the movement, you have not presented any evidence to support your opinion. So, speak for yourself. In terms of what you have forgotten or what you ever think you knew, I leave that up to you but does not sound like much based on what you say, how you say it, and how little evidence you bring to bear on arguments you try to make. I do respect your right to have an opinion--no matter how ignorant or stupid it may be. Problem for you is that if you go out in public and make an ass out of yourself can't complain if people call you on it. As they say, lead, follow or get our of the way (or we will get you out of the way). No time to be in the confused middle. Your call.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Where do you think the data came from, you arrogant know-it-all?

People have warned me not to argue with committed "leftists", as they will deny every fact, ignore every argument, and fall back on name calling and "feelings". You have confirmed this.

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 3 years ago

Read. I clearly asked you for a reference. Your question to me is not a reference. It is a way to avoid the real issue. If you have empirical evidence for the statements that you made, then present it, and I will consider it.

[-] 0 points by FreeMarkets (272) 3 years ago

Winning!

[-] 1 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

most people are all for being rich. The rich should pay their fair share and not use their power and influence to gut the poor and the middle class which is what the corporations have done with the help of right wingers in Congress. The rich-banks-should NOT defraud their customers and produce fraudulent mortgage loans. They should not gut the consumer. There is no such thing as "the rich"!! We are talking about corrupt individuals and people who don't play by the rules and don't pay their fair share. They have made a great deal of their wealth by outright corruption and greed. That is the kind of rich most people are against. Try not to think in slogans and black and white.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

I don't think there are more than 100 people in the country that fit that description. As for the "right wing", I point out again that they comprise approximately one half of the 99%, so I don't get why they are viewed as part of the problem. Remember that it was Barnie Frank and Bill Clinton that originated this whole debacle in the first place, along with the corporate co-conspirators Fannie and Freddie. So I think we can dispense with the whole right- left-thing.

[-] 1 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

it was not Barnie Frank and Bill Clinton but all those GOPERS in Congress who passed the bankruptcy bill and did away with GLASS STEGAL. That was Phil Gramm.

Bush pushed home ownership and refused to let 18 states reign in corrupt lenders in 2004 when the FBI said wide spread fraud was taking place in the mortgage industry.

Bush drive for home ownership fueled housing bubble http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html White House Philosophy Stoked Mortgage Bonfire http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21admin.html Bush pushes home ownership opportunities for minorities http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/03/27/bush_pushes_home_ownership_opportunities_for_minorities/ Bush to push ownership society http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/01/news/economy/election_bush_plan/index.htm Home Ownership and President Bush http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8

[-] 1 points by GeorgeWashington (81) 3 years ago

If the rich people were so philanthropic we may not be in the boat we are today....don't you think?

[-] 1 points by Decoy4924 (44) 3 years ago

I think we still would be in the current situation because a great deal of the issue comes from how the money is made not how it is spent. Though I could be wrong Im not exactly a business guru. Good thought though.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

That is just goofy. Direct charitable giving in the US is over $300B each year. Corporate, individual, and payroll taxes amount to 80% of the $2.5 Trillion collected by the government. All of that comes from the people who have money. The "boat" we are in today comes from allowing the federal government to (a) amass too much power and autonomy, and (b) be too open to corruption by outside influences. What comes from that is fraud, waste, and abuse (think Solyndra).

We need to focus on the problem at hand!

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 3 years ago

You have no idea what you are talking about and are full of shit. 1/3 of the 300b goes to religious issues but that is besides the point. Last time I remember someone looked, they found that as a proportion of income, the poor gave more than any other income group.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2009/05/19/68456/americas-poor-are-its-most-generous.html

The rich have too much power and the government is for sale to them. That is the problem. We need a strong and vital government of, for and by the people.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

What makes you think that this movement is funded by "the rich" as you say??? Not hardly! Funny you should bring up philanthropy, as a friend of mine was telling me how her aunt, who married into money, is very upset by the OWS movement; her aunts' excuse for great wealth was exactly that: rich people are philanthropic. To which my friend explained to her dear aunt that many charitably organizations are industries, per se, and so the bulk of the money they donate goes to the foundation instead of the needy people they profess to serve. If you read David Kay Johnston's book Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (AND STICK YOU WITH THE BILL), there is a great chapter about electric utilities. Warren Buffet is the subject of one utility buy out, where he bulldozed over the citizens of Johnson City who wanted to have an independent electric utility, while Buffet was promoted in the media as a "beneficent billionaire who is portrayed as someone that we should respect because he is so rich." People don't get rich without stepping on toes, and for the wealthiest, that means relinquishing citizens with their power, ability and authority to makes systems work in their local economies. Not to mention how wealth and riches are relative. The best measure of wealth should not be how much money do the minority of people have to be frivolous with, but how well our systems serve people and communities. The more politically involved and economically involved and empowered people are, the more we can act in society as true individuals, rather than proponents of a limited set of choices. Increased freedom to be better and greater actors in society...that is where this is going.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

It´s undemocratic when the rich control major recourses:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/replace-capitalism-with-democracy/

[-] 1 points by Freedom2B (23) 3 years ago

Actually, it would be the epitome of democracy for "the rich" to control resources. In a completely free society resources could only be controlled by those who use them wisely, because the force of law and government could not be used to protect their interests.

[-] 1 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

WHAT???? So the rich guys at British Petroleum need to control our resources. where do you get these whacko ideas??? with no oversight and NO regulations then the tax payer gets to spend billions to clean up the mess or care for the cancer victims who sucked up the criminals pollution.

[-] 1 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

In other words, "might makes right".

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

No, in a free society the institutions is run democratically by the particiapants ( http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/ )

not by private tyrannies

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpd3grtjkK8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxPUvQZ3rcQ

intersting that you put "the rich" in quatationmarks. Arnt the rich really rich??

[-] 0 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

thank you for your rational posts. To think this person has the word "freedom" in his moniker.

[-] 0 points by xavier (28) 3 years ago

against the rich? i think it's more about legally redefining the meaning of 'profit' and how 'profit' is made. clearly global resources can no longer support the 'right' to make limitless profit at the expense of those who labor, communities, the environment, basic human rights. 'profit' needs to become synonymous with the social good in some way.

[-] 1 points by bettersystem (170) 3 years ago

Capitalism is fine, the freedom to opt out of it and not die is what this is really about.

a system for the exchange of good and a system of governing people and preserving their inalienable right to human life on earth should always be separate.

It shall be the privilege of no person to claim from another the resources of the earth for which they rely on for life and liberty.

http://wesower.org

[-] 1 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

This, and the comments made by Zendude and yasmine, pretty much proves my point: The original goals of this movement were not to vilify "profit", but rather to remove the influence of corporatism in government. Now we are drifting into zero population growth, and the idea that profit is somehow a bad thing. Zendude, you can always make things more efficient. That's what agriculture and modern manufacturing do. And outsourcing jobs is viewed by all economists as ultimately a good thing: It's certainly good for the poor in other countries - is it not? It also means that the consumer in this country gets to keep more of their own money - to do with it what they see fit. Perhaps they can give more to charity, or send their kids to college. Your view would shut all of that down based on ignorance of basic economics.

I notice a lot of people who are abandoning the movement. The extremists have taken over, particularly the left wingers. I think things may have already run their course, and now the movement has been hijacked. So sad . .

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

The TEA party movement all over again just with a different set of extremist.

[-] 1 points by xavier (28) 3 years ago

i see ows as a pro-democracy movement. that to me is what it's about. personally, i wouldn't want to see it dominated by the left, right, center or any political party, regardless of my own preferences and beliefs. i want to see a democracy movement where everybody's in and can be heard. then you can have a real discussion.

[-] 1 points by GeorgeWashington (81) 3 years ago

Modern agriculture has never made us more sick. Talk with nutritionists. Outsourcing would be great if it wasn't conducted as just a small step above complete slavery. Send their kids to college? Because if the college student gets a loan it's estimated to take him until he's forty to pay it back! Economic ignorance? Check your facts.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

There must be a pony in there somewhere . . .

[-] 1 points by OooGeeE (21) from New Rochelle, NY 3 years ago

Dude what world do you live in? and how can you not understand what we are for? We are looking for equality across the board. Money shouldn't control our politics. Period.

[-] 1 points by Freedom2B (23) 3 years ago

I'm in favor of equal opportunity, but not from the government and laws. Opportunity comes from people and businesses. Laws come from government, and they are typically a double-edged sword. Usually someone gains at the expense of another, just like when corporatism favors certain businesses or financial "institutions" at the expense of taxpayers. Fewer laws dictating our every waking moment would allow people to create their own future and enjoy the results of the risks they decide to take to create that future.

[-] 1 points by OooGeeE (21) from New Rochelle, NY 3 years ago

Your idea is great and I agree but then we have the current problem of "corporate greed" which throws everything out of whack and then yeah we need government to step in to protect the PEOPLE. Then you have these greedy execs controlling the entity that is For The People. And that there is the problem. There salaries have gone up and ours have stayed the same for decades now. And yet there is another problem.

[-] 1 points by invient (360) 3 years ago

The current state of agriculture AND manufacturing is not more efficient in any meaningful terms (energy, and time). GM foods have shown to reduce soil quality, and have reduced out puts, all the while consuming more and more amounts of pesticides. How is it more efficient to build something in china, and then transport to the US for sale? If it were made in the US, would not that be more energy efficient.

Outsourcing can be argued to be bad. For each job that goes oversees, we have a loss in one customer. This customer likely had a job that was paying a low wage or salary, and they likely would have to spend all of their income to get by. Now, this new worker oversees, will be in the same position, but the difference in his pay from the US worker, goes into the profit margin. The company, can then give out a bonus to the CEO for outsourcing, and dividends to its' share holders. Its all about aggregation of wealth, not efficiency. The only way to aggregate wealth once any true efficiency is rooted out (say improving the manufacturing process), then the only way to get more profit from the same sales, is to decrease labor or material cost. Labor often gets the short end of the stick.

[-] 1 points by Freedom2B (23) 3 years ago

You refer to the unfair currency manipulation that both the US and China engage in. Because the value of the yuan is pegged roughly 7-to-1 to the dollar, of course it makes business sense to send manufacturing to China or risk being uncompetitive. Slapping tariffs on all Chinese goods might be a response, but I think most of the heavy manufacturing that has already left will not return. The global economies are transitioning to a digital world, and all seismic shifts result in collateral damage unless people can adapt and change to the new reality quickly.

[-] 1 points by invient (360) 3 years ago

The current state of agriculture AND manufacturing is not more efficient in any meaningful terms (energy, and time). GM foods have shown to reduce soil quality, and have reduced out puts, all the while consuming more and more amounts of pesticides. How is it more efficient to build something in china, and then transport to the US for sale? If it were made in the US, would not that be more energy efficient.

Outsourcing can be argued to be bad. For each job that goes oversees, we have a loss in one customer. This customer likely had a job that was paying a low wage or salary, and they likely would have to spend all of their income to get by. Now, this new worker oversees, will be in the same position, but the difference in his pay from the US worker, goes into the profit margin. The company, can then give out a bonus to the CEO for outsourcing, and dividends to its' share holders. Its all about aggregation of wealth, not efficiency. The only way to aggregate wealth once any true efficiency is rooted out (say improving the manufacturing process), then the only way to get more profit from the same sales, is to decrease labor or material cost. Labor often gets the short end of the stick.

[-] 1 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Like I said, this movement is being taken over by people who have, shall we say, "alternate theories" of economics.

Do you make your own steel for your car or bicycle? Wouldn't it be more energy efficient, per your argument, to make steel in your basement? No it would not. These types of things were figured out - and SETTLED - long ago. Before you try to tear down a system, you should try to understand why it works so well.

As for your bogey man argument that "profits" are given to CEOs and shareholders, I believe that is the whole point. This is not a bad thing: That money drives the economy.

I will say it again: I am all for supporting a movement to limit the corruption of government. However, I am not sending more donations to this cause if I think it has been taken over by economic illiterates and dreamers. We can effect real change, or we can become a caricature.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 3 years ago

I agree. This movement has zero focus and does not intend to change. You might want to check out this group.

At least it has some concrete plans to work with and through government to get something done! There is a link here to their FB page. Right now thats all they've got for a forum, but they are said to be working on getting something better. https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/

[-] 0 points by Zendude (75) from New York, NY 3 years ago

This world needs its dreamers. We are all witnessing a change that was not even thought of a couple of years ago--social media and the Internet have created a venue in which people from all over the world can express their ideas and opinions, and it is from the expression of these ideas and opinions that a consensus, a truly democratic consensus, can emerge.

Henry Kissinger had a great idea many years ago. He called it "convergence." He envisioned a world where the best of all political and economic systems would converge into a new system that would benefit mankind and ultimately lead to a one world government. Was he an economic illiterate and a dreamer?

Why do so many of us, either on the "left" or the "right," shut our open minds down and choose to espouse our chosen dogma? Haven't enough dogmas been "proven" wrong over the centuries? Don't we have the moral strength yet to be able to realize that there is good and bad in everything? We would all be so much better off if we could work towards ultimate solutions that incorporate the best of all systems--capitalism, socialism, and even the dreaded communism, while eschewing the worst of these systems.

[-] 2 points by Freedom2B (23) 3 years ago

Just a note: "Democratic Consensus" is a oxymoron, because the majority rules and the minority is ignored.

[-] 0 points by invient (360) 3 years ago

It is a negligible transportation cost from a local foundry as apposed to China. I never said, make everything yourself. My point was the abhorrent energy inefficiency of making something across an ocean and then transporting it. If externalities were included in the cost of producing and transportation, you would see much less work being done overseas.

It is the whole point, but you have to look at the whole equation. The profits, are NOT profits, it a transfer of wealth from US labor workers to the company through outsourcing.

There are multiple schools of thought when it comes to economics. Please do not only concern yourself with the chicago version.

[-] 1 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Tell me how companies that make products overseas and ship them here manage to avoid paying "externalities". I am not anti-capitalist like you. Capitalism has a way of making things as efficient as they can possibly be. You can't hide a loss by talking it away, or you will go out of business.

[-] 1 points by Thomas132 (2) 3 years ago

As efficient as it can possibly be? Come on! Planned expiration of products is quintessential capitalism, why do you think your Ipod battery gives out after two years or your inkjet printer dies out guaranteed within five years? Has any pc been produced the last twenty years that didn't break down very quickly while the very first computer is still running? Efficiency is capitalism's greatest enemy. I don't know about you newworldnow but please tell me how the manufacturing of goods in the far east and shipping them across an ocean to be sold is effcient in a time of expiring natural resources? You call everyone here dogmatic extremist and naive, well trust me you're the one dreaming. By the way since price setting is a purely subjective thing economics are not a science but just a new religion, just look at inside job and tell me how brokers and ceo's of banks destroying their own companies for a shorterm bonus next selling that wreckage to the government is efficient. Sorry, what you are saying is bs and those academics you believe in make 90% of their money consulting major finance institutions. Economists' efficiency means ignoring the environment, local welfare and human rights conditions notwithstanding crime like corruption, energy resources and their obligations towards their clients and only focussing on the shortterm profit. If you're not anticapitalistic yet watch the documentary inside job and tell me again you still believe in capitalism. It's simple the balance is completely lost, I don't mind a market economy but American capitalism is predatory and insane, I believe in European capitalism, but people like you hysterically brand that as leftist and socialist while the average living standard is higher in Europe compared to the US every year. Jeezes you really got stuck in the past, get with the future.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Hmm. How many straw men did you murder in that single paragraph, I wonder . . . You have come up with your own definition of efficiency that has nothing to do with goods and services. Rather, it has to do with your values, and your (unfounded) belief in "expiring natural resources". You can make purchasing decisions based on those values, and if there are enough of you then "capitalism" will respond and give you what you want: Look at all the goofy "green" cleaning products that you can buy (even at WalMart). The problem is you are in the minority: Most people like what they are getting for the price. The PC, iPod or printer would last much longer if you would pay more, but on average you won't: In any case technology moves so rapidly that these things are obsolete in a couple of years: The market has balanced this out. You are merely offended at the outcome.

[-] 1 points by Thomas132 (2) 3 years ago

Again, bs, every major company CEO will tell you their only responsibility is towards the stockholders, considering the impact they have,, why should their only responsibility be with those that want ever more money and nothing else. The goofy green products you mention are simply a different goofy packaging, a reduction in tocicity of 5% is now greenwashed to be ecologically friendly. Should I refer to the BP commercial that was running while the oil platform started leaking? The idea that people want to pay less and therefore are stuck with bad products is not true. As a consumer you don't have any leverage to codecide about price, you claim the consumer has all the power but he hasn't, since consumers are divided and consumer organizations are gutted. It has all to do with incentives, a modern day incentive structure rewards greed as was proven with Freddie and Fanny ENron, Lehmann..., American politics, the insurance and medical sector etcetera. I don't have anything against money, but if a maximum profit is the only goal you can't deny that crime is reasonably the most efficient because you get the most profit in the shortest of time, that's why banks launder money, cook their books and defraud their small investors by parking them in the most lousy investments. During the internet bubble anything with .com got a triple A while internally they knew very well they were given pieces of crap shares. The reason products don't last that long is the shortterm annual quarters profit margins. Do you consider it efficient for a company that when the CEO dies the shares go don not for making losses, but simply for having 10% profit less. Banks are leveraged 33 to 1 so the slightest glitch in revenue leaves them bleeding dry of cash and because they are capitalist the staff won't think of giving in a bonus to help the company survive. Your problem is that your arguments come from a time when people still had to believe what information they got, the library was a long distance away for checking up on what was said on the telly and you needed training to find your way and know who were the good authors. Right now people have been empowered by the internet and can check any given fact imediately. Of course there are the stubborn people protecting their own advantage and refusing to do so, but they seem increasingly cruel, criminal and dumb as every discussion on this board proves. I know companies in and out, I know how PR and marketing works and I had a postgraduate training, I speak four languages and I'm making good money. I'm not the ecodreadhippie you imagine. I just think that anyone not seeing how this system is destructive on a global scale worse than any kind of epidemic or natuaral disaster is stupid or naive or a cokehead or simply a guy speaking only for his own interests. Machiavelli, the moment any kind of society doesn't manage to convince their subjects it is in everyone's best interest, the society will fall. Your way of thinking has caused this to happen, noone knows now what will be next. 20 million foreclosures means creating an army of people wanting to change society. You're creating your own downfall hombre, enjoy it.

[-] 1 points by invient (360) 3 years ago

I like capitalism, but the one envisioned by Adam Smith (i.e. many small enterprises competing over the same market)...

I am also a libertarian socialist, which only means I wish for democracy to be applied to all forms of our lives. Democracy in the work place, just as democracy outside. For some reason people think it is okay to switch to authoritarianism once they clock in...

[-] 1 points by invient (360) 3 years ago

Climate change, as result of our inefficient use of energy is one. Also, there is this phrase in political science called "race to the bottom." Were third world countries compete with each other for the most lax environmental regulations to attract manufacturers who do not want to pay the costs associated with their particular form of pollution. Coal power plants release heavy metals into the surrounding air, this leads to higher cancer rates in residents (yet the power plants will not pay their health care bills)... PCB manufacturers in one town had polluted so much that everyone in that town had health problems and blood levels way above average, the ground is literally saturated.... the recent fracking industry has had many complaints of their pollutants getting into water basins, causing residents to develop cancer, and nerve diseases...

The list goes on and on...

[-] 1 points by bettersystem (170) 3 years ago

Capitalism is fine, the freedom to opt out of it and not die is what this is really about.

a system for the exchange of good and a system of governing people and preserving their inalienable right to human life on earth should always be separate.

It shall be the privilege of no person to claim from another the resources of the earth for which they rely on for life and liberty.

http://wesower.org

[-] 0 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

who are these "extremists" yore referring to..? can you be more specific? What on earth is extreme about being left wing?

[-] 1 points by bettersystem (170) 3 years ago

which wing is responsible for a food and drug administration that enforces laws written by private pharmaceutical companies and handed to government officials with fat checks and promises of future employment?

The health of all Americans and people throughout the world is jeopardized because our health care industry refuses to provide natural medicines and treatment that people can acquire and use themselves because it will have a negative effect on industry profits. This the primary reason why we refuse to give ourselves universal care.

It is criminal and it is only works because the people have been manipulated through media, fear and propaganda to turn against one another and help preserve private profits, against their own interest.

Boycott Capitalism, Force Change.

http://wesower.org

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

"which wing is responsible for a food and drug administration that enforces laws written by private pharmaceutical companies and handed to government officials with fat checks and promises of future employment?"

The right wing (that includes the democrats)

We need a libertarian left society built on democracy form the bottom up.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

[-] 0 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

"We" do not, but you guys in Norway can do whatever you want.

[-] -1 points by Killumination (80) from Los Angeles, CA 3 years ago

Well, that was a load of crap.

[-] 0 points by Zendude (75) from New York, NY 3 years ago

You are absolutely right about profits! I mean what the heck? How is it possible to perpetually reap greater profits, the raison d'être of corporate America? Well, the first way is expansion and the second is to reduce costs. When you look at this realistically, it is impossible for this to continue forever. We already have 7 billion people on this planet. Do we keep expanding and expanding? What happens when we have 14 billion people, are we going to expand on other planets?

Reducing costs is also impossible long term. How long can you squeeze and squeeze to reduce costs? The only way is to lengthen employee working hours and outsource jobs to countries where workers are willing to accept lower wages. No matter how you look at it, the corporate process cannot ultimately survive mathematically.

I believe that the prime responsibility of society is to provide housing, education, jobs, and healthcare for everyone. If one person in our entire global society is not receiving these basic necessities, we, the 99%, have failed. Through Occupy Wall Street, global consciousness is rising, and I am confident that the battle cry of the new order will be, "All for one, once and for all!

[-] 3 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

"I believe that the prime responsibility of society is to provide housing, education, jobs, and healthcare for everyone. If one person in our entire global society is not receiving these basic necessities, we, the 99%, have failed."

Things like this will be the end of the OWS movement let this view be expressed as the goal and it will destroy all the hard work.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 3 years ago

Well said!

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

I like the republic that we have and my property rights you will have to find a new idea that doesn't involve socialism and spamming/shouting views like this is going to hurt the movement and loose support from the average American.

[-] 2 points by laffingrass (362) from Normal, IL 3 years ago

That's fine, considering this doesn't involve socialism.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

I think you´re underestimate the american people. I think most of them want democracy. I think most of them want to be in control of their own lives and affairs:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

So our real argument is what gives more freedoms?

A socialist government or a republican democracy? It's all in the title....

[-] 0 points by Frizzle (520) 3 years ago

I would think the argument shouldn't be about labels at all. But about the actual solutions, without trying to label it the same as outdated idea's. We live in a highly technical society. Anything humanity will try will be a lot different then any of the older systems.

[-] 0 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

humanity?

I want America fixed, the others appear to be doing their own thing as well or is Sharia Law a option in this talk?

governments have titles for a reason, it defines what they are and the amount of freedoms we truly have.

[-] 3 points by Decoy4924 (44) 3 years ago

Good call Socrates my main focus is getting corporations to pay there fair share in tax and get there influence out of Washington. If possible we should pressure Congress to put law in place stating corporations can make no campaign donations directly or in directly and lobbyist can not give "gifts". Given the average large corporation pays less than 18% tax which they are supposed to be paying 35% the tax law needs reform more than ever.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Agreed

[-] 1 points by Freedom2B (23) 3 years ago

I think I know what you mean, but freedoms are not given, they are innate.

[-] -1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

"So our real argument is what gives more freedoms?"

Well, that´s a very superficial way of looking at it. There are lots of differnet cases and that are important.

"A socialist government or a republican democracy?"

No. A republic has a huge democratic deficit. The question we should be asking ourselves is what i referred to a couple of minutes ago:

Do we want real democracy?

Do we want to be in control of our own lives, work and affairs?

Do we want to have a solidaric sustainable society?

If the answer to all those questons are "yes" (which I think most people wold answer) than libertarian left/anarcho-syndicalism is the way to go. Libertarian Socialism doesnt mean enpowering government (actually its anti-government) LS only means expanding democracy to workplaces, communities and so on.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

"Do we want to be in control of our own lives, work and affairs?"

You tell me, who enforces these socialist laws that the majority put in place?

[-] 0 points by FreeMarkets (272) 3 years ago

The Politburo will enforce them, of course. They will shop at private stores and vacation at private villas (because they need their energy to lead the People).

[-] 0 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

The people participating in society. I think you need to read my post once more. Watch the links as well. http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

"The people participating in society." different then politicians how?

Is there a main group in all this and why would we not call them a government also how is "The people participating in society" different then the way government enforces laws and do so without oppressing a group of people, and my final question of we already have a system that "The people participating in society" can use it's called voting why would your version work better instead of removing the corruption that is currently the problem to a form of government that has already proven itself to be the most effective?

Also waiting on a reply to comment below

[-] 0 points by FreeMarkets (272) 3 years ago

You know, they poisoned the first Socrates for asking "dangerous" questions like that . . .

[-] 0 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

In an anarcho-syndicalist society there would be much more direct democracy, in other words, less representative democracy with lying politicians running things. There will have to be representative democracy in this society, but they would be recallable delegates representing communities etc. The society would be decentralized and fedrated.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Delegate: A person sent or authorized to represent others, in particular, an elected representative sent to a conference....

We call those politicians in America and we do elect them even. how is what you say different then fixing what we have? Like replacing the corrupt "delegates" we currently have with Americans that understand the Constitution and Bill of Rights from people in our "community" (state) through Direct Election and what politician can't be removed if the American people could agree they wanted him out?

In the end you just want the socialism part so one set of people can control the rest of the people by means of the government through economics.

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

" "In the end you just want the socialism part so one set of people can control the rest of the people by means of the government through economics."

No i want a fedreated society with democratic workplaces and communities."

That's what I said you just put a socialist spin on it that I am not buying.

This is where we move on, neither one of us is going to convince the other.

have a good day.

[-] 1 points by invient (360) 3 years ago

I think you just described the current system.

[-] -1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

The main difference would be that there is MUCH more direct democracy in a libertarian left society

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WveI_vgmPz8

Arnt you paying attention..?

"In the end you just want the socialism part so one set of people can control the rest of the people by means of the government through economics."

No i want a fedreated society with democratic workplaces and communities. Pay attention!

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

We have had this talk, "control of the majority over the minority".

The Republican form of government with states deciding their own laws on things like welfare or education. Then you say "control by the minority" in which I reply "not exactly, it's decided by the majority at a state level".

And your guy Chompsky and "Libertarian Socialism" saying we don't use the correct meaning of libertarian at least not the classic one...

Libertarianism can be traced back to ancient China, where philosopher Lao-tzu advocated the recognition of individual liberties. The modern libertarian theory emerged in the sixteenth century through the writings of Etienne de La Boetie (1530–1563), an eminent French theorist. In the seventeenth century, John Locke and a group of British reformers known as the Levellers fashioned the classical basis for libertarianism.

Throughout history, Laozi's work has been embraced by various anti-authoritarian movements. Anti-authoritarians usually believe in full equality before the law and strong civil liberties. Sometimes the term is used interchangeably with anarchism, an ideology which rejects the state and other compulsory forms of hierarchical authority.

One more question, will you be voting in this election?

We will have no part of your socialism, thank you and good day.

[-] 1 points by Decoy4924 (44) 3 years ago

Is there an actual leader to this movement or plan of action because I really want to know? Can we have a plan of action at least because Seattle 99% is kinda dying and I want it to succeed. Also sorry for hijacking your discussion but the newest entry's kinda devolved into pissing contest.

[-] 0 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

"libertarian" has been used frequently by anti-stateist socialists, left marxists and anarchists in european history. That was Chomsky´s point. I don´t think it very relevant debating where the word was first used. What I want to focus on is what kind of society we should have - how should it be organized and so on. Should people be able to democratically run their own workplace or should unacocuntable private tyrannies be the ones in control of society´s recources.

What you call a fedreated decentralized society with democratic communities and workplaces is not important, the important thing is tha we strive for this society.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Will you be voting?

[-] 0 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

which election are you referring to?

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Nov. 6th 2012

[-] -1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

Oh, that one:) Well, then I would have to move to the United States and become an american citizen, which probably would be very nice, all americans I´ve met so far (in real life not online) have been very kind. However, I do like my life in Norway right now. But who knows. If the 99% manage to set in place a more democratic free and just society I might apply for citizenship :)

its btw nice to be mistaken for an american. That means my english isnt that bad...

[-] 1 points by The1capitalist (87) 3 years ago

you constantly contradict yourself in your own arguments, and also have a very ignorant world view. By "pushing a few buttons" you wouldn't last a day in that environment. It is competition at its fiercest. The venture capitalists and "wall street" are an economic engine.

Think Silicon Valley. Think tech start ups.

Try reading and understanding without bending your arguments to your innate biases

[-] 1 points by derek (302) 3 years ago

Related to your point on equity inthe fruits of generations of the human social enteprise: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit

Also, on mixing local subsistence, gift giving, exchange (softened by a basic income), and participatory democratic planning: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vK-M_e0JoY

I can wonder how many hours went in to this event (and viewing it) and what other alternatives were considered. Often, political people lose power not so much when they are confronted (which implies they are still powerful and gives them an excuse to exercise their power) but more when they are just ignored and passed by because there are seen to be alternatives somehow.

Bucky Fuller said: "You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."

In that sense, what OWS is doing learning to live together and police itself and allocate the movements resources equitably and with foresight and compassion may be more interesting and pathfinding than these kinds of protests? Perhaps speaking truth with each other may make a bigger difference in the end than "speaking truth to power"?

[-] 1 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

couldn't agree more. keep up the great work. maybe the American people will wake up.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

The growing occupy movement shows that americans are in the process of doing that at this moment :)

[-] 1 points by stacythorpe (4) from Hutchinson, KS 3 years ago

capitalism and democracy are one if you take out capitalism you remove democracy then what would it be replaced by ? socialism ? that is exactly what your fighting against is socialism not capitalism. It was a socialist decision to bail out the big corporations and let the people that needed the money starve and vise verse if the money was given to the people. socialism is were the government gets involve in capitalism and regulates it or frees it up. What the government did was wrong and should have not got involved in the first place and let them fail. When they did this it broke the capitalist system and made things all messed up. Yes people would have lost there houses, and yes the big companies would have failed and payed for there screw ups.. that is how capitalism works it is fair for all until when big companies fail small business is able to rise to take its place and middle class and poor are more able to start new businesses and revolves so that the wealthy can become poor and the poor can become wealthy.instead the government gets involved and screws with the system. They printed more money and got loans from other countries to cover it then bailed out the people that should be poor now and now there will be more inflation and the poor will suffer more it hasn't got to its worst yet.The government and lobbyist of corporations have passed so many laws to keep the people from making money is also the issue not the capitalist system itself. It can be fixed with abolishment of laws that were past over the years to keep the people from being creative and inventive and also to be able to start there own business without all the fees. abolishment of taxes that are illegal in the first place according to the constitution. Go back to the free trade market the way it should be.. return to the gold standard.. remove the federal reserve and IRS which cost billions to run and operate bring back the troops and stop waging war that's not on our own soil.. These are a few things that can be done. Also it was against the constitution for the government to print money for this very reason.

[-] 3 points by invient (360) 3 years ago

CHINA has a CAPITALIST economic system. Despite the myth, capitalism and democracy are not tied together in any way.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

correct. In fact, you cant have real democracy an capitalism at the same time http://occupywallst.org/forum/replace-capitalism-with-democracy/

In order for a free democratic society to be realized, capitalism must be dismantled http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

[-] 1 points by looselyhuman (3117) 3 years ago

Agreed. Pinochet proved it.

[-] 1 points by Uspatriot5000 (128) 3 years ago

Wrong. I have worked in China. The government is still heavily involved and controls everything. A company has to have permission to open, work, etc. They decide in many cases what the workers will be paid or at least a range. If the company does business with the government, they decide when to pay the company. Sometimes it is 6 months after the work is done. My former employer maintained an complex over there for years. I was sent over there to work and saw the culture first hand. I was having a conversation with one of my Chinese co-workers one time. I made a comment about the company having no unemployment, hunger, homelessness, etc. His direct quote, "That is government propaganda bulls%$t!" So, NO they are not capitalist.

Socialism will never take root in this country. This movement will not make any change. The most recent Rasmussen pole shows that only 36% agree with the OWS movement. That 41% disagree. The rest are undecided. That means you are still in the minority. With no majority, no change. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/october_2011/occupy_wall_street_protesters_36_favorable_41_unfavorable

The other problem is you have the hard conservative Tea Party on one side, the hard leftist OWS on the other side, and possibly as much as 50% of people in the middle. Once again, not enough on either side to change. The problem isn't just politics, the social structure of the country is divided. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/americans-torn-tea-party-occupy-wall-street-back-independent-president-article-1.972696?localLinksEnabled=false

Basically, Congress is currently a reflection of the country. Hard core conservatives elected Tea party members during the last congressional race to make the changes they wanted. Less spending, reduces social programs, etc. Those people are doing just what those that elected them requested they do. So, while you get so angry at the new freshmen. Remember, they are doing what they campaigned on.

Just like in Wisconsin, the teachers and state workers are angry at what they did, but the did not get enough support in the public the change what happened. The general public feel that state workers have too many benefits and pensions over what the rest of the private sectors have had for years. My wife, who is a teacher, and I have the debate often. She is angry over no pay raise, increased insurance cost, etc she has been experiencing. All I say is, "Welcome to my world".

[-] 2 points by invient (360) 3 years ago

The polls are not in agreement (http://swampland.time.com/full-results-of-oct-9-10-2011-time-poll/)...

This movement is NOT about socialism, and is NOT hard left... OWS is open to anyone, their message is get money out of politics and that is it... are there people on the left there, yes... but there are people on right as well, Ron P aul supporters and end the fed people... its diverse.

I highly doubt that TEA party agenda had so many bills about abortion on their top to-do list.... I thought they were only for small government and taxes, not larger government between a doctor and a patient...

I appreciate your anecdotal evidence, and cannot say I have lived there before... I never claimed China as 100% capitalist, just like the US is not. They are a mix, they have adopted many tenants of capitalism, and it has worked for them... All I am saying is democracy is not necessary for capitalism... Any sensible government would choose a mix of things that combine to make a stable system, but as we have it now, it is unstable.

I would hope the average Wisconsin voter would want their private sector jobs to become unionized so they may get the benefits that the public sector has. Rather than rip those benefits from the public sector workers. It is worrying that people think this way, that if another group has worked and negotiated for more, they think they should deny them those benefits because they do not have them.

[-] 1 points by Uspatriot5000 (128) 3 years ago

Personally, I have no desire to ever become unionized. I think all they try to do is get less work for more money. First, my father was in one of the few textile plants to go union in the South. About 5 years later, it went belly up. All those people thought the union was going to protect their jobs. My father said all he saw it do was to keep the worst, laziest workers from being fired. Period! He saw no other benefit. Second, a co-worker's father works for UPS moving trucks at a distribution center. Per the contract, once he has moved "X" number of trucks, he has done a full days work with a full days pay. He said it takes him about 4 hours to do this, then he goes home. Third, my late wife's sister took a summer job one year where her father worked. She did her best. At the end of the day all of the other people were angry and yelled at her that she was making them look bad.

I was raised on a farm. Taught to work hard for what I have and not be given anything unless I earned it. Sorry, I don't see 4 hours of work a days work well done. I work, I am on call, I know what the job entails, and I accepted the position. The job is what it is. As long as they pay me my salary, whatever they asked me to do (as long as it is legal) is my job. I don't complain, I just do my job.

All the union do is give people a reason not to work at their best or do their best because they will still get paid and it is hard to fire them. That is one reason all our work is moving out of this country. If you notice, the North is hurting the worst. That is why the movement is probably more predominant up there. Down here, we are "right to work" states, We like it that way and like the jobs moving down here. Keep them coming.

[-] 2 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

"I was raised on a farm. Taught to work hard for what I have and not be given anything unless I earned it. Sorry, I don't see 4 hours of work a days work well done. I work, I am on call, I know what the job entails, and I accepted the position. The job is what it is. As long as they pay me my salary, whatever they asked me to do (as long as it is legal) is my job. I don't complain, I just do my job."

First off, agriculture is heavily subsidized to keep it afloat. Not only do they receive more subsidies than any industry, but food stamps also keep the prices sustainable enough to make your job worth working. So, you may want to rethink your position on government intervention being socialism as it would make you more socialist than the rest of us and I'd also question how much you "earned" compared to how much took from the rest of us hardworking taxpayers.

Also, UPS does not pay well so your assessment of 4 hours work for a day's pay makes no sense. They frequently hire employees part-time to avoid paying them well.

I agree that accepting a position, knowing what it is, is a good thing. But what if you don't know or are simply mislead? What if the employer simply does not hold up their end of the agreement? What if they ask you to do something that is illegal or that you never agreed to do?

Fortunately for you, unions fight for labor rights that have ensured that even nonunion workers will be treated better, lest they find union jobs or seek union protections.

So while you may disdain the actual unions or their jobs and also condemn socialism, you have spent your entire life benefiting from both.

If you'd rather live in a country where unions don't exist, be my guest. There's a long list of third-world and communist countries where labor leaders are assassinated and thus there exists no middle-class or innovation because everyone is poor and uneducated.

[-] 1 points by Uspatriot5000 (128) 3 years ago

One, it was a small farm, not subsidized in any way. My grandfather and father both worked in textile mills during the day and farmed at night. My mother and grandmother also had "day jobs". If you are mislead about a job, then quit. If you are ask to do something illegal, document it, and report it. Be a whistle blower. I actually did this at a company I worked at 15 years ago. I will admit the unions were necessary and beneficial when the were created. Now days, with government and private organizations, unions are a thing of the past. Not needed. There are many companies that have gone bankrupt because of trying to appease the unions. Many automakers, had they not been propped up by the government, would have gone under. I work with people who have been in unions. Mainly when they lived up North. All but 1 speak in disdain about them. The one that does more or so believe in them came from the telecommunication workers union. He says the auto industry and government worker unions are the main culprits to giving them bad names, those do more harm than good. To keep workers, companies need to offer good benefits. I work for a manufacturer, here in the US. All factories are here in the US. This company is totally private, has no unions, has not laid anyone off (did cut some hours back), kept benefits, and has no debt. This can and has been done in a capitalistic system. Are all employees happy? No, but most of the people have worked there over 20 years, and members of their families also work there. It is truly a family business.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

"I will admit the unions were necessary and beneficial when the were created. Now days, with government and private organizations, unions are a thing of the past."

You mean government labor laws that unions still fight for and are still being stripped away?? You mean private organizations that primarily support unions??

"I work with people who have been in unions. Mainly when they lived up North."

So they moved up here for work?? They moved AWAY from right to work states in order to enjoy both a higher standard of living and the higher economic growth that exists in places that are more unionized??

"To keep workers, companies need to offer good benefits."

Correct. Otherwise they'll either unionize or find union jobs. Without that alternative, there exists nothing to ensure they'll provide you with those things. This is the case in third-world countries. We can't depend on government alone.

"It is truly a family business."

Well that's great. So any mistreatment of an individual worker would possible entail problems with their family members within that same business. Thereby artificially creating an allegiance of more than 1 person which establishes an informal system of checks and balances. That's great that you guys found an alternative to unionizing that's just strong enough to be sustained on a small scale. But most people work for large businesses and simply can't depend on our family members for support.

[-] 1 points by Uspatriot5000 (128) 3 years ago

"So they moved up here for work?? They moved AWAY from right to work states in order to enjoy both a higher standard of living and the higher economic growth that exists in places that are more unionized??"

No, they moved FROM the North TO a right to work state here in the South because the JOBS were here.

No, there are just a lot of people who are married, siblings, adult children of long time employees, etc. Since people enjoy working for the company, they encourage their families. The plants are spread in various places around the country, so everyone in the whole company is not related, Just a lot of individuals are related.

[-] 1 points by invient (360) 3 years ago

No one is forcing you to. However I would point to your weekend as a glaringly obvious benefit of unions. I'm sorry that you have anecdotal evidence that have led you to your bias. I don't deny that sometimes unions can leed to inefficiency by prolonging the stay of less than productive workers. However,I personally believe the protections they afford the average worker are important and thus they're usefu Institutions.

[-] 1 points by Uspatriot5000 (128) 3 years ago

Well, some of it comes from people who have been in unions and did not like it.

[-] 1 points by ross1975 (3) from LaCygne, KS 3 years ago

Chinese Govenment is still involed in the economic system here in china. They still have government run business to give free market busniess competition. Also, workers here are not that great. Most are under paid and unhappy with life. Many work like slaves. They get a lot done because they have the population to man factories. But believe or not, they are starting to get short of workers. I live here in china now. The goverment has control of everything. Believe me they can shut you down today without any warning. It's not as free market as you think. But things are slowly changing and I think for the good of the world. Our government is changing to for the worst. We are becoming more like China everyday with our corrupt leadership. Vote them out, all polititians who are in office now need to go, there fired. Write in our vote, I don't care who gets it but get them you know what's out of their. I'm working in China, I wan't to come home, but I don't want to strave to death. No jobs.

[-] 2 points by craigd89 (32) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Isn't that why there is a "new left" in china pushing to bring back socialist ideals and to address the widening gap between the wealthy and poor?

[-] 1 points by ross1975 (3) from LaCygne, KS 3 years ago

Not as much as one would like to think. Money controls a lot over here just like in America. They are not a democracy or even Capitalist. It's more like the Mafia. U.S. Corporations just pay officials large pay off's to work here. Then our corporations scew us. We're all getting screwed. You know!!!1

[-] 1 points by adamanto75 (9) 3 years ago

IMO (in my opinion) I think capitalism is a flawed system and so is socialism we need to brainstorm to create a whole new system the world has never seen before because no matter where you go in the world NO ONE is FREE!!!!

[-] 0 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

"socialism" seems to have many meanings these days. Originally it meant that workers ought to be in control of production ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4Tq4VE8eHQ ) Now it its used to describe anything from leninism to european welfare states.

I myself are talking about libertarian socialism (where the the word gets back some of its original meaning. Libertarian Socialism/Libertarian Left is something very different from the state capitalist society with bailouts etc, and also reject any form of state tyranny.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

[-] 1 points by stacythorpe (4) from Hutchinson, KS 3 years ago

you are describing the difference between state socialism and social democracy, we have to realize that as long as we have a ruling government there cannot be the type of democracy you are stating and the people truly do not rule and will not. We do have a democratic government that has been warped and changed so much that it doesn't seem democratic anymore. i believe democracy is the answer but not state socialism. If we are not careful this is what will happen as the government still holds all the cards and military might. State socialism is a bigger enemy than capitalism because it becomes communism as with Hitler.

[-] 1 points by craigd89 (32) from New York, NY 3 years ago

uhh Communism is a society self-managed by the working class.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

No, Im describing the difference (which is big)beween state socialism and libertarian socialism (watch this for more info: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDHBvQRyOr0 )

Social democracy is not Libertarian Socialism, Social democracy has capitalist structures in some areas in society and has a central state. LS has non of these.

read my post The Society We Should Strive For

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

"State socialism is a bigger enemy than capitalism" I disagree. I dont favor state socialism either, but its much better than capitalism if the state is democratic. Than we would at least have some democratic organization. Capitalism is pure tyranny, private tyranny

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpd3grtjkK8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxPUvQZ3rcQ

[-] 0 points by PA333 (0) 3 years ago

I understand and agree. However, what about the business owner who takes a risk the 99% are not willing to take, and then becomes successful. Should he not benefit more than the 99%? Why should his profits be divided by the workers who did not contribute any of the inital intelligence, risk, and hard work?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

It´s not a interesting question for me personally, because I like the idea of more democracy - I think that production and work ought to be started and run democratically by the participants at the workplace and in the community.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDHBvQRyOr0

Please read my post "the society we should strive for" http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

If I were forced to answer your question (with premise of short term perspective) it would have to be : because we should work for a more egalitarian just and free society where everyone can have a good life.

Your premise is that people work based on economic incentive. That´s not what humans are about. In capitalism we´re being encouraged to think like this often, but we should build a society thats based on solidarity and letting people live out their own creativity, not greed and pointless consumption

[-] 0 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

The ones who get the free ride are those who earn the highest incomes without paying their due of taxes, be they individuals or corporations. These "persons" do not and cannot reap their profits without government influence, which allows for and facilitates their monopoly in the economy, thereby reducing the average worker, regardless of skill, eduction or age, to an employee. In the corporatist economic model, people, human beings, are stripped of what makes them human, compassion, dignity, integrity, and molded into docile cogs in a directionless, unaccountable, and dysfunctional machine. We the People need to break free of the ride they are taking on our backs.

[-] 2 points by gestopomilly (497) 3 years ago

The great corporations which we have grown to speak of rather loosely as trusts are the creatures of the State, and the State not only has the right to control them wherever need of such control is shown… [Applause] but also the DUTY to control them

[-] 1 points by zahid (7) 3 years ago

interesting perspective. I would like some more insight on what you mean by "loosely spoken of as trusts but state controlled". Let's just say I'm interested in a clearer differentiation. But first I'll "define" trusts. A trust is formed to avoid being controlled by any sate absolutism by using laws of inheritance and charitable organisations that have unique rights? The only state involvement ought to be the supreme court stabilizing the interests of these trust so they are not accessible to state absolutism. Another difference of trusts is that you can't start "your own" state within a state but you can start your own trust, GB's Royal Academy of science is a trust so is their stock exchange, two very different organizations both making a lot of money, so you see the trusts interests and missions have variations but are protected by the state, so they have become very popular yet they aren't at risk of any kind of monopolization phenomenon. Why? Because anyone can do it. Meaning my friends and I who are working to form a trust can potentially became very wealthy because we can WORK TOGETHER without the state impeding our growth due to their interests. Instead they protect our right to continue WORKING TOGETHER within the trust and you can do the same thing without the cops showing up to drag you off to jail.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 3 years ago

that was a quote from Theodore Roosevelt

[-] 1 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Cartoon world once again. We need to address the REAL problem of government corruption, not these neo-Marxist fantasies.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

There is nothing fantastic about Karl Marx and his study, his most accurate study, of capitalism. Any educated person will tell you, whether they are a professor or a banker, that Karl Marx's summary of Capitalism is essential. Corruption is when there is a breakdown in the system of Democratic governance that allows for unethical behavior. Government and the finance industry are in lock step, and this does need to change, for sure. Though it is not the only place where transformation is necessary.

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

I'm not fully disagreeing with you, but I do think that what the "neo-Marxists" are trying to address are related to the general problem of government corruption. On the one side (and here's where I'd like to think I'm in agreement with you), there is an endless string of judicial innovations that allow public servants to be paid off by lobbyists. This is a central problem, and one where most people who oppose corruption are in agreement (or at least I assume, since most bribery doesn't come in the form of some guy showing up at a congressman's office with a suitcase full of bills). But the neo-Marxists do have one central point: the very regulations (and another, better way to say this is LAWS) that lobbyists work to dismantle are all that stands in the way of their having the money the use to bribe politicians. I wouldn't consider myself a Marxist of any variety, but I do think we oppose the same thing. It's the deregulation of the financial world that has allowed such an enormous accrual of money by so few people, and these are the very people that are attempting to corrupt our government.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

"I am not a Marxist"- Karl Marx

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

I have been reading this site without comment for several weeks. Today I had had enough, and my blood began to boil. I agree with much of what you said, other than I think over-regulation can cause it's own problems, including the notorious "unintended consequences". It's the whole anti-capitalist claptrap that is getting on my nerves, and making me question my suppport. This movement has to stick to a few core principles that are held by the 99%, and I assure you that 99% of the US is not neo-Marxist! We already have MoveOn and other such organizations for the hard left; this was SUPPOSED to be a movement of common cause, but it is rapidly turning into an anarchist movement.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

So far you've said that MoveOn is "hard left" and "anarchist", which is ridiculous enough by itself. You must standing to the right of Glenn Beck to think such things. But then you also claim Obama is the biggest crony capitalist?? It's almost like you're throwing everything you have at anything left of the extreme right-wing fringe and are just now, all of a sudden in danger of not supporting this movement. If you were looking forward for this to turn into another corporate sponsored protest-themed Tea Party event, you were wrong and it probably isn't for you.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

I had hoped that it would have the discipline to remain centrist, to stay on point regarding corruption in politics. The left is currently in power, and hence gets most of my ire. The right, until 2010, has been powerless - serving mostly as a bogeyman for the left.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

Who are you to define what this movement is "supposed" to be? Start your own movement if you have a better vision. You likely are ignorant to the history of the Anarchist Party in the U.S., as opposed to the propagandized term "anarchist" with the diminutive 'a.'

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Is this the "99%" or is it not. I didn't come up with that definition. That is the avowed purpose of the movement. I don't care about anarchist or Anarchists - they are a marginal bunch of loons who rely on the goodwill of the host that they parasitically infect. When they become annoying enough we squash them like cockroaches. In the meantime, I wish you much happiness in your little world. The point, which you seem unable to grasp, is that this movement will only hold together if they find common cause with the 99%. You are not going to convert the other 98% to your cause.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

Again, who are you to speak for anyone but yourself? 99% is a number, the point being an untenable number of people who do not have access to the resources of the 1%. If you read Paul Krugman's latest op ed piece in the Times, he cites how there is even great inequality in the top .1%. It would behoove you to educate yourself about the terminology you use before you use it. That said, what do you have to offer to the discussion other than anger and predictable criticism? The Anarchist Party was a party that emanated out of the last Great Depression and whose mission was to allow for the free cooperation of people without Government rules and laws intervening, put simply. If this movement is about anything it is about a rebirth of citizenry that have been brainwashed into thinking that their most important function is an economic one...obviously this limited role in our government has not served us well. Who are you to call my world little? What makes your "world" so much bigger, hm? That is rhetorical.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

The goals of the Anarchist party are their own. Go out and sell it in the free market of ideas. The goals of OWS are stated on the home page, among other places. I'm trying to sound an alarm that you and your special-interest friends are marginalizing the movement. You don't care. You will burn it to the ground in your narcissism. In fact, I can see that you can't even grasp my point, you are so monolithically committed to your cause. This thing is wrecked already. It didn't last two months.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

So now they're "special-interest" "anarchists"?? Oh yeah, and now supporters are narcissists for not being exactly what you want it to be?? You may want to look up narcissism.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

The OWS message was singular, and has now been eclipsed by special interests. If you cant' see that, I can't help you.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

What in the world are you talking about? You have made a leap in logic when you assume you understand the politics of anyone, simply because you assigned a title to them based upon your prejudice. I am not an organizer for any political party. I clarified what the term "Anarchist" meant for your sake, not mine. Lighten up, calm down, stop hurling insults and maybe your point will be more lucid. I think what you're saying is that you believe the movement to be too radical. Okay, so what would you do to improve it? You can't sit on the sidelines and just criticize, you have to add constructive criticism, not banal pessimism. Love you!

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

I guess that's a problem of language, though. I mean, a lot of what Adam Smith might say would come across as socialistic. There's the famous lines from the Wealth of Nations, which I think perfectly describe our situation, and yet still might sound marxist if you didn't cite the author: "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies, much less to render them necessary." The argument I share with a lot of the lefter people on the site is that not only does our government facilitate exactly this, but every time the meetings happen, institutions that prevent this facilitation are stripped of their authority ever so much more. It's just the natural effect of accrued financial power.

But the other side is this: we have the power to sway this movement. If the harder leftists are gaining control, and if this is against the broader sentiments of the American populace, then we should get down to our local occupations and try to sway things our way. It's true - they're willing to listen. I've been a regular part of the Zuccotti Park occupation, and people in general do care about democracy, which means they do care what people who don't directly affiliate themselves with the movement think. It's just a matter of numbers - if you disagree, you need to get your friends to show up!

[-] 2 points by xavier (28) 3 years ago

thanks ARNY, i hope ows can remain open, inclusive, and not tied to left, right or center. the desire to restore our democracy--to take the money out of our elections and law making--seems to be shared by a whole lot of people who may disagree on just about everything else.

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

It's possible, especially given recent trends in leftist political theory (not that I'm saying it's only leftism that's making the real moves). There's been a very large trend toward the recognition that even ideally democratic societies will have enormous frictions within them, and so a lot of more recent theorists have tended to focus on the structural impediments to a more equal friction, one where all parties have relatively equal leverage when interacting and opposing their fellows. OWS has gotten behind a lot of the suggestions hiddenwheel put down below already just because these are exactly the kind of things impeding equal interaction.

[-] 1 points by xavier (28) 3 years ago

interesting. helpful comment. it's so easy to get sucked into reaction to what's happening (individual symptomatic issues) because we're struggling with those issues in our lives. versus how it's happening. the enabling systemic mechanism -- how power is being exercised. but people across the political spectrum are on to it even though it hurts to acknowledge it. when so many people say that greed and corruption are wrecking our democracy that seems like a potentially systemic critique. but ultimately how do you boil that down to orientations and ways of communicating that can harness the momentum of huge numbers of people who will otherwise mostly disagree?

[-] 1 points by hiddenwheel (83) from Newton, MA 3 years ago

Let's keep this simple: Special Purpose Entities, Corporate Personhood, Quantitative Easing, Foreclosure Fraud, Repeal of Glass Steagall, Violation of the Federal Reserve Act (BAC/Merrill Lynch), A Trillion in Bailouts. These are all things that, any American (right or left) who knew the details would be disgusted by. let's cross other bridges when (and if) we come to them.

[-] 2 points by xavier (28) 3 years ago

that list doesn't look 'simple.' and if you don't change the way election campaigns are financed and the role lobbies are playing in the law making process, that list will keep getting longer. those are symptoms of the privatization of our democracy.

[-] 1 points by hiddenwheel (83) from Newton, MA 3 years ago

Absolutely! What is simple is that each item points back to the interests of the OBSCENELY wealthy(Campaign financing and lobbies do too). Deep throat to Bob Woodward: "Follow the money"

[-] 1 points by xavier (28) 3 years ago

i really agree with you, Hidden. totally with you on that. so then, where do you go from there? i mean from awareness to possible action maps?

[-] 1 points by hiddenwheel (83) from Newton, MA 3 years ago

I'm glad you used "action" instead of (list of) "demands". I think the actions that have happened so far have become increasingly more meaningful and they have happened essentially spontaneously! That's the kind of thing that no think tank or semantics expert or lawyer can counter no matter how much money you throw at them!

[-] 0 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

Well, do you know what youre criticizing though? What do you know about Marx. Have you read Das Kapital, an extremely thoroughly analysis of capitalism, it´s cycles and affects. Lots of what he wrote, especially in analyzing capitalism has been proven true a long time ago. Much of it is plain truism (f example the issue of surpluse value - worker´s pay being less worth than the value of what he produced, over production etc)

However, he also wrote lots of things that are outdated today, and things that deserve criticism.

What tsdevi wrote is not specifically marxist thought. Its just common sense that most libertarian leftists, anarcho-syndicalists, an probably lots of environmentalists and activists in general would agree with.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

[-] 1 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

Please. "corporatist economic model" . . . "stripped of what makes them human". . . kind of dramatic, don't you think? The vast majority of people like their jobs, like their company, and are in a partnership with their management.

Whatever. Again, I ask why all this peripheral stuff has to become front and center. You are going to lose 98% of the 99% if this is the path forward

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

"corporatist economic model"

This is absolutely true. What we have is a kind of state-capitalist society, also called crony capitalism, corporatism etc. Its a society where most menas of production is privatly owned by people not using them, and where the state plays a role in regulation, subsidies etc. Thats thats a truism

"stripped of what makes them human". . . kind of dramatic, don't you think?"

Absoulutely not. Capitalism has only been around a couple of hundred years. Humans have existed over 100 000 years. For millions of years our ancestors have lived in relatively egalitarian groups cooperating for the common good. Now with capitalism youre forced to work on external demand and be treated like cogs in a machine. This is a highly unnatural state for humans. Humans and their ancestors have been used a very different social organization

Please read my post The Society We Should Strive For and watch the links

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2w4ThqMEpUQ "The vast majority of people like their jobs" Yes, the willingness to work is so high that people even want to work when on command. But ask them if they would rather have a more democratic workplace and have a say in how the institutions run..

[-] 0 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 years ago

Agreed. I think youll find my recent ows forum post interesting. Make sure you watch all the links as well:)

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-society-we-should-strive-for/

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

Ok.

[-] 2 points by gluttonsbedamned (18) 3 years ago

Tallahassee should have this!

[-] 1 points by zygarch (83) 3 years ago

To begin with, there are already groups mobilizing to enact change. Anyone who has not already signed the following petitions, please do so:

To get money out of politics: http://www.getmoneyout.com

To repeal corporate "personhood": http://movetoamend.org

To bypass the two-party system, visit: www.americanselect.org

And of you're really serious and go here: http://moveyourmoneyproject.org/

As a reward, you can check out this HOT video! http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=k5kHACjrdEY

[-] 1 points by Joyce (375) 3 years ago

Beautiful?! How? Per usual, I want to rewrite the laws, but established, common decency does not apply to me. This is exactly what will drive opinion away from OWS. Since our agenda trumps the rights of those gathered to hear Gov. Walker, we will simply disrupt and begin our immature rant. Why would anyone be proud of this video? It proves that a group can impose their agenda, forcibly?

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 3 years ago

Joyce, if you were paying attention, they made their point that while Walker's freedom of spech was protected, Mayor Emmanuel had ordered the arrest of occupiers who were not allowed to exercise their rights of free spech. That action puts this reaction in some context. There is no expectation that everyone will agree with every tactic. Remember the town hall meetings? Similar tactics. That is the point that some are trying to make to you.

[-] 1 points by Joyce (375) 3 years ago

Could you please point out where I imply any foundational regard for the town hall meeting disruptions? By default of your reasoning, I disregard the message of one group but find their means of presenting the message perfectly fine. What strange logic.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

Why not? It is the same tactics used by your Tea Party. Why didn't you complain then?

[-] 1 points by Joyce (375) 3 years ago

"same tactics" by "my tea party"? So, you have made a poor assumption that since I disagree... in some way, by default, I support the tea party? no, I spoke directly toward simplistic ways to engage in intelligent-polemical based dialogue.

[-] 0 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

If you are in no way affiliated with the Tea Party, I stand corrected. However,"Since our agenda trumps the rights of those gathered to hear Gov. Walker, we will simply disrupt and begin our immature rant. "

This is clearly your (negitave) opinion. Hardly appears you were trying to "engage in intelligent-polemical based dialogue."

In fact, using your argument, your immature rant (your post) would be disrupting, and trumping, the rights of those gathgered here to discuss and support the Occupy movement (one of the main purposes of this website).

For the record, I have no problem hearing your opinion, just as I have no problem with the people at that luncheon hearing ours. Those that used the "peoples mike" at the dinner obviously paid to get in just like all the others who were there to hear the Gov.

The governer could, and did, finish his speech after the protesters were arrested or left.

So, nobody got hurt, and our vioces were heard.

THAT is why I said it was beautiful!

I still feel that way.

[-] 1 points by Joyce (375) 3 years ago

"In fact, using your argument, your immature rant (your post) would be disrupting, and trumping, the rights of those gathgered here to discuss and support the Occupy movement (one of the main purposes of this website)".  

Really? I have been told all opinions are welcome here. Can you please equate my post with anything seemingly immature...I'm looking yet fail to see. I have posted in an "open forum" and followed the rules established here (hence, "read the rules before posting".) I have clearly gone along with established rules which brings me to my main point of contention. 

Walker's inability to move into his speech only figures into a singular issue; the room was filled with other people planned their work schedule around this event with the sole purpose of networking and listening to a speech. 

You and I come here recognizing the varied opinions which exists and will be written.  However, the prearranged agenda for Walker foretold of no alternate message guests could expect reasonably expected to listen to - but, they had no choice given the verbose method. 

"For the record, I have no problem hearing your opinion, just as I have no problem with the people at that luncheon hearing ours. Those that used the "peoples mike" at the dinner obviously paid to get in just like all the others who were there to hear the Gov."

Sorry to inform you, a general caveat of business luncheon decorum dictates that the "people's mike" or whatever you deem as such, when such an instrument is available, there are considerations of decency that go along. 

Oh, and not to indurate your logic further, but, it is border mean egotism (not in Thoreau's sense of the phrase) to assume the 99 percent, by default of the claims espoused here, wholeheartedly embraces "support the Occupy movement". I keep on reading and hearing about the 99 as though each and every 99 was on board.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

"Sorry to inform you, a general caveat of business luncheon decorum dictates that the "people's mike" or whatever you deem as such, when such an instrument is available, there are considerations of decency that go along"

In other words, sit down shut up and give me my bribe. You have no voice. Yea, we know. That's why we're so pissed.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

"Oh, and not to indurate your logic further, but, it is border mean egotism (not in Thoreau's sense of the phrase) to assume the 99 percent, by default of the claims espoused here, wholeheartedly embraces "support the Occupy movement". I keep on reading and hearing about the 99 as though each and every 99 was on board"

Again, nobody is saying 99% agree on anything. The 99% has to do with the difference between who holds most of the wealth and who doesn't. Had you done a little more reading here and a little less condescening, you would have already known that. Unless, of course, you really aren't here to hear anyone else's opinion, and are instead here to troll.

[-] 0 points by Joyce (375) 3 years ago

No, in all reality, I am soaking up as much information, from a variety of sources, concerning this movement. A "troll" fine.....I will gladly mine each and every post i have made and send it to the Canadian mod for his/her approval ( I'll assume Canadian given the geographic attribute given to the person who posted the forum rules). And we shall confirm you litmus test - which will prove unfounded.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

I didn't accuse you of being a troll. I just suggested it was a posibility, considering your level of ignorance to what The 99% means, while you preport to be knowledgable about our movement.

BTW,: so what if a canadian moderates a forum?.Is he/she not qualified? This movement is global. We are not bound by borders or political party affiliations. We are the face of a new, more direct, democracy. It is far from perfected, but we are working together on it. Care to join us?

[-] 1 points by bettersystem (170) 3 years ago

Hey,

Please pass this on if you agree. We are working on setting a date.

Force Change, Boycott Capitalism

We know what the problem is, let us fix it and move forward together.

When you look at a republican or democrat, congress or FDA official, Judges and Justice Department, you see criminals.

Our corruption dates back many years to when those, who in trying to preserve slavery, had to find new ways to preserve it and so created a scientific and advanced form of slavery.

Only two components were required -- the illusion of freedom & choice and the taking away of the freedom to live off the land.

How else would you get a person to submit themselves to mind numbing or degrading work unless you oppress them into it.

Our current system is rooted in corruption and every attempt in preserving it involves manipulating human thought and turning people against one another.

In America the population has been transformed into two major voting groups but they only have one choice.

They had been distracted up until now with television and American culture which prospered through the oppression of other nations.

Americans allowed themselves to be fooled into using their military and economic dominance to seize resources of other nations and create expanding markets for American profiteers.

Now that technology, competition and conscience have evolved Americans are realizing that our current system of government is damaging and unsustainable.

Our government officials have allowed private profits and personal benefits to influence decisions that affect the health and well-being of people all over the planet, not just in America... how much longer will we allow them to rule over us??

Occupy Washington and demand that government officials resign their posts.

We will setup new online elections with a verification system that will allow us to see our votes after we cast them, put our new officials in office and work toward rebuilding our country and our world.

Pass this message along to any and everyone, we already occupy the world, unite.

Occupy Washington, Boycott Capitalism, Force Change

http://wesower.org

[-] 1 points by onepeople (49) 3 years ago

This is not representative of the 99%, if you're endorsing this then I think you've lost touch.

[Removed]

[-] 6 points by OfeliasSon (10) 3 years ago

I don't think it's a secret at this point where Scott Walker stands on Union busting. In my opinion, he's the perfect candidate for a mic check

[-] -1 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Once upon a time unions had a purpose, now they're money laundering machines for the dem party.

[-] -1 points by Rob (881) 3 years ago

Apparently the people of his state agree with him. Isn't that democracy?

[-] -2 points by FreeMarkets (272) 3 years ago

Walker has no position on unions. He tried to rescue some workers in public sector unions from being laid off. For that he was pilloried by those same workers: They do not want reality intruding on their sinecures.

[Removed]

[-] 3 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

You leave a comment asking a question, someone reply's and you respond with "so who gives a fuck WHAT you think?" I give everyone a chance but you Sir are a waste of time and worse then those that you complain about because you do nothing to help the situation you are ranting over.

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 3 years ago

This incoherent idiot has been trolling here for a while and has been obliterated in other threads. Still comes back for more. Must be some kind of masochist tea bagger.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by legalassistant (164) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Unions are outspent 3 to 1 in elections by corporate donors.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by legalassistant (164) from New York, NY 3 years ago

So because workers organize and try to fight back, they are no better than the attackers? I mean, is that even an argument?

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 3 years ago

MikeyD is just a troll. You're right to challenge him but know that he doesn't really care one way or the other. He just tries to get a rise out of people. I donate a dollar to Occupy Wall Street every time I see a post by him or other trolls like him. It's time to monetize trolldom and harness their wasted energy for good.

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 3 years ago

Exactly!!!!!

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

you donate to ows ,I donate to the NRA.

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 3 years ago

You mean the killers (rifle) or the enablers and funders of sexual harrasment (restaurant)?

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

National Rifle Association,..............Supporters of the 2nd ammendment. Killers are not concerned with legal gun ownership.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 3 years ago

Thanks!  There's another dollar for Occupy Wall Street.  Trolldom has been monetized.  This is fun :) http://occupywallst.org/forum/we-have-monetized-trolldom-for-the-benefit-of-the-/#comment-223231 . Care to donate? Just visit homepage at www.occupywallst.org .

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Of course you do. That doesn't surprise me one bit.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

2nd ammendment. shouldn't surprise anyone.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

And some donate to both.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 3 years ago

Now, who are the promoters of violence you coward ass? You are not even man enough to have a brain or the ability to defend yourself without any gear. Anyone can get gear, fool. And now you are threatening to shoot others. You are a demented criminal.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

That doesn't surprise me at all.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Reality99 (1) from Oxford, OH 3 years ago

My grandfather was at the Ford Rouge Overpass (5/26/1937) standing up for the same equality we now seek from our corrupt capitalistic system. This fight has been going on for generations. You can’t expect it to be resolved in a matter of months or even years. You must think in terms of generations. So the logical path to a peaceful non- violent revolution is to work through our current system and elect the people that are most likely to have the same or at least similar views as you do. It took more than 30 years to create this economic climate starting with the Ronald Reagan policies of deregulation. You do know he started this mess don’t you? That’s what we get for electing a Hollywood actor to run this country. Just a few years prior to Reagan’s corporate leadership. Dwight David Eisenhower also a republican said “Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.” That was said in 1954, so it took about 50 years to get from that republican position to where we are now. Thank you Mr. Regan! (Sarcasm) Change takes time that can only be measured in terms of generations. Go and vote for whomever you want and we will see if commonsense prevails or will we continue to spiral down into the abyss of inequality. We need to think what’s best for the future generations, not what’s best for ourselves. Greed takes many forms, and there all not monetary. http://apps.detnews.com/apps/history/index.php?id=172

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

It was long before Regan, this goes back to FDR and the Federal Reserve in the 1930s

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/fdr-takes-united-states-off-gold-standard

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

This is a valid question, but one I can't answer due to not knowing much about what's going on up there. I would be very disappointed

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Could someone explain please, I'm not trolling just wondering why would they not be angry at both parties?

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

It depends on the organization of the particular Occupy group. There is a community of sentiment among the various groups, but no overarching organization (the NYCGA is trying to make its website format available, but that's the extent of it, since the general idea seems to be that each community should be responsible for itself). This creates occasional problems, for instance Chicago not staging an event against Emanuel (although I'm not sure they haven't - I just haven't read about it). It also creates circumstances like this one, where a group decides to voice its opinion to another community's politicians. But I don't think this is necessarily a problem. It's just confusing if you ask the question in a certain way, for example the way MikeyD did. His question assumes that there's an organization unifying all Occupies, and that the choice to pose the question about Emanuel to someone from Madison must have been some deliberately contrived obfuscation - as if the nonexistent Occupy national leadership deliberately decided to reproach a Republican from Madison for something a Democrat did in Chicago because they're secretly on the side of the Democrats. But it's really that a local Occupy group made a decision to approach a certain politician and, seeing his acts as somehow related to another politician's acts, brought those up in their complaint. So, really, it's because they see a systemic relation (I'm not saying they're right to do so, just that this seems to be what they did) and are using another platform and another specific occasion to draw the connection.

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Well done, thank you and MikeD wasn't looking for an answer he was just trolling but trolls do lead me to the truth eventually just have to find what they don't understand about whatever they happen to be spouting off about.

[-] 2 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

No problem. What's going on is a difficult thing to get on an intuitive level, since it really is something new. I do tend to think the Tea Party is a coopted movement, but I don't think it started that way; we're in the stages they were first in, and I hope we don't get coopted ourselves. The difference is that the media we first used to connect (facebook and twitter) don't really allow for much thoughtful dialogue, so they were used to get us to certain places, rather than as tools for planning prior to our debut on the public stage. We decided to discuss things openly (or as openly as possible), and that meant it looked like we were disorganized and didn't know what we wanted. But this has been a boon - I think a lot of people respond to the fact that we don't have a platform, and we're generally willing to listen to people who feel disenfranchised (which has been problematic, in the case of antisemites who show up, for example). So things do pop up spontaneously, and that's not the usual run of things. The result is that people tend to put us back into categories that were previously the norm - we must have an organization backing us, because most previous social movements did.

The other night I was having dinner with two (Republican) friends, for the first time since Occupy started. Their first question was about "the antisemitism" (which I think is overplayed, in the same way that the first expressions of Tea Party racism, when the Aryan Nation showed up at rallies, were overplayed). Their second question is the one I always get - why aren't we protesting in DC or Detroit? If you think of OWS as the central organizing hub, instead of what it really is - the first place we chose to congregate because it was symbolic - and you don't get much information from the mainstream media on the movement (which always talks about OWS, but says very little about the other Occupies), then you'll naturally be led to think that there's nothing happening at all in other cities where other roots of the general problem first were laid.

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Agree with you about the TEA party movement, started as fiscal responsibility then suddenly they turned into god, guns and gays because people were just jumping on not because they understood but because it made the other guys mad so I fear what can happen to this movement, I am hopeful for it but must keep in mind what it can turn into that is why I come here so maybe I can help keeping the focus on a single goal and unite under the philosophy of anti-corruptionism.

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

That's going to be hard. A lot of us do think that's the primary issue, but the problem is we all disagree on what "corruption" means. I think we've institutionalized certain forms of it (a lot of them), and yet this technically means they're not corrupt. Also, I'm not sure there isn't a kind of mental corruption involved in thinking the "economy" is there just for an individual's personal gain. I'm not saying we should go socialist or anything; most earlier theories of capitalism (especially Adam Smith's) would have thought it an abomination to suggest that the state of the economy shouldn't be measured by the maximal benefit for everyone. In fact, it seems to be his entire justification - the freedom of markets was (at least in his day) for the greatest benefit of all people. I'm not so sure we have that anymore (actually, to be honest, I'm sure we don't), and much of the "deregulation" (which is really a changed form of regulation that favors the already-wealthy and ultimately results in instability) seems to be at fault. I think the apologies for it in the name of "freedom" (which is really just a freedom of a certain kind, and accepted only by very few people in the grand scheme of things) are a bit corrupt themselves. Anyway, to get to the point - I would agree with you that anti-corruptionism is the main point, but I also think that we need to broaden our ideas of what corruption means. If there's any truth behind the 99% slogan, it's that anything that is opposed to corrupt has at least to equalize the playing field for everyone.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Corruption: Dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery.

Figure that would cover it

Anti-Corruptionist: a person who engages in or upholds anti corruption practices, esp. in politics or public life.

Corruptionist: a person who practices or advocates corruption, especially in politics or public life.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Wish there was more reply buttons before it cut us off.

As for the money in political elections I say spending caps and donation top outs then have real debates televised live with questions that have to be answered no dodging or you're removed from the electoral process. And term limits.

I'm not a man made global warming believer but if you're going to make a statement prepare to cite information so if he cannot explain why he would have these views to a reasonable degree and making such a claim then he is being dishonest. Honesty has only one value, complete truth anything less than is dishonest.

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

I suppose, but how do you bribe? It usually doesn't take the form of some guy showing up in your office with a suitcase full of money and asking you to sign some bill. It's made legal through court decisions that don't require disclosure of donors, through the use of campaign money for excessive expenditures on luxuries for a campaign (private jets, lavish hotels, etc.), through the promise of future employment if you push policies that favor the employer...

And as for "dishonesty," that's also hard. Take climate change, for example (and forget about whether it's true or not). It's technically dishonest to say "the science isn't there" when 97% of the professionals in the field agree that it's anthropogenic. That's a level of agreement far beyond what you'd get on any basic issue amongst doctors, let alone economists. And pushing that belief has resulted in direct and attributable gains for the oil industry (for example - other industries benefit indirectly). So, let's say that Rick Perry honestly believes that the jury is out, even though all available evidence says it isn't - is he being dishonest? And how do we take action, since it's within his legal right to have that opinion?

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

There is an Occupy in Detroit.

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

I know; it's what I was saying. My Republican friends seem to think otherwise.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

I didn't think there was enough left of Detroit to occupy.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

You don't live there, so what the fuck do you know about it? You're just running your foolish mouth thinking you know everything, as usual. You right wingers are one in the same. I can't fucking stand you.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

I read. With every post you get more and more unhinged.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

Replies like a troll, sounds like a troll, is a troll. Rahm Emanuel and - let's get to your troll point - Barack Obama are not supported by OWS, even if individual participants support them. If you go to any Occupy site and engage in real conversations (and I know you've said you won't) you'll find ten people against the democratic party for every one who supports it.

But let's get to the real evidence for why you're a troll: you can't even keep your story straight within your own post, but it's irrelevant since you get to make any complaint you want; we're the only ones who have to be honest. As you acknowledged, they made a complaint against Rahm Emanuel, and posted the whole discussion on their site. Which means that, even though they said it at a Walker rally, they made their disapproval publicly. And, as you acknowledged, people on this forum praised it. Which means that they're not in Emanuel's camp. I know it's hard, being mildly insane and constantly driven to distraction any time someone says something you don't like, but try to understand: just because you see a similarity between two points of view doesn't mean they're in the same camp. You could just be making a mistake. I know that's inconceivable, since you're always right, so I'm sorry if you're pained by anything I'm saying.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

Did you actually read my post? And I'm not going to respond further. No one here thinks you're here for anything other than a response. I have other, more intelligent people to engage with.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

Uhh... if it looks to you like at least 40% of the "people" here acknowledge that unions are a special interest, maybe it's because you're not looking at the names on the posts - they mostly have your name attached.

And as for "American," sure, if we follow your very special definition of American - anyone who agrees with you - then most people here aren't American, even if they live there and are legally citizens of that country (which includes me). But here's the point - if no opinion counts unless it's an American citizen's, then you're going to have a very limited amount of people you can listen to. You're going to have to write off most of the people you probably think you get your ideas from - most right-wing economists (a short list will include Hayek and von Mises), most conservatives (a short list would include Burke and Oakeshott), and anything written by the Founding Fathers before 1787. Also, you might want to think about the logic of this - what if someone who is American got their ideas from someone who isn't? There goes Milton Friedman, Robert Bartley, Martin Feldstein, and, since he listened to them all, Ronald Reagan! It's gonna be rough for your brain from here on out, but I think you'll manage, since you've been doing fine without it for this long.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

Alright, one more reply. I'd like you to consult other posts on this as well, since I don't want to speak for everyone. You represent a small minority on this site, a very small one. So I'm off by a percentage point or two. This means, what, exactly? For one thing, it's a convenience phrase - it's like saying "I eat pizza all the time" when all you mean is that you eat it more than most people do. For another thing, it's hardly a sign of some ultimate hypocrisy on my part. Most of my statements on this forum are self-conisistent, unlike yours (note the number of times you fault people for being uncivil with you compared to the number of times you, for example, curse or insult Canada - civility is trans-national). So I'm sorry I was slightly wrong because I exaggerated one time. What's your excuse?

And as for how it's working out for me - it seems that most people think my posts are alright, even when they disagree. So, even though I retract my statement that suggested I'm speaking for everyone, most people with whom I've interacted - just short of "everyone" - seems to think we're doing fine. And I'm fine with that.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

ARealNewYorker had a valid point, but I would like to see a good rebuttal to your statement from someone in regards to "being angry at Walker for reducing their power and influence"

[-] 1 points by jgrace (20) 3 years ago

Maybe it was just availability issues? In IL, the same issue was discussed because of the influence of MoveOn. But our opportunities to mic check public officials are limited. #occupycitycouncil is in the works here! And it's not left or right, but right or wrong!

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Reasonable answer for the information available.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by jgrace (20) 3 years ago

Is Rahm on the list next? Have you talked to anybody there? Did you know the schedules? I simply stated that it may have been an availability issue since we are having the same dilemma here (mention of MoveOn influence). I understand you mad bro, but damn. Just throwing my two cents out there, you know part of that Bill of Rights! Maybe you should stop by your local occupation and express your voice, jus sayin...

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

That was a weak response.

[-] 2 points by jgrace (20) 3 years ago

Do you acknowledge there may be other underlying issues besides right or left that we don't know about? And the Tea Party should be out there with us!

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Agreed, (former TEA party supporter) TEA party where the hell you guys at? Talk a good game but show your true colors once your party decided what you should believe about the OWS movement, so say it's disorganized or whatever you want because they disagree about what exactly is wrong or how to fix it, we all agree it's not working in it's present state and they are trying to do something about it so one way or another we are going to see some kind of change come from this.

[-] 0 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

no becuse they are part of system with small differernt they wants 100 persent all and they dont give fuck a bout 99 percent

[Removed]

[-] 3 points by therising (6643) 3 years ago

MikeyD and his fellow trolls just can't swallow the fact that this is a peaceful broad based movement supported by large chunk of America. To MikeyD and the rest of his conspiracy theorist pals, there has to be a plot. It can't be a legitimate organic movement. They need to find foreigners and scary extremists who stirred up what they believe to be an otherwise perfectly happy and asleep American population. To them, it could never be the Americans themselves.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

And he and his ilk can't stand the fact that the OWS and other Occupy protesters aren't toting guns around with them..... something he and his ilk live by, because they have so much fear, they can't walk out in public without their "protection".

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Broad based? NO. Supported by a large chunk of America? Which push poll do you get that from? Organic? LOL

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Wonder if MikeyD knows the guy that started the TEA party movement is a OWS supporter?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Denninger

MikeD you are misinformed.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 3 years ago

MikeyD is just a troll. I donate a dollar to Occupy Wall Street every time I encounter a troll post..  Trolldom has been monetized.  Fun because the more they post, the more they help the movement. :) http://occupywallst.org/forum/we-have-monetized-trolldom-for-the-benefit-of-the-/#comment-223231 . Care to donate? Just visit homepage at www.occupywallst.org .

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

To comment below

Rick Santelli's CNBC mention of a tea party on Feb. 19, 2009 followed Mr. Denninger's blog entry on January 20th.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Denninger

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Who are you speaking of? Rick Santelli?

[-] 1 points by jgrace (20) 3 years ago

See now, the majority are not anarchists, rapists, or whatever other smear campaign's next. I understand the roots of the movement and special interests played upon the public, which again I mention MoveOn. Of course the left will swoop in, just as the right with the Tea Party, and swing the movement their way.

But, protesting Wall St. is drawing the attention to the real people in power. OUR government is ran by these individuals, not the people we 'elect.' The protest, in my eyes obviously, is directed at the government through the men behind the curtain. I understand protesting the government to stop the acceptance of the bribes and such and to focus the anger towards them. I really hope this movement goes to the mall!

Defined agenda? I agree it is a too broad of a grievance, but simply just get the money out of politics. I'm not a lawyer, therefore I don't know how to write the laws or understand the language. The money is fraudulent anyway, which in my opinion should be the real direction of the movement.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 3 years ago

MikeyD and his fellow trolls just can't swallow the fact that this is a broad based movement supported by large chunk of America. To MikeyD and the rest of his conspiracy theorist pals, there has to be a plot. It can't be a legitimate organic movement. Then need to find foreigners and scary extremists who stirred up the otherwise perfectly happy and asleep American population.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Yeah, because you have a big, fat mouth..... which is typical for a right winger/Tea Partier.

[-] 2 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

That's true to the current TEA party but not what it was founded for, something I worry might happen to OWS if not careful.

Stick to anti-corruption it's what got me on board.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

And that's exactly what I'm speaking of.... where the Tea Party is now.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

Yes, now it has turned into what all the bashers were calling it and has lost my support as well as many others.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

The Taxed Enough Already party is busy working on their issues.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Barney Frank is still alive. The biggest fat mouth Teddy "the lifeguard " Kenndy died. So has Robert "KKK" Byrd.

[-] 0 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

you right hony weeks ago i said new world order means new way salvary then lets fuck them all to change system

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

I'm the hater??? Hahahahahahahaha.... I would've thought that by your language and level of insults that YOU are the hater!!!!! You show your true colors very well.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

ARealNewYorker.... I wasn't able to comment under your comment to me.... but, yes, I know that I should know better!!! It was very late, I was deliriously tired, and I let myself engage in arguing with this hateful troll.

I do find it quite ironic how he called me a hater, when all he does is swear and insult and scream nonsense at others, especially if they're from another country (specifically Canada). But he and his ilk (raines, for one) will just get more mad and will go out into the streets with their guns and ammo..... because that is the only way they know how to "handle" things!!

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

Man, arguing with trolls! You oughta know better, SwissMiss! (but thank you anyway) It's an uphill battle since they don't play by the rules they try to assign you... This guy, who calls you a hater (and we so know you're not), wrote "F.U.C.K. Canada" just a few posts down - a whole country! But if you watch MSNBC, it's so obvious (somehow) that we do too (MSNBC?? that's the "left"? I guess when you're so far right, everyone is left).

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by jgrace (20) 3 years ago

I understand the Soros, Tides, Adbusters to the paid and staged protestors with Craigslist. I understand the real goals of the turmoil and true agendas of the elite. Do you? You see, NATO, UN, NAFTA, the euro and such are all stepping stones to the one world government. Problem, reaction, solution. Everything else is just a show to keep us entertained. We MUST fight for our liberty! This is just the beginning of something much bigger. And we must keep our ears, eyes and minds open.

I suggest to continue trolling but not the petty politics, the BIG picture at hand. Exercise your first amendment. Be heard, maybe even stop by one. And don't forget the second amendment either! I honestly think they have bitten off more than they can chew. These stunts would have worked in the 1900s, but we're in the dawn of the Internet. Educate yourself, man. Be smart with the trolling, spread the word!

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Good post !!! Don't forget Agenda 21

[-] -1 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

i think you must be one those baby rush limbough who dosent have any brain but have big ass like rush

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

I agree with you. I have observed a rapid, alarming convergence to the typical "leftist" views on this forum. What was once an independent movement about power and corruption is now just another version of MoveOn. I am getting very disillusioned, and I am not alone. Not to even bring up the violence . . .

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Um.... it's right wing people who come on here, swearing and name calling and insulting people to the hilt and aren't able to engage in intelligent dialogue.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

That's not true, most would see me as "Right Wing" but I do none of those things and engage in intelligent dialogue on almost every post I submit.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Yes, but I didn't say ALL right wing people do that on here, did I. What I said was it's right wing people who run their mouths on here.... meaning the ones who run their mouths, swear at people, insult them constantly, etc. are right wingers. That is NOT the same as saying ALL right wingers on here do that.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

What happened to the original cause that the 99% agreed upon? --Corruption of government by corporatism.

Half of this country is conservative. And the other liberal half are not rabid anti-capitalists. This movement is about to go into a death spiral because it has been hijacked by radicals.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

I think I'm the 50%.

Middle class and split on OWS support.

[-] 0 points by therising (6643) 3 years ago

Do you just make this stuff up or do you have a manual that you're typing from? Because you sound like such a goofball defending Scott Walker. I'm laughing heartily right now watching you go through these contortions. Do you know how silly you look defending this fellow and making these completely lame and useless attempts to create division among the 99%?

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by freedomfighter2 (5) 3 years ago

I have a question for you MikeyD: How do you feel about working for the Federal Reserve for roughly 3 months out of every year? That is where your income tax is going... it's no secret. Around 25% of your income goes into the private banking system.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Misenka1457 (45) 3 years ago

Abstein from comments, or...more bluntly sh. t. f. up.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Misenka1457 (45) 3 years ago

No, not realy, dont need your benevolence, my first answer does it. Put up with it....

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

OWS partisan? They sure are.

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

Everyone's partisan. The basic claim - 99% - is that they are partisan. So what? At least their partisanship is aimed at the maximal good, not the bank accounts of a very small number of individuals.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

overthrow of capitalism is for the maximum good? Maximum good of who?

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

Just because some people advocate the "overthrow of capitalism" in situations where everyone is invited to speak doesn't mean that that is the fundamental goal of the movement. Just because some people acknowledge that capitalism as we know it needs serious adjustments because, for the past 40 years, it has institutionalized favor for people who have money (look at the proportion of capital markets to markets for tangible goods - they're almost 100 times as large, and they require that you already have money to invest, which means that they bar entry to people that don't have money, which means they favor those who do - which is the definition of inequality of opportunity) doesn't mean these people want to "overthrow capitalism" - it means what they say: re-instituting regulations that allow for greater equality of opportunity, taking public control of markets that favor natural monopolies, and providing public services that enable equality of opportunity (ever read "The Road to Serfdom"? Even Hayek said that the government should provide health services). So nice try.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

If you want to invest , in anything, YES you should have money. And yes I have read The Road to Serfdom.

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

That wasn't the question - the question was whether it's actually advocating the overthrow of capitalism to say these things are problematic. I've got news for you - if you think anyone should be able to invest in anything and make a profit from it, then we don't even have "capitalism," and you should be all fired up and taking to the streets to advocate for an abolishment of child labor laws, laws against polluting water sources, laws against kiddie porn, laws against slavery... I could go on. But let's get back to the first point: who is benefitting from the institution of capitalism? Because it sure as hell isn't everyone, or even most people. It's the very few. So, without advocating communism, I can still reply to your first claim by saying, for whom is the institution of capitalism a good? It's certainly not for the maximal benefit of everyone.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Choosing to investing with the hope of making profit. What do you call that? I have no reason to take to the streets for any of the things you cited. Everyone benfits from capitalism. What are you using to post ?

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

The internet developed by the Federal Government, and a website put up by Occupy Wall Street.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

So, you got it from an Apple store. Apple, the product of capitalism.History proves that capitalism is the best system. There is no utopia.

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

"Apple, the product of capitalism." Apple is the product of Apple, and Apple's products were not created by "capitalism," they were created by programmers - we have no idea what those programmers would have done under a different incentive system. Moreover, Apple would be nothing without the internet, which, as I said, was developed by the Federal Government (by the definition I'm sure you ascribe to, any government action is socialism, so go figure).

By your definition, everything good is the product of capitalism, and anything that is bad is good because it's the product of capitalism. I suppose if I bought a Disney sweatshirt at Walmart, made by sweatshop workers in Haiti for a wage that would only gain them after 20 years of labor the amount the CEO made in an hour, that would be a good thing, because that CEO made a lot of money.

Anyway, no more with you. You're obviously a troll - you think you've made some "check and mate" move, and you haven't. You've just ignored everything substantive I've said, including the several times I said that modifications to capitalism may make it better, which by no means constitutes advocating for a utopia. And you've never appealed to history, which would only prove that we've only tried these things (had we been in the thirteenth century, I'm pretty sure everyone would be saying "history proves that feudalism is the best system.") All you do is just keep citing the same basic talking point: capitalism is awesome no matter what, and anything that comes from it must be good, so everyone should forget about socialism even if they're not talking about socialism.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Apple is the product of capitalism. No, any government action is not socialism.Socialism is central government planning regarding everything. As I said , no system is perfect. With capitalism you have the freedom to achieve or not depending on your ambition , drive, talent and work ethic. Not so in a totalitarian state.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

you responded without answering the question. Where did you get the machine/gadget you use to post? No political system is perfect, none will ever be, but capiialism is still the best.

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

Actually, I did answer the question; either you just don't want to read or you don't want to think about anything that might contradict your claims. I suppose I didn't tell you which store I bought it at (it was the Apple Store in midtown Manhattan), but I did tell you this much: I didn't buy it from capitalism. My whole point was simple: you keep assuming that an entire system is responsible only for the goods produced within it, and not the evils. You can't prove that capitalism is the best possible economic system just because it delivers some goods. There are other, untried, systems that may work much better - even systems that are just modifications of the current form of capitalism. Just because I bought a computer according to the ordinary laws governing sales doesn't mean other people aren't thrown out of their homes. It doesn't prove anything about the inherent virtues of capitalism that I bought a computer - which is exactly what you were trying to prove by asking me where I got it.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

And where did you get the machine/gadget that you're using to post?

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

I'm sorry - do you think you've me caught in some contradiction here? You post an endless string of one-liners and think you're smart enough for that? I'm not saying I'm that smart a guy, but I'm certainly smart enough to avoid being outwitted by people like you - in other words, people just smart enough to repeat the same right-wing talking points we've all already heard. That I had to buy a product because the prevailing social system requires it? Capitalism gets credit because I bought this one product, but it doesn't get blame because other people can't buy it? You're making a logical error (which is pretty hard to do in an extended string of one-sentence posts - usually you need to make two statements to have them contradict each other; let's here it for your efficiency!). "Capitalism" is not responsible for any single action undertaken within it. It's a logical error to conflate two terms, in this case, agent and situation. Capitalism has offered the opportunity for many people to do beneficial things; I never disagreed with that (if you'll recall my statement above, I said it was perfectly possible to open the market for some things while closing it for others). But you can't, therefore, say everything that is beneficial that happened within the bounds of a capitalist economy is directly attributable to that economy - everything bad that has happened within it is also the result of it (and there has been a lot of bad, even if you don't want to recognize it).

I'll end with a simple thought experiment. If you assume that an unregulated industry is automatically a good thing, then any outcome that follows from the absence of regulations must be good. So let's take the example of financing the purchase of a house. Let's say a loan is given to someone who has a job that will allow them to pay their mortgage every month provided nothing decreases their income at the margin (in other words, a subprime mortgage), and let's also say that this person thinks he'll have his job for the whole period it will take him to pay off the mortgage. But "deregulation" also means that the bank is not required to explain to this person anything about the nature of the financing - they are only required to put the document in front of the person and assume they're capable of understanding it, without honest explanation. The guy and the bank both know that he is only capable of paying his mortgage so long as he doesn't lose his job, or have his wages decreased, or doesn't get in an accident. But the bank thinks he may very well lose his job (for whatever reason; usually this has to do with the information asymmetry that obtains between one person and a corporate entity made up of numerous persons - at any rate, I don't need to give a reason because it's a hypothetical), and so they insure the mortgage. If he can pay off his mortgage, you'll say this is a benefit of capitalism - someone who, prior to the deregulation of the credit industry, would not have been able to afford a certain good is now able to afford that good. This is attributable to the system "capitalism," since, in the general sense defined above, it's responsible for all goods. But if he loses his job because, say, the plant closed down (even though he had no reason to expect this would happen), the bank still gets money because they insured the debt. This is also attributable to the system, for the same reason. But the guy lost his job, and the bank still made money. So what you have is two disproportionate benefits, both attributable to the same system. How come capitalism gets praise for the positive side of the first outcome but does not get blamed for the negative side of the other?

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

"Because, bright spark, when you are partisan, you are no longer the 99%."

So, the masses of people in the USA, the majority, who identify with belonging to a particular political party (because independents make up less of the population than Democrats and Republicans do) ARE NOT the 99%, and if one claims to belong to any political party, then that means they shouldn't be allowed to be part of this movement???

Wow.... you are such a genius.

[Removed]

[-] 7 points by Ilovethe99percent (10) 3 years ago

I'm a Canadian, and I love what the American 99% is doing to create change in our world. Thank you! Well done! Let's stop the union busters, we all need a living wage. Tax the wealthy, tax all of the financial transactions of Wall Street. Create universal health care, it breaks my heart to hear the stories of the American 99% paying shocking medical bills.

The 99% has no borders.

[-] 2 points by Misenka1457 (45) 3 years ago

Well said. We need to tax those bastards at a rate of 94% just like in times of Roosvelt. We need to begin now!

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 3 years ago

Was it really that high, 94%? Thanks for the post.

[-] 1 points by Misenka1457 (45) 3 years ago

Yeap, went down to around 70% in the 70s now is at 34% and the bastard are mad that Obama increased it like another 4% only. See they count that the young gen doesnt know aboutit and argue that it would halt hiring etc. Back in the 40 s Roosvelt created 11 million jobs with that money and in the seventies high taxes did nor affect hiring either. Now, theyonly have half the taxes and are not hiring anyway, just sitting on capital. Go to www.rdwolff.com, brows the site a bit, its all explained there.....

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 3 years ago

Hi, is there a way to copy people's comments so that I can go back to look at the websites, like the one you've mentioned, later? I really want to read more--maybe I can just open the website and then copy the link.

I'm sorry, I didn't quite understand your comment, but I'll go to the link.

Thanks very much!

[-] 1 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

It was that high as late as 1969. You know, when we were building highways, sending men to the moon and just otherwise making the necessary investments in the future to improve the lives and opportunities for all people-without going into debt.

[-] 1 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 3 years ago

It was in 1944

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 3 years ago

Thanks very much for this very significant information.

I'd like to use the format of a reply comment here to include a plea for immediate action by OWS including a mobilization of all our union support, as follows:

Urgent proposal: OWS to call for a massive EMERGENCY national action opposing Congress's upcoming attempt to impose--is it a trillion dollars?--in cutbacks to social programs that the 99% depend on. Obama will prove useless in opposing the cuts, so WE HAVE TO STOP THEM! I’m referring to the virtual dismantling of essential social programs, using the deficit as an excuse. In an hour-long talk on YouTube to Occupy Boston, Noam Chomsky describes this projected assault on the 99% as a dagger aimed straight at the heart of the country.

Thank you, everyone.

[-] 1 points by Misenka1457 (45) 3 years ago

Anything you need just ask. Study the site www.rdwolff, its an eye opener, you will get all the data you need there for your project.....

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 3 years ago

Hi, I just copied the link, it looks very interesting, I'll try to look at it soon. Thank you again.

[-] 0 points by IChowderDown (110) from Dallas, TX 3 years ago

Essential social programs- cutbacks should not even be considered. If they really did cut back I think you'd have civil war. The 99% are not at fault for the ballooned deficit thus should not have to continue the brunt of punishment and continue lining the pockets of the Elite. There is lots of fat from the elite to take back and get the accounting house in order. It's not rocket science, just the ego's of the very few.

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 3 years ago

Thank you so much, but Congress has already managed to practically dismantle some life-saving social programs, so we have to mount as massive a protest as possible--can't count on a civil war.

Thanks!

[-] 0 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

we should take it all becuse that was belong to us in first place then lets kill all of them

[-] 1 points by MaxRommel (57) from Ridgefield Park, NJ 3 years ago

Violence is not the answer Ray.

[-] -1 points by FreeMarkets (272) 3 years ago

I say we just line them up against the wall and shoot them, then just seize all their ill-gotten wealth that was stolen from us. We must kill their children as well.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Shooting and killing..... that's what I expect to hear from right wing crazies.... because that's all you people think about.... oh, in addition to God and money.

[-] -1 points by FreeMarkets (272) 3 years ago

I was just following the crowd missy. Isn't that your end goal, to purge the world of the majority (conservatives and, in the US, Christians)? I'm trying to help you focus your hate.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

You're the ones who love shooting people and animals.

[-] 0 points by Dio1313 (69) 3 years ago

I love shooting animals in a legal setting with the proper tags. Talking of killing people and their children is something that only a complete idiot would do, and it will only work against the few educated, knowledgable people who are actually trying to do something good.

[-] 1 points by bsl041972 (37) 3 years ago

Sounds like a plan...you're in charge. We expect immediate results.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

FreeMarkets, while an obvious troll, has made a point: I am getting sick of all the loons that are taking over this movement. We formed to fight government corruption and now we are going off in every direction, including directions that are definitely NOT shared by the 99%. We are a free market, capitalist country. Most of the 99% think that is a GOOD thing, and that all honestly earned profits should be kept by those who worked hard to get them. I am a hairs breadth away from dropping my substantial financial and moral support of this movement.

[-] 0 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

hey i agreed 100 percent they deserve that

[-] 1 points by MaxRommel (57) from Ridgefield Park, NJ 3 years ago

Cheeseheads, go away!!

[-] 1 points by MaxRommel (57) from Ridgefield Park, NJ 3 years ago

Go away cheesehead.

[-] 0 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

fuck off

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 3 years ago

I am so glad to see Canadians posting here! You're right the 99% absolutely do not have borders. Borders are something that has benefitted the 1% no end!

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 3 years ago

Solidarity!

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

yes agreed and fuck europe too

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Um.... yeah.... if someone isn't a citizen, then they can't vote.... Einstein.

[Removed]

[-] 6 points by demonspawn79 (186) 3 years ago

Great jobs guys. If our elected representatives will not speak for the people who pay their salaries, then they will not speak at all.

[-] -3 points by hometownboz (0) 3 years ago

For once, the politians ARE speaking up and doing the will of the people. The recall elections which unions spent millions of dollars failed because the people are tired of being taken advantage of by the unions. The unions are the ones who do not speak for us. Gov Walker speaks for the majority of us Wis. Taxpayers.

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

Unions built this country and created the middle class. They have helped me and YOU. The ones taking advantage are those who require unfettered, unchecked power. Without unions there would be child labor, a standard 80-90 hour work week, no safety procedures on the job, 100-to-one student teacher ratios in our public schools, and slave wages for everyone but those whose income are derived from investment portfolios instead of work. I

It is hardly taking advantage to fight for the rights of the people who make the profit of corporations possible or civil society function. It is hardly taking advantage by creating the American Middle Class, which has shrunk in direct proportion to the loss of unionized workers.

If you work for a living, you are arguing against you own interests when opposing unions. They provide the only effective checks and balances on Robber Barons. And EVERY SINGLE benefit you currently enjoy on the job, whether union or non-union, was won for you by the sweat and sometimes blood of unions in the country. A little gratitude is in order.

As to confronting Gov Walker, thanks to those who so bravely and clear-sightedly acted. You did so on everyone's behalf, including even those in the 1%, though they don't realize it. What they have yet to understand is that a rising tide lifts ALL boats, including theirs.

[-] 1 points by ARealNewYorker (227) from Brooklyn, NY 3 years ago

Exactly! What every anti-union, pro "free market" poster on this site seems to forget is that the capital market is almost 100 times the size of the market for real trade goods (this has increased, since 1970, from 6x). But supposedly traders are the people who "work harder," even though they produce nothing. No, their "working harder" has everything to do with the creation of institutions that allow someone to speculate on currency, make a killing, and get out before they tank the economy because their firm has the money for the research to understand this (when, oftentimes, foreign governments don't!). All you have to do is have the basic education and connections, and presto. But for some reason, unions, which have fought to make life livable for the people who actually work for a small salary, are at bottom responsible for all of our problems! I will admit that most consultants and traders do put in long hours, but they're not that much longer than most working Americans (despite the rhetoric of the 40-hour work week, most Americans end up working 50-60 just to make ends meet), and the payoff is significantly greater, with no benefit to anyone except the relatively few people who own significant amounts of stock. If OWS is pro-union, it's because unions are the only major interests that have traditionally had concern for working people. Whatever their flaws now, this is still true.

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Those traders work "long hours", because they know they will rake in more if they work longer.

My company has traders who trade futures, carbon credits, etc. When my department took a tour through the trading department and was told this, my immediate thought was, "Is this right, and how can this be legal?"

These traders are "untouchables" in my company. They get to do what they want to do, and the rest of us can't go into their area without being escorted there. It's insane to say the least!

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 3 years ago

You're right!

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Yep!!

[-] 1 points by jgrace (20) 3 years ago

Thank you.

[-] 2 points by JesusChrist (81) 3 years ago

ah, no. As I recall the GOP lost two seats in the recall election clearly indicating the public didn't agree with Walker. And it's his turn next :) I hope he'll enjoy unemployment.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

He retained more than he lost.

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

I have to agree. I don't see what unions even have to do with this movement. Unions are democratically elected, and the vast majority of workers have rejected them. Are we now intending to force them on the majority? What has happened to our original principles of fighting corporate corruption in government?

[-] 0 points by nikka (228) 3 years ago

Amen to that!

[-] 5 points by Misenka1457 (45) 3 years ago

BRAVO!!! we need more of those and everywhere, particularly at those stupid election debates!

[-] 4 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

If you don't know what they are upset about, you are living in a different universe. If you read what they said, it is obvious what their complaints are??? They are protesting Walker for being an antidemocratic governor who has busted unions and fired teachers. he is speaking in Chicago where a 100 million tax break was given to the mercantile exchange while Americans are having social services cut?? They are saying why should Walker have a right to speak whe the police keep them from speaking. Get It. Try listening and thinking for a change, Americans. then the rest of the world won't think you are soooo stupid to have let corporations gut your country the way they have!!!

[-] 4 points by Ilovethe99percent (10) 3 years ago

I'm a Canadian, and I love what the American 99% is doing to create change in our world. Thank you! Well done! Let's stop the union busters, we all need a living wage. Tax the wealthy, tax all of the financial transactions of Wall Street. Create universal health care, it breaks my heart to hear the stories of the American 99% paying shocking medical bills.

The 99% has no borders.

[-] 2 points by Ilya (3) from город Новосибирск, Новосибирская область 3 years ago

I'm from Russia, and I admire what OWS is doing. There will be demonstrations in support in front of US embassies in Russia. Together we change the world.

and its sad to see those nationalist comments. Do we have to wait year 3000 for people to understand they are the same on both sides of the borders?

[-] 3 points by Shanty23 (11) 3 years ago

no those comments are from trolls who don't represent the American majority. OWS is not a nationalist movement, We want global solidarity against the neoliberal menace. Corporations don't have national boundaries anymore, why should we?

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

"Do we have to wait year 3000 for people to understand they are the same on both sides of the borders?"

I totally agree.... but many people think they are superior over others..... especially if they have a lot of money.

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Thank you for your support and participation. Ignore the trolls. They aren't worth the time. I know it's hard, but they really aren't worth it.

[-] -1 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

shut the fuck off go back to russia

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Have you ever been diagnosed with Tourette Syndrome? Just curious.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Misenka1457 (45) 3 years ago

Suck your own. Dick.

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

I'm sure he does!

[Removed]

[-] 7 points by martikus (12) 3 years ago

A ha ha ha ha ha - LMAO. What a loser this dork is. This is a real Bush style redneck. Yup, I'd love to be an American and be in need of heart surgery. "How much that gunna cost me, doc?" Oh, free in Canada. As far as our hockey players are concerned (whatever that has to so with this movement) we have six teams in Canada - 24 state side. You could look at it this way: Americans need Canadians to come over and show them how to play the game LOL. All that aside, those on this side of the boarder who are not brain washed by the right-wing facists that be, we fully support this effort. Keep it up. We've had it start up here as well, Toronto, Vancouver and other spots but not to the extent you're taking this. To bad it might benefit a putz like this MikeyD jerk. Come on up to Canada, Mickey. We'll give ya a good old-fashioned Canadian welcome whereby we'll rearrange your big fat ugly mouth with, no doubt, as ass to match it. What an embarrassment you are to your fellow countrymen. Probably a Hermy Cain man LOL LOL (or Hermy boy for short LOL). Bravo Occupy Movement!!!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by Frthnkr85 (20) 3 years ago

This is the most childish thing I have ever seen. I hope OWS knows they are being used. It doesn't matter which side you are being used by the left or the right, being used is being used. Trust me when I say that no one looks out for the interest of others without having something to gain themselves. The 99 percent are just as greedy as the 1 percent they just were not in the right place at the right time. We need to go back to the farming days where, you either produce for yourself or you starve, and that would do a good job of weening the population, of all of the useful idiots on both sides that contribute the the Nobility and allow themselves to be controlled. I love Canada, and enjoy visiting there, and I love the people, but your healthcare system is not a good one, and nothing in this world that is free is ever going to be worth much, I can promise you that, from experience.

Continue to think that giving the so called 99 percent what they want will change anything, but anyone who lives in the real world, which is a far less amount of people than 99 percent, can see that this movement is a joke, and the people in charge are the same ones in charge of the unions, which are the same ones who are in the bed with the politicians, which are the same ones who are in bed with Wall Street and big business. I honestly hope that you guys all understand that.

[-] 1 points by ark99 (3) from Jonestown, PA 3 years ago

" Trust me when I say that no one looks out for the interest of others without having something to gain themselves"

Isn't that what Jesus said?

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Yeah, there isn't one person on this planet who actually cares for others and who helps them out of the sheer desire to help them!!!! Of course, someone who's in favor of free markets, no regulation, very liberal gun rights, etc. would be the one to say that!

[-] 1 points by Frthnkr85 (20) 3 years ago

Actually I don't agree with Mikey D's ignorant comments either. We need to be adults and be able to discuss things, or we are all children who just want to yell scream and curse. Do not try and justify what you do, because of what others do. I Like the fact that Modernmonalisa was able to articulate an argument that makes some sense, and it is something I can reply to and continue intelligent conversation, where as you make inappropriate comments and do the same thing MikeyD does, and then admonish others who are trying to give some in this movement the benefit of the doubt. Also you talk about right wing this and that, and make extremely offensive comments, while patting yourself on the back for putting MikeyD in his place though you are doing the same thing.

Now to address a real point. Mona some of what you say makes sense, and I think your argument was well framed, and I like your metaphor, it was very appropriate for you argument. I would just say that, there is no fairness in this world that the individual does not make for themself. The problem with groups is that groups need leaders, and leaders have power, and power corrupts. You are seeing this with your own movement. The group created power that the radical elements we are now starting to see are taking advantage of, and they are taking the seriousness and legitimatness away from your movement. Hitler was able to seize power of a group of people and convince them that a whole race of people needed to be wiped off of the map, and there are numerous other examples throughout history of groupthink leading to much evil.

The problem in this country is that we have gotten away from the individual, and we put people into groups and then apply political correctness, which puts up walls that do not allow the groups to communicate, and then the so called leaders use the groups to fight against one another, while they maintain there power and continue to screw ALL of us. Politicians are the real crooks, and the education system and media are as much to blame, and have been formulated to be the way that they are by these crooks in order to keep the population dumbed down, so that they can maintain their power. This is a common strategy and has been used many times throughout history. I believe that OWS should be Occupy Washington, because politicians from both sides are what have caused this country to be in the mess that it is, and unions and these other special interests do not look out for the average person, that is just propaganda, and while unions were neccesary and alturistic when they first came around, they have become nothing more than a power hungry institution just like everything else.

I agree that there is greed on WS, but as I said everyone is greedy, it is just a matter of whether you are going to assuage your greed by getting something for yourself in a way that you can feel good about, or by getting something off of someone else, by either using force, or by letting the government use it's force for you. We need a Renisance in this country where the Pargidm shifts away from the childish aruging and towards a realization that if we as individuals do as we should, then we as a whole will also be better off, instead of trying to work this from the top down we need to work from the bottom up, and the bottom starts with the individual.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

"Most of the people that post on here are out of touch with reality, as a matter of fact, most of the people that live on this planet are plain crazy."

You're really the voice of reason and civility, aren't you?

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

"Continue to think that giving the so called 99 percent what they want will change anything, but anyone who lives in the real world, which is a far less amount of people than 99 percent, can see that this movement is a joke, and the people in charge are the same ones in charge of the unions, which are the same ones who are in the bed with the politicians, which are the same ones who are in bed with Wall Street and big business. I honestly hope that you guys all understand that."

Don't pat yourself on the back for "being" civil, OK.

[-] 1 points by Frthnkr85 (20) 3 years ago

Aparently you want to argue, and you try and tell me what I think, and what I believe. The fact is the things I said are true, and though you might not believe in everything everyone else believes does not change the fact that those factions exist. I did not come here to curse and call names, and what I have said about being childish and wanting things for free is very applicable. I am on this site not to condemn and demean like MikeyD and others from the right who are act childish as well, but to gain some insight, and possible change a few minds regarding the problems we really face.

My first comments came because I was reading a decent intelligent conversation, and it quickly collapsed into name calling and cursing. You may want to paint me as a right wing wacko that doesn't believe in science, and is racist and ignorant, but I am not, if anything I am a Liberatarion, and this movement should be a libertarion movement if all of the things it supposedly stands for are true, but I believe it is the whole leadership and power structure of this country that has pulled the wool over our eyes, and that big business is only a piece of that puzzle. You and those like you who would rather argue right wing, left wing, conservative, liberal, will never achieve anything, and are about as rational as a hillbilly blood feud. I think it would be a shame to let anarchists and communists take over your movement, just as it would be a shame if the KKK and other so called right wing hate groups took over the tea party. So argue with yourself for all I care, and luckily I have run into some rational people here who have helped me to shape a better opinion of what this movement is about, and what some of the sentiments are of the rational elements of this movement.

Also I could care less about patting myself on the back, I am not some "troll" or whatever other designation people use to describe someone like MikeyD who just comes to curse and forment chaos and hate. Also don't take my words out of context to make a point, others can read what I have posted, as you can see I am not taking your words and trying to define what they really mean through my perspective so please have the respect to do the same.

[-] 0 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

no religion please fuck all of them let get real

[-] 1 points by modernmonalisa (8) from Seattle, WA 3 years ago

Oh, also I wanted to ask if you happened to read A Tale of Two Cities at some point. I just read it to help a student with an essay, and it's definitely been in my mind.

Also, are you familiar with the part of Jewish law that calls for a year of Jubilee? Every 50 years, the land reverts to whatever family originally owned it, and all debts are cancelled between everyone in the community. So if you hired yourself out as a serf, you would be free and get to go back to your family's land. I don't know if the law ever got obeyed, though.

[-] 1 points by modernmonalisa (8) from Seattle, WA 3 years ago

"no one looks out for the interest of others without having something to gain themselves." I think (based on what I know, which will always be limited), that the ideology behind the OWS and seeing oneself as part of the 99% is recognizing that everyone's interests are connected. Therefore, of course each individual will benefit by looking out for other people's interests. Absolute altruism isn't necessary to build a society where everyone has the opportunity to create their own wealth without creating obstacles for others to do the same.

Regarding your thought that the 99% are as greedy as the 1%, I personally think that 99% is grouping a lot of people together that really aren't in the same economic category and don't have the same interests--at least if you are talking about 99% of the population in the industrialized world. So here's how I would break it down:

The largest percentage of our (US) population is disadvantaged by and prevented from earning their keep because of our political-socioeconomic system (soooo wish there were a shorter way to say that--PSE system maybe?). It is absolutely not greedy for anyone in this population to want to change the system to one that will benefit themselves as much as it benefits those who support/control the current unjust PSE system. That is asking for basic human rights--the right to be able to earn your keep. Which you can't do if the only jobs available that you have training for don't pay a living wage (probably because corporations moved their operations overseas so they can economically screw over the rest of the world). When you can't, or can barely, meet the basic needs of yourself and your family, it isn't greedy to want your fair share of the pie. What would be greedy would be demanding a large slice of the pie without working for it, or at the expense of others being able to get enough for themselves. Which is generally what the "Nobility" has claimed for themselves.

This next bit isn't really is response to your comment, but it's a good place to say it, so forgive me: Then there is a smaller % of the population that is pretty well off and benefits from the system well enough that they aren't truly desperate for things to change. But they would like to see changes that will allow them to have more financial freedom--lower interest rates, less expensive higher education, less taxes, etc.. This is the middle class, and its % has been shrinking for the last 50 years while the wealth of the 1% has grown.

In this respect, I think that making everyone go "back to the land" is sort of a fair idea, as long as everyone's plot is equally fertile, everyone gets the same store of seeds and equipment, etc... Would be interesting. Suddenly most of us would be taking lessons from immigrants who maybe left similar circumstances for better opportunities here. And the Amish. They would suddenly be very popular. Personally I love to garden and like crafty things like knitting, etc... so I wouldn't necessarily mind.

[-] 1 points by sassafrass (197) 3 years ago

Well, there's a segment of nuts in our society now who seem hell-bent on erasing years of hard-won rights and protections while we are being impoverished, to take us back to the days of slavery-- and that sure involved working the land. So ---heaven help us all--- you might get your wish. Careful what you wish for.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

MikeyD's comments aren't the most childish things you've ever seen? Really? You're the hypocrite. Of course you'd stand up for someone like him.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

They don't , that's why they're "useful idiots".

[-] 0 points by FreeMarkets (272) 3 years ago

I'd like a nice tour of your navy fleet; oh, wait - you disbanded it.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

Mikey, First YOU would have to have a dick.

[-] 1 points by martikus (12) 3 years ago

Hmmmm . . . . . that's interesting. Tell me, who won that Olympic gold metal in hockey? Oh yeah, Canada LOL. Who was our opponent The U.S. perhaps?? Ah, all in good fun spunky. Hockey aside, and that Olympic loss yet again, I feel much more pain for your countrymen (and women) who have to put up with the likes of you and those like you. This only strengthens their resolve I'm sure. OWS: Keep up the fight!!!

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

He's just a redneck whack job, Tea Party psycho.... like their whole lot. I know some of his ilk. They aren't significant.

[-] 1 points by Frthnkr85 (20) 3 years ago

You are much more respectable, and sensible I am sure. Why continue to paint the Tea Party as psychos? Is it because that is the information you are given? Stop being a zombie like most of the useless humans on this planet, and wake up to your hypocrisy. The Tea Party has a lot more in common with the "supposed" theme of Occupy Wallstreet than, for instance the unions. People on both sides that call names, and don't think for themselves are equally foolish. I really suggest we all wake up or the elites will run everything, and we will be back to where we were, before the Magna Carta was written, and regular folks began to actually have rights and opprotunity. The people in charge of your movement are the same as those in charge of the Tea Party, they just use different Rhetoric. Do not be fooled into thinking you have a righteous movement as you slander others who want to see responsibility from the same individuals you do.

Or do you and this movement just want everything for free? Nothing is free, get over it, if you can't than maybe life is just to hard for you. That is what it really comes down to in the end. I am not rich but I am happy, money does not buy happiness, get a clue, and realize that this is not about how much money others have, but about how much money you don't have. Greed is greed that is a fact.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

The people I've run into who are part of the Tea Party act like he does. Maybe all aren't like that, but there are enough of them. MikeyD has done nothing but ridicule and insult people here.

And, no, I don't want things for free. "Or do you and this movement just want everything for free? Nothing is free, get over it, if you can't than maybe life is just to hard for you. That is what it really comes down to in the end. I am not rich but I am happy, money does not buy happiness, get a clue, and realize that this is not about how much money others have, but about how much money you don't have. Greed is greed that is a fact."

And you aren't a zombie for posting shit like that??? That is a very typical rant from those who oppose this movement. Don't talk about hypocrisy when you yourself are guilty of it.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

The Taxed Enough Party was significant enough to vote in a republican majority in congress in November 2010.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

Old news. Let;s see what happens in the NEXT election. Come spew here then.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

You're such a lost soul. How sad that is.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Um.... actually, my company isn't owned by foreigners, dumb ass.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

"Go back to working for your foreign masters...."

I don't work for OWS. Nice try, though.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Why don't you go and seek out some maturity instead of talking out of your ass?

If you haven't noticed, there are Canadian AND U.S. hockey teams in the NHL.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by shercares (1) 3 years ago

Lying in a hospital bed with a skull fracture. That is American Pride. Loosing his words in exercising the 1st Amendment. What have you done for the freedom to speak in this Country? We are Patriots. We are the 99%.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

If how you talk to others is what you consider American pride, then you can have it all to yourself.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Um.... because someone voices their opinion about the USA, and they are from another country, and you disagree with them.... that gives you license to call them names and treat them like shit?

You make ALL Americans look badly. No wonder so many people from other countries can't stand us.

Respect to you is treating others who disagree with you like shit????

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

I do have a spine, and I know how to use it..... unlike you, who just flings insults about. Is that what you consider having a spine?

People from other countries have more knowledge of what's going on than people like you do. You'd rather hide behind your right wing wall.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Courtney (111) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Not true. Canada is awesome.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by Courtney (111) from New York, NY 3 years ago

the u.s. doesn't stay out of anyone else's politics

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

You are right.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

THIS American supports it in this case, as do millions of others, I assure you. Why are Canadians involved? It must have occurred to you that US banks, financial institutions, businesses, politics, even our pollution effects Canadians, as they effect countries all around the world. The financial system is globally interconnected, and what the biggest economy of the world does has impacts across the globe.

It is WE who are guilty of foreign intervention. The Canadians participating in this movement are simply exercising self defense.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

He doesn't understand your level of explanation. He just calls people names when he gets pissed about their views.

He's a right winger. Go figure!

[-] 1 points by Courtney (111) from New York, NY 3 years ago

He's a ridiculous troll

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

yep

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

I have no liberal guilt. I have anger at those who stole all of our futures.

Polls indicate that perhaps as many as 100 million Americans support the 99% movement or at least view it favorably and agree with its basic premises. They don't all have to be marchers. Not every single Black person in America marched on Selma. A few thousand did. Do you really think those marchers were in the minority of blacks back then, and that they weren't supported by a much larger community?

Now, until you begin addressing me, and everyone else you disagree with in a civil tone, you may not consider me your "pal". Honestly, I don't understand your contempt and rage at people who are demanding democracy. Is that not what you think America is about?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

@ Frthnkr85

I am replying above your post rather than below because there is somehow no reply button available at the end of your comment.

You have history wrong and you have economics wrong. I suggest you read up on the issues, and perhaps source material outside your usual go-to places.

The problem is there is indeed a free linch, but only for the one in power. The rest of have to struggle more and more just to stay in place. As laws were changed, as unions were driven from viable existence, as politicians were captured by corporations and the very wealthy, there was a massive redistribution of capitol in the US. But it was all from the bottom to the top, and it was entirely by design.

Canada largely, though not entirely, escaped the worst parts of the current recession, and that was mostly because they did not allow their banks to act as recklessly as ours did, combined with a much stronger social services foundation (ie universal health care.) But that does not mean they weren't effected at all. Banking, as i said, is global; what effects one banking system effects the rest.

Politically, they sent troops to Iraq, etc, along with us, despite there being zero threat from Iraq to them (or us, for that matter). Why did they do it? Because economic ties with the US compelled them to. So they lost blood and treasure to serve those very same corrupt powers.

As to the problems in Europe, neither Spain, nor Italy, nor Ireland are in the mess they're in because of over-gernerous social welfare programs. (It could be argued that Greece is, but they are a unique, and especially corrupt government.) There are explanations about the other three countries, but it would take a long essay on economics, the structural problems with the Euro, an so on, to fill you in about that, and I don't think this is the forum for multi-page dissertations.

As to stopping being used, that's exactly what people here are trying to do. We have been used for decade by a growing plutocracy. This movement is trying to end that.

[-] 1 points by Frthnkr85 (20) 3 years ago

Stole your future? Do they pass out talking points at these things. Most of the people that post on here are out of touch with reality, as a matter of fact, most of the people that live on this planet are plain crazy. Where would Canada be if OWS succeeded. Have you guys ever heard of there is no such thing as a free lunch? Well the US has been paying for Canada and most of Europe's free lunch for a long time now, and when we decided we wanted some of that free stuff as well, we ran up a huge defecit, and when it all collapsed on the jokes we have for politicians heads, guess what happened? All of these countries that were depending on us to fuel their "social" programs got a very rude wake-up call, and it all started to fall apart around them, because a large part of their societies are on the dole, and they did not have the ability to fend for themselves. This has been a small lesson in history, though this happened not to long ago. See if you can put the rest together for yourselves, and for god sakes please stop being used.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

He's probably one of those militia dudes.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Push polls.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by martikus (12) 3 years ago

Don't want us to chat about your dysfunction? No problem. Don't ask us to fight in your fucking wars jack ass. Our troups are in Afghanistan as I type and we've lost good men for YOUR fucking cause . . . only to have some ignorant slob like you tell me to stay out YOUR biz? Go toe hell pal, or perhaps your already there. SwissMiss has you nailed. You are what makes Americans look bad. Grow the hell up, punk. You're just an ass who gets off making idiotic comments in a forum of support for social change. You are a cancer within society. Corporations love jerks like you. Karma will catch up with you. Watch.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Do us all a favor and fuck off. Better yet, go shoot yourself in the head.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

You know, MikeyD, you're right. My numbers were wrong. 30 million is indeed closer to the mark. That's still quite different than the seven thousand you mentioned. So I guess both our numbers are off a bit. (Of course since only voters were counted, it is a fair assumption that the 30% extends to all adults, so 100 million is likely correct.) Nevertheless, you conveniently for got your implication that there are only 7000 supporters of the movement. By your own admission, there are at LEAST 30 million. Why the attempted distortion earlier? WHat do you hope to accomplish with such transparent deception?

I am doing nothing at the behest of "anarchists" from Canada. A Canadian web site may have sparked the movement on its first day, but it immediately became an American phenomenon. (And international, too, I might add.) Its immediate rapid momentum is the result of real civic grievances that have been festering for a long time in the States and have finally come to a head. You, on the other hand don't seem to realize that you are working very hard for those who continually try to enslave you, and you don't even know you are being taken advantage of. The shrillness of your defense of crony capitalism suggests you know underneath that the king has no cloths and are ashamed to admit you bought into the lie for so long. Very little else explains the coarseness and hostility of your posts.

I am supporting the 99% on my own behalf, for my own sake, and for the sake of my country (which I love). I really don't care if the idea initially came from up north. It was a good one, and millions of people are supporting it for good reason. These "anarchist" foreigners are not fomenting anything, unrest or otherwise. The movement has taken off because there is inequity HERE, corruption HERE, and those of us HERE who want that to change are trying to get the ball rolling. We want even people like you to have better representation in Congress and are subject to less thievery by Wall Street

I'm sorry that you are somehow angry or offended or frightened by this movement. But it's even more of a shame that you don't understand what it is, why it necessary, or even how it would benefit you. You can't seem to get past you ideology and bizarre rage long enough to learn anything, least of all economics or principles of democracy. That's a waste Pal, Buddy Boy, Chum., Homey.

[-] 0 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

hey let me call rush limbough he dose it for you and if he is not available please call tea party

[-] 3 points by Misenka1457 (45) 3 years ago

We need a national and global strike! We need the 99% to interrupt work to begin affecting the 1% pockets. Then we demand to begin returning their money, returning our houses, our retirement money and begin changing legislation in favor of the 99%!!!

[-] 3 points by NWIndiana2012 (2) 3 years ago

I am so proud of each of you! Very well done! 99% must always PEACEABLY: Show them who you are. Tell them what you want. Don't give up. Effect the change.

[-] 2 points by johnnyapple (15) 3 years ago

How about we all focus on getting all Government appointed officials, from our local City, County, State, Mayors to Governors and all their elected cabinets, all the way up to and including the Federal Government, Congress, Senators’, Obama and his cabinet take a 10% cut in their outlandish salaries and freeze their raise for the next two years!!! This would make a serious impact on our economy, Christ maybe even balance the budget!!!! They all keep talking about cutting into our very needed social and educational programs, but no mention on their lavish life styles.

[-] 1 points by socialmedic (178) 3 years ago

I'd rather charge Goldman Sachs 30 percent interest on all the money they have taken and STILL are taking from the USA. And NO debt forgiveness.

[-] 2 points by prisonforbush (4) 3 years ago

This needs to be done everywhere, especially in D C at all the congressional meetings open to the general public. Remember, public property is not the private propery of mayor's, govenor's, senator's, congress or the president, it is public property, paid for with tax dollars.Occupy it.

[-] 2 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 3 years ago

Walker confronted face on! Fabulous! Occupy Congress is next on The Agenda!

[-] 2 points by johnpeterjames (2) from Asheville, NC 3 years ago

Please, more and more of these approaches to free speech. The elite must be made uncomfortable enough to share the enormous wealth and income they command, much of it at the expense of almost all Americans. If the elite only understands abuse of power, then we must speak the language of protest. UNITE OR DIE, ECONOMIC JUSTICE, RESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP, PROTECTION OF THE VAST AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. Concentration of wealth has always been a problem, it is now a matter of excess to such an extent that it is destroying America. History shows again and again, excess greed of the elite destroys nations.

[-] 2 points by gregthegreek718 (4) 3 years ago

these is effin awesome!!!! if obama can't stop these beasts the poeple will!!! we had enough of these paid polticians!!! these 1%'ers have awakened the sleeping giant 99%. Thank u scott walker u sob tool of the 1%!! it has finally begun!! expose them all everywhere peacefully!!! we can do it!!!

[-] 2 points by zygarch (83) 3 years ago

Oh MY GOD! I have chills!!!! This is Fan-Tas-Tick! Keep going. Occupy EveryWhere.

[-] 2 points by DianaLee (55) from Salt Lake City, UT 3 years ago

Brilliant. Beautiful. Mic check: up the revolution!

[-] 2 points by RightsOfMan (45) from Brownsville, TX 3 years ago

Shine On You Crazy Diamonds!

[-] 2 points by nawi (24) 3 years ago

awesome!

[-] 2 points by lemondrop (1) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Awesome!! Love it love it love it!!

[-] 2 points by NoCorpWelfareChi (2) 3 years ago

Thanks for sharing this! Anyone interested in more Stand Up! Chicago actions can check us out on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/chicagostandsup), sign up for our big Jobs Not Cuts Day of Action on the 17th (https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=272934822751033) or a stereotype-destroying action this coming Monday, Nov. 7 in which senior citizen activists are joining Occupy Chicago and Stand Up! Chicago to protest social service cuts together (https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=272934822751033)!

[-] 2 points by Bsmart (1) from New York, NY 3 years ago

My grandfather was at the Ford Rouge Overpass (5/26/1937) standing up for the same equality we now seek from our corrupt capitalistic system. This fight has been going on for generations. You can’t expect it to be resolved in a matter of months or even years. You must think in terms of generations. So the logical path to a peaceful non- violent revolution is to work through our current system and elect the people that are most likely to have the same or at least similar views as you do. It took more than 30 years to create this economic climate starting with the Ronald Reagan policies of deregulation. You do know he started this mess don’t you? That’s what we get for electing a Hollywood actor to run this country. Just a few years prior to Reagan’s corporate leadership, Dwight David Eisenhower also a republican said “Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.” That was said in 1954, so it took about 50 years to get from that republican position to where we are now. Thank you Mr. Regan! (Sarcasm) Change takes time that can only be measured in terms of generations. Go and vote for whomever you want and we will see if commonsense prevails or will we continue to spiral down into the abyss of inequality. We need to think what’s best for the future generations, not what’s best for ourselves. Greed takes many forms, and there all not monetary.

http://apps.detnews.com/apps/history/index.php?id=172

[-] 2 points by iam99pct (115) 3 years ago

This is huge. I feel so proud of our citizens, not just for their courage and integrity, but also for their ingenuity and sense of humor.

[-] 2 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Walker is a psychopath.

[-] 1 points by socialmedic (178) 3 years ago

As are any of the people willing to pay to sit in a room to pay attention to anything Walker has to say. Seriously, what in the hell do they think they are doing? At least this time they got their money's worth.

[-] 1 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Yeah. Here's a video from Al-jezeera about Walker and the Tea Party:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOCHAv25uTw

[-] 2 points by paledog (4) 3 years ago

that was amazing! i have a lot of respect for the people in this video.

[-] 2 points by GarnetMoon (424) 3 years ago

Brilliant!!!

[-] 2 points by HelpingOthers (10) from Wall, NJ 3 years ago

i almost cried with joy : ) i am 16 and it is rejuvenating to see that this kind of beauty, that this kind of social and political awareness, is possible in our country. the masses are saying no to the people that sitting alone in my room i have not been able to say no to. they are thinking outside the box, this is valuable, this is beautiful, this is inspiring

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

I am very happy to see very young people here supporting the movement!!! I believe our young generations are more aware than the young ones of the past, and this will help us to move forward!!!

[-] 2 points by ckfox (29) 3 years ago

long post, but ilu

I wanted to share a fantastic article I ended up reading today that showed me that in South Korea students and other dissidents faced this same struggle and won democracy from their republic without a revolution through force of arms.

The article is “Rituals of Resistence: The Manipulation of Shamanism in Contemporary Korea” by Kwang-Ok-Kim

I had known about this period in Korean history, but I didn’t recall it in light of current events until this article brought the reality home hard. This is us, again, in the face of the same forces: “the national economic development program, carried out mainly through the alliance between the government and some privileged business monopolies, deprived people of open and fair access to political and economic opportunities.”

Google Books nicely has the article…with a few pages missing, but I will type out some pertinent excerpts because it’s a long article. I may be quoting the academic bits, but the majority is a narration of the events of the time.

http://books.google.com/books?id=crJCNLyCnPYC&lpg=PA195&ots=YnMCUbGRTQ&dq=rituals%20of%20resistance%20the%20manipulation%20of%20shamanism%20in%20contemporary%20korea&pg=PA195#v=onepage&q&f=false [Make sure you copy the whole url, which scrolls off to the left. <3]

For the Koreans, it was shamanism. For many of us, it’s the 2006 movie V for Vendetta. That movie fulfills one key element: “Dissenters need their own language, through which they both stigmatize the establishment as lacking legitimate power and cultural nationalism and legitimize their own counter culture.”

.

“Although the government held that the state and the government are one and the same, in popular regard the ‘state’ refers to a much broader political entity that includes all Koreans regardless of political or ideological differences.

The central issue of antigovernment demonstrations during the period of the Fifth Republic was people’s demand for democracy, including a constitutional amendment to restore the right to general elections, and the resignation of the illegitimate government of Chun Doo Hwan.”

.

[Note: Comparing us to this movement is not an endorsement of violence. Here there was rioting after a student, Pak Chongch’ol, was killed by police torture and his death covered up.]

“Just three weeks after the chinogwi kut [shamanic consolation of a vengeful or unhappy ghost] for Chongch’ol and the nationwide violent antigovernment demonstrations that followed, Chun’s government yielded. Roh Tae Woo (No T’ae-u), then the representative of the majority party and Chun’s designated successor, issued “Roh’s declaration” nullifying President Chun’s prohibition of constitutional debate. Hanyol’s funeral was held within days of the government’s ‘surrender.’”

.

“Conservative Christians teaching has led people to believe that all the hardship that has befallen them is a sign that the Second Advent is imminent and that it will happen in Korea. Above all, laypeople are urged to cultivate themselves to become complete servants of God, and this lesson of submissiveness in the spiritual realm translates into submissiveness in the political realm.

Since the late 1970s the conservative church leaders have been involved in state politics in a new way, organizing meetings and rallies with significant political implications.”

.

“Criticizing the new elite [in Korea in the 1980s] as an alliance among the old elite, military officers, and civilians from industry and business, dissident intellectuals seek the driving force of history in the culture of humble people. Resistance and revolution by peasants or the historically oppressed have become major subjects for the performing arts as well as in academic debate among activists.”

[-] 2 points by derek (302) 3 years ago

To echo your point on the success of non-violence in affecting social change in South Korea, "Voyage From Yesteryear" is a a 1982 sci-fi book that explores non-violence as a means of social change: http://www.jamesphogan.com/books/info.php?titleID=29&cmd=summary "The book has an interesting corollary. Around about the mid eighties, I received a letter notifying me that the story had been serialized in an underground Polish s.f. magazine. They hadn't exactly "stolen" it, the publishers explained, but had credited zlotys to an account in my name there, so if I ever decided to take a holiday in Poland the expenses would be covered (there was no exchange mechanism with Western currencies at that time). Then the story started surfacing in other countries of Eastern Europe, by all accounts to an enthusiastic reception. What they liked there, apparently, was the updated "Ghandiesque" formula on how bring down an oppressive regime when it's got all the guns. And a couple of years later, they were all doing it!"

A big point made there is always to do actions that bring more and more people over to your side. So, in that light, was this action related to Governor Walker likely to bring him and his staff and supporters over to the OWS side? If not, then one should reflect on that and why the demonstration was done as it was.

The big issue is not so much the success with non-violence in South Korea or elsewhere in eventually bringing about deep healthy social reform, but more that creative sustained non-violent resistance is almost always the only path that can accomplish such change (given the state has lots of guns etc. and a legal monopoly on violence, and violence can quickly get out of hand for decades whoever starts using it, as the most violent people then rise to the top of leadership positions).

We in the USA tend to take for granted the relative peace on the streets that makes our society possible. Lack of trust because of widespread violence makes a society very inefficient, and that can impose real hardships on lots of people. Just look at what happened in Iraq after the US invasion as neighbor turned on neighbor in the power vacuum the US created and allowed to persist.

Governors have tough jobs, as do most politicians. Think of Governor Walker's behaviors in office as detailed in that demonstration more as a symptom, not the disease itself. We need to think deeply about what the actual disease is and what to do about it. And getting at the root causes of a disease often involves asking a lot of questions starting with "why" and then following up the answers with more "why" questions. And that is more than "follow the money" but also asking why people pursue the money. That will probably connect with the point you raise on language and culture like discussed in: "The Mythology of Wealth": http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/402

See also: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/change/science_nonviolence.html

[-] 2 points by rva (4) 3 years ago

Go to Chicago Union League's Facebook page and let them know how you feel about the fact that Walker was invited. They have pictures up there from the breakfast as if this never happened.

[-] 2 points by mandywaz (1) from Tarcoola, SA 3 years ago

Well done, guys! Once many of those people in the room who weren't protesting with you lose their jobs, homes, investments etc. due to the coming global monetary collapse, they'll actually be joining you in your protests! Be patient, they'll eventually "wake up," and join your 99%!

[-] 2 points by Faithntruth (997) 3 years ago

That was great! How did they get in there? The rest of the crowd ranged from perplexed to outrage...i love the lady at the end who stands up and gestures at the occupiers...looks like her head is about to pop open. So amazing, to show up in such a unexpected place! And kudos for not tipping the water glasses on the way out!

[-] 1 points by d3bug (29) 3 years ago

made me think of that scene from "Scanners"... :P

[-] 2 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 3 years ago

This is what the masses seem unable to grasp:

If we replace our current leaders with human beings, they will sell out just as far as the current bunch. Our leaders weren't born sold out. Wall Street executives weren't born evil. They were born human. With a natural instinct to gather and store for survival. A natural instinct to care for family and community. 

When modern society was formed, we began to sell out our natural instincts. Survival turned into survival with a little more elbow room. Then survival with a little more elbow room and a nice view. Then survival with a little more elbow room, a nice view, and something pretty to hang around our neck.

Fast forward a few thousand years. With the industrial revolution came mechanized transportation, air conditioning, and television.

We had become somewhat spoiled. Somewhat motivated. Still relatively down to Earth. Still modest enough to appreciate one another, care for one another, and work towards a common goal.

Along the way, the potential for increased personal wealth became more and more intoxicating. Now, just about everyone wants to be rich. They want it so badly, they are willing to sell out basic morality to attain it. They WILL sell out basic morality if given the opportunity.

How can I be so sure? That's easy. Human nature plus years of corrupt influence plus opportunity.

Mother Nature did not plan for modern society. She did not plan on such corrupt influence. She never intended for any of us to seek or attain extreme personal wealth. We simply can not process the concept without being corrupted by it. Without compromising basic morality.

Extreme wealth is the single greatest corrupt influence of modern society. With every 'zero' on the paycheck, our basic instincts to care for family and community are compromised.

Those of you who still aren't convinced, consider this: 

If God himself gave you the power to end poverty, bring about world peace, and take a bonus of $100,000,000 for yourself, would you do it?

If God himself gave you the power to end poverty, bring about world peace, OR take a bonus of $100,000,000 for yourself, which would you choose?

Not only is the greatest concentration of wealth in world history the single greatest underlying cause of economic instability. The very concept of extreme personal wealth is the most corrupt influence in the history of mankind.

I speak the ugly truth. 

There will be no government "of the people" and "for the people". Never again.

[-] 3 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

Don't be so cynical. I would take the end to poverty and the bringing about of world peace. Many of us would. I don't need, nor do I want $100,000,000. Money is only paper. Life is about the relationships you make and the mark you leave behind for others. We will regain our government and rid it of the corruption. Have faith. Be patient. let go of your prejudices and join us. Together we can, and will make a better world. That is the true nature of humanitry, not greed.

[-] 1 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 3 years ago

Tell it to our leaders. I'll believe it when I see it.

[-] 2 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

Have faith my friend. That's why we are here.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

You will never get rid of corruption, it's human nature.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

So is love and common decency. We are fighting to move these forces of human nature ahead of greed. Are you against that?

[-] -1 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

So, you're fightng for love and decency. How naive.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

I would rather lose trying to make a difference than sit on my ass and give up. Quitters never win.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Another "useful idiot " heard from. You're being used by people that don't give damn about you. You're nothing but cannon fodder for them.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

Brother, you took the words right out of my mouth. I was just thinking that exact same thing about you.

I guess we'll find out which one of us is right.

Talk to me in a couple years.

Until then, I respectfully agree to disagree.

[-] 1 points by GarnetMoon (424) 3 years ago

PART of human nature...only part of it, raines... so is kindness; compassion; altruism; generosity; sacrifice; benevolence; empathy; remorse and redemption. These other facets of "human nature" are just as valid. It is a shame that they are not encouraged more... I guess they are not as exciting as greed and corruption, nor do they generate money. The happiest people in the world are the ones who have strong relationships and enough money to keep them from want...yet in the end it is the good people in our lives that make it worthwhile... People are waking up to that.

[-] 2 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

"A natural instinct to care for family and for community," ...and how is that evinced, by stealing from and squandering the money of clients and communities? Nonsense. We the Poeple have the real capacity for self governance and those who stand in the way of it be damned.

[-] 1 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 3 years ago

I meant that they were born with it like the rest of us. Any good will our leaders may have had once is long gone. That's what I meant.

[-] 2 points by BethesdaMD (25) 3 years ago

Damn. Someone get me a box of tissues. I'm real sad now.

(I just HAD to read the posts on the occupy site before bed. as if 20 other times a day isnt enough. bwahhh bwahh. )

[-] 1 points by EndGluttony (507) 3 years ago

You are a true philosopher, and by philosopher I mean moronic asshole.

[-] 1 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 3 years ago

Next.

[-] 1 points by mjb3 (1) 3 years ago

Right On Beautiful !! Same thing going on here in Michigan. If people new the draconian fascist bull shit that is going on in Lansing they would be appalled. Doesn't matter what party they belong too. They republican's have deluged the public with bills that are nothing less than war in the form of policy on the poor middle class working people in our state.
Since last January they have passed laws to tax pensions, severely limit collective bargaining in the schools, cut medicaid, cut unemployment benefits, capped welfare to retroactively to 48 months. Meaning that many people had only a few weeks notice to learn they would be without incomes. Snyder's reasoning is "these people can go out and find jobs". But there are no jobs you rich cold blooded selfish prick. They've also cut medical and retirement benefits for all state workers, while giving pharmaceutical companies immunity from being sued by anyone in Michigan who is harmed or even killed by a medication. They've revised the workmans comp laws making it much harder to get and keep. They now pay less to reciepents and treating doctors. You already know how they are attacking auto no-fault. They have cut funding for schools by $300 a student. Passed a law that gives government the power to go into any city, deem it in financial crisis and have it taken over by a private company, firing elected officials and having a corporation take over schools. And the list goes on and on.

Synder and his puppet appointees and shadow dancing republican legislature are calling this "reinventing Michigan". Snyder says the benefits of his policies may not be seen for 10, 20, or even 30 years. Thats bullshit. They are taking from the poor and further padding the pockets of the Insurance pharmaceuticals other corporate big business and themselves.

Higher education keeps rising making it unaffordable for most. Corporations are now being put in charge of primary and secondary education.

In 30 years we'll have a dumbed down fox news type fed public thankful for a minumum wage jobs at walmart or another corporate giant, as they pedal the public shit products all made overseas.

The american dream is on life support now and our own goverment wants to go for the kill. Unless the people take a stand they'll do just that.

The constitution needs to be taught in a history class. Its no longer a government of and for the people. Its now a government of and for the corprations. Its not capatlism its corpratism.

Nothing next to a full scale revolution is needed . The people need to come together and stick together. Its war. The corporate owned media will misinform and try to destroy us , Throw the TV out. People need to come together like we did in the late sixties.!

[-] 1 points by bethernc (1) 3 years ago

OH THANK YOU SO MUCH. Many of us have been watching Wisconsin since earlier this year. How ironic that this happened to Walker in the very city (Chicago, my home town) where senators absconded to avert the anti- union bill passage. Would have loved to have been there for this one, no kidding. THANK YOU

[-] 1 points by notastupidsheep (3) 3 years ago

since the majority of Occupiers are Democrats (AND the democratic party stands for "no national banking"..since the inception of Thomas Jefferson) Who was in office in 1994? Bill Clinton..who was in office when GLBA was instated...Bill Clinton. Who issued the bailouts AND asked Bush to start the ball rolling so he would have $350 billion ready available 1Q for his presidency..Obama AND who did Obama consult 1Q when he took office..Clinton AND who asked for additional $400 billion for bailouts only 3 weeks in office....Obama. I must say, Dems, your party elects represent the so-call "Republican mentalty" more than actually Republicans do. They literally go against the fabric of what the democratic party represents. Maybe it's b/c they're the stockholders. AND "occupiers" who is the one person that a CEO of fortune 500 company answers too...the STOCKHOLDERS. You're marching on the wrong damned city ppl. Your tents on popped on the wrong street. If you truly want to accomplish what you've started you need to move it out of NYC to the capital. These bills have NOTHING to do with CEO's...they were aloud by our government. Bill could have veto'd GLBA but he didn't. remember that. Obama could have said "NO" to the our tax dollars. You need to ask yourselves: Does the Democratic Party actually stand for the "little people" anymore...or are THEY the greedy ones that are trying to make you look at their right hand so you won't see what their left is doing. wake-up.

[-] 1 points by notastupidsheep (3) 3 years ago

FINALLY! someone talking sense. I just want to add, since the majority of Occupiers are Democrats (AND the democratic party stands for "no national banking"..since the inception of Thomas Jefferson) Who was in office in 1994? Bill Clinton..who was in office when GLBA was instated...Bill Clinton. Who issued the bailouts AND asked Bush to start the ball rolling so he would have $350 billion ready available 1Q for his presidency..Obama AND who did Obama consult 1Q when he took office..Clinton AND who asked for additional $400 billion for bailouts only 3 weeks in office....Obama. I must say, Dems, your party elects represent the so-call "Republican mentalty" more than actually Republicans do. They literally go against the fabric of what the democratic party represents. Maybe it's b/c they're the stockholders. AND "occupiers" who is the one person that a CEO of fortune 500 company answers too...the STOCKHOLDERS. You're marching on the wrong damned city ppl. Your tents on popped on the wrong street. If you truly want to accomplish what you've started you need to move it out of NYC to the capital. These bills have NOTHING to do with CEO's...they were aloud by our government. Bill could have veto'd GLBA but he didn't. remember that. Obama could have said "NO" to the our tax dollars. You need to ask yourselves: Does the Democratic Party actually stand for the "little people" anymore...or are THEY the greedy ones that are trying to make you look at their right hand so you won't see what their left is doing. wake-up.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

The guy they chose to read the statement was perfect for it.

[-] 1 points by cpaylorc (2) 3 years ago

Great video I just came across, support all over America, not just major cities!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CfXy3mkTeI

[-] 1 points by safogel (1) 3 years ago

I watched with tears in my eyes. This was powerful. I am proud of you. I am an expat in Mexico, and activist, and I applaud you. I also write about the Occupy movement for the local English-language paper. Keep up the good work.

[-] 1 points by curandera4 (4) 3 years ago

That was Beautiful. It sent a warm wave of hope through my body. Thank you & keep up the good work.

[-] 1 points by curandera4 (4) 3 years ago

That was Beautiful. It sent a warm wave of hope through my body. Thank you & keep up the good work.

[-] 1 points by curandera4 (4) 3 years ago

That was Beautiful. It sent a warm wave of hope through my body. Thank you.

[-] 1 points by curandera4 (4) 3 years ago

That was Beautiful. It sent a warm wave of hope through my body. Thank you.

[-] 1 points by creamstp (40) 3 years ago

Now this is OWS...we are the 99%....well done Occupy Chicago

[-] 1 points by mehler (1) 3 years ago

Truly inspiring! Strong Work!

[-] 1 points by freedomofspeech (5) 3 years ago

That was so awesome. Keep it up and we cant stop now. They are trying not to hear us but they do. Stand,Unite and Fight!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by francorivera3 (10) from Bloomfield, NJ 3 years ago

I love this!!! Great job occupy Chicago!!!

[-] 1 points by DennisPortland (2) 3 years ago

How can anyone be proud of this disruption. I am sure that all went away proud, with a sense of accomplishment, but really whats the point. I am not a fan of Scott Walker, but the reality that union pensions are ultimately bankrupt many, many municipalities doesn't seem to be given any thought at all...why???

[-] 1 points by joebarone93 (1) from New York, NY 3 years ago

This was wonderful; let's keep these actions going! Let's get these criminals out of office.

[-] 1 points by craigd89 (32) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Isn't now the time to think about organizing and building a party that is run by and represents working people?

[-] 1 points by socialmedic (178) 3 years ago

By the people for the people, that organization is known a the USA. That one protects EVERYONE, even those who can't work. There is an organization known as by the worker for the worker, its called the Union. Now by the 1% for the 1% how did that one get so wildly popular? By calling people lazy perhaps? By selling the country the idea that GOVERNMENT was the problem. By telling people we needed to de-regulate and stop taxing the rich, perhaps? Now people are saying here wait a minute, we work we are on your side aren't we? Ha haaaaa! Walker says. No, you have a living wage. YOU make too much money! The fact is that the market is a pathetic vehicle around which to arrange all of human life.

[-] 1 points by brando (2) 3 years ago

That was wonderful! We have taught them well, I see the older adults are joining in, NICE.The children need our support. The is the beginning of the new paradigm.

[-] 1 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

Please OWS, go to the comment pages of WP, NYT, and Politico. Our views are underrepresented there:

http://thehill.com/

http://www.politico.com/

http://www.rawstory.com/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/

http://www.nytimes.com/

[-] 1 points by freecorvus (22) 3 years ago

We will vote to whom is with us and between us, Occupy the White House! Occupy Capitol Hill!

[-] 1 points by LaughinWillow (215) 3 years ago

Love you all - thank you thank you!!!

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 3 years ago

Note again the olive pit eyes: http://on.fb.me/slw9Dv

[-] 1 points by OldCrow (22) 3 years ago

Hmm. I could have gotten this on Democratic shill Rachel Maddow's show. Why aren't they doing this to Democrats too? They are just as bad but with sometimes with "lefty/progressive" rhetoric to suck in the gullible. The Democrats are probably more effective at getting right wing pro 1% legislation passed and signed because when the Republicans try it the Democrats stop them just to appeal to their base so they can get elected. Then when the democrats are in power they pass it. Bill Clinton pushed for and signed into law NAFTA and financial deregulation including the repeal of Glass/Steagal. This was after the Republicans had tried to get it passed 2 or 3 times.

[-] 1 points by Occupytheimf (134) 3 years ago

Is the beertent still open?

[-] 1 points by Occupytheimf (134) 3 years ago

Is the beertent still open?

[-] 1 points by 44mag (28) from Coventry, RI 3 years ago

way to go, make them feel small! good job well done.

[-] 1 points by 44mag (28) from Coventry, RI 3 years ago

Scott walker is the epitome of whats wrong with American politicians these days he truly is a monster and needs to be ousted immediately.

[-] 1 points by jmel9ether (4) 3 years ago

hey you guys should join Fail2adapt.com We are apart of this movement too..Fail2Adapt To Wall st !

[-] 1 points by warriorspark (1) 3 years ago

Right On Occupy Chicago!!!!

[-] 1 points by need4trth (2) from Los Altos, CA 3 years ago

That was AWESOME. It is exactly what a large majority of teachers, students, and public sector workers tried top express in the Wisconsin recall of Republican legislators. It was unfortunate that instead of getting the three that they needed they only got two. Yet that is a massive victory because both right wing Koch Whores were from predominately RepubliCON districts..Unfortunately as you probably know, Gov. Walker had an ace in the The Clerk of Waukesha County – Kathy Nickolaus. The same person who mysteriously found 7500 votes on her computer that put right winger Judge David Prosser on Wisconsin Supreme Court to help enact Gov. Walkers Union Busting bill. On the night of that election this same Koch Whore Kathy Nickolaus was the last to report votes in her district, Waukasha County, which put the right winger being recalled Alberta Darling over the top. As everyone already knows Republicans, the GOP, right-wingers do not play fair.

Anyway, this video and the activism taking place in gave a clear message to these right wing 1% donors sitting there to pay for and listen to the LIES pouring from Gov. Scott Walkers mouth. I have to say thanks. OWS has made me very hoipeful. Here in California we aren't facing the onslaught of right wing activism in 201 we voted Democratic straight across the board. We have the Governors seat with Jerry Brown and we control the Senate and the legislature. Yet these right wingers have caused a lot of pain in our State as well a few yeqars back they fooled a majority of Californias to vote in a state ammendment which makes it necessary for a 2/3 majority to pass any bill that would raise taxes on the 1% it's almost the exact blueprint of the RepubliCON strategy in the house of Representatives. They think they can get America to create this right-wing lunatic control even when they are voted out of office. OWS speaks to me and let's me know that will never happen. We are the 99%

Thank you for your activism

in Solidarity need4trth

http://www.need4trth.blogspot.com

Olufemi Vin san francisco CA

[-] 1 points by outsidenyc (11) 3 years ago

You filthy slobs should get a job. I worked my whole life, I didn't ask any rich people to give me money that THEY earned, I earned my own.

I washed dishes, swept floors, served burgers and any other job I could get. When I didn't have a job, I didn't sleep in some park protesting and whining that some other people had more money than me and I want some of it. I WENT LOOKING FOR A JOB!!

I got married, had kid, got a better job bought a house, had grandkids and saved some money so I could retire. NEVER ONCE did I expect someone else to give me money for nothing.

You filthy, lazy hippies should get your ass whipped. Go out and work and earn your OWN money, you effing lowlifes. If any of you were my kid, I'd give you an ass whuppin you'd never forget.

By the way, the only people who are rooting for you are other filthy lazy slobs like yourselves. They rest of us would kick the crap out of you if we had the chance.

Lazy ungrateful slobs.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

You are two moinths late with that tired, fake rant. Stop listening to FOX radio and think for yourself. If you open your eyes you will see that we are not who, or what, you think we are.

For example, I have worked since I was 16 years old (1977). I served my country (USAF 1978-1982). I pay my taxes. I have voted in every election since I turned 18.

I watched my wife die at age 39 from breast cancer in 2002 while our health insurance stonewalled on every step of her treatment because it was "too costly".

After she died I raised my kids myself and didn't ask the government for a nickel.

I lost my home to foreclosure then, because I had to chose between her treatments and the mortgage payments. I watched the bank block the sale of my house before foreclosure, then make 45 thousand dollars more than I owed when they auctioned it off. 15 years of on-time payments down the drain and the bank kept the equity.

I watched my friends lose their jobs because their companies sent them overseas, where they could exploit low income workers. I pulled up my bootstraps and worked even harder.

I worked my way out of a 2 bedroom apartment and fixed my credit. Then in 2004 I had a new home built for 187,000 dollars. It was the lowest priced new home in a 50 mile radius from my work. I have never missed a payment.

In the meantime, my health insurance premiums went up, my homeowners insurance premium went up, and my car insurance premiums went up, while the amount of coverage on all three went down.

Now, the greedy banks have created, then burst the housing bubble, leaving my home worth less than 90,000 dollars. Now, I have a negative equity in my home of 82,000 dollars. I can pay for the next fifteen years and still be upside down on it.

My kids , now 18 and 23 years of age maintained good grades throughout our struggle. Neither has been able to find work that will ever enable them to move away from my home, because they barely make enough money to make their car insurance payments and gas to get to and from work.

My daughter's employer, a large pharmacy chain, doesn't hire anyone full-time, because they do not want to give any benefits like sick leave or health insurance. My son has been unable to find a real job for more than a year. He gets by, doing odd jobs for anyone that will hire him, while maintaining his college grades.

I only tell you this because you, and others who do not want to take a real look at the face of the Occupy movement, need to see that we are not all a bunch of whining, crybaby, drum-beating, jobless hippie communists.

Most of us are just like me. We are hard working Americans who are fed up with getting screwed by the greedy.

We have earned the right to stand in a park with a sign. Whether you believe it will change anything or not is of no consequence. Change is coming. We will see to it.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 3 years ago

ALERT: @ABC News CONFIRMS 1,000,000 move their money.. Credit Unions see $4.5 Billion in new deposits.. http://bit.ly/v9Uvpb #OWS #OO

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 3 years ago

more peoples-mic truth-outs please!

[-] 1 points by jdjay (34) 3 years ago

Bravo. I wish I had the balls to do something like that. Inspiring.

[-] 1 points by cristinasupes (145) 3 years ago

That was unbelievably great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by shamrock (0) 3 years ago

Mic check!!!!!!!! I call on all occupy movements to unite for a week in solidarity with this current proposal. 1) Shut down corporate business wherever possible Banks, Ports, Corporate chains ( Starbuck's, Walmart's, McDonald's etc.) I mean shut down!!! No profit for them that day! 2) March on those who seem to ignore or slander our occupy or brother and sister movement's including but not limited to reporter's and media station's! 3) Recruiting should consist of but not limited to speaking with students and professer's that are sympathetic to our movement and join us in anyway they see can help in our victory against corperations. Contact union leaders to join us in our solidarity week and organize strikes across the country. Send a S.OS (via internet) to all those who are second guessing weather they should support our movement's or not. It's time they choose who's side their on. RECRUIT RECRUIT RECRUIT!! We need number's people!!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by Organizer721 (0) 3 years ago

A great action! Utterly beautiful! This really is what democracy looks and sounds like.

[-] 1 points by adamanto75 (9) 3 years ago

When in a situation like this stop doing that mic check repeat everything I say bullshit, if you want them to hear our message we must articulate ourselves in a clear manner. If the video had to be subtitled do you think the governor or anyone in the room for that matter heard what they were saying. I'm all for the movement but you have to think of things like this I mean it's awesome that we got into a breakfast like that, but don't be repeating everything that one guy is saying just let that one man speak I'm sure they would have listened and responded a lot better. All this did was piss them off...... I hope after you guys did this you let them respond to what you had said and not just walked out of there!

[-] 1 points by jjpatrick (195) 3 years ago

WHY REPUBLICANS RULE! WHY DEMOCRATS ARE BETTER! ---some things to know:

  1. Independent Human Rights investigation of Obama and NATO crimes against humanity in Libya. Obama gave orders to bomb without congressional approval: http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/10/11/sarkozy-cameron-obama-al-thani-and-the-suffering-of-the-children-of-sirte/

2 Fact check: Romney vs Obama: who lies more? -- quite similar. http://www.factcheck.org/barack-obama/ http://www.factcheck.org/tag/mitt-romney/

  1. Top 20 recipients of Wall Street Funds: http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U Historically, which party receives more from Wall Street? http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=A&sortorder=U

  2. Noam Chomsky on the State-Corporate Complex: http://chomsky.info/talks/20110407.htm

  3. Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQhEBCWMe44

  4. Noam Chomsky on why Obama is worse than Bush: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mA4HYTO790 and Obama's imperilstic policies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiwAFIgGCkQ

7.republicans were in power at one point and Democrats were in full power just recently---the difference? Obama's budget for the military was higher than that of Bush's:

Is it better to give allegiance to Caesar whether it be Romney/Obama OR your children. Two parties for two audiences, but same policies that serve their funders--each telling their own audience to demonize the other party, and thus get off free from bearing any responsibility or accountability.

NEITHER REPUBLICANS NOR DEMOCRATS have been representative of the people. CHOOSING BETWEEN THE LESS OF TWO EVILS IS A FALSE DICHOTOMY.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

Agreed. Both parties are guilty of the same greed. We will vote for who will push forwared our agenda and who is the most closely alligned with our goals and principles, regardless of party affiliation..

[-] 1 points by greedisgood (39) from Washington, DC 3 years ago

Just curious, Unions contribute heavily towards the democratic party. So they are acting just like a corporation. How is that different than say the koch brothers?

Your for money out of politics as long as its money that goes towards the causes you dont agree with.

Interesting....... sad lack of intellectual honesty.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

Where does it say we are for that? I believe all money should be kept out of politics. Stop making assumptions about us. Both parties are corrupted by money. Obama does not get a free ride in this either. Take a closer look at us. We are not who you think we are. We are the face of a new democratic process. It takes some getting used to. I suggest you try. You might like what you see.

[-] 1 points by greedisgood (39) from Washington, DC 3 years ago

take a look at the video.

They talk about stripping union rts and cutting benefits in Wisconsin.

Do you really think this movement isn't pro union?

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

I have no Problem with unions. They are responsible for many of the rights we have as American workers. I said we want ALL money out of politics.

[-] 1 points by nsd72 (31) 3 years ago

Did anyone see THAT letter from a Wall Street worker? Here's my response: http://www.tocamu.com/?page_id=5665

[-] 1 points by CancelCurrency (128) 3 years ago

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. July 4, 1776.

[-] 1 points by CancelCurrency (128) 3 years ago

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. July 4, 1776.

[-] 1 points by efschumacher (74) from Gaithersburg, MD 3 years ago

That was very good. But you missed a trick. It would have been good to get pictures, names and business cards from all the Walker financial contributors present. Then you could post them on a handy website and it would help the rest of us to make more informed consumer decisions.

You going to get a Mic check on Kasich before Tuesday's referendum on his doings?

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 3 years ago

I'm always amazed at how people don't notice that Scott is using two olive pitts in place of his eyes..He's obviously a mongoloid child of Satan.. Definitely a "Rosemary's Baby" candidate..

http://on.fb.me/u9LgJ0

[-] 1 points by stacythorpe (4) from Hutchinson, KS 3 years ago

Capitalism may be broken but can be fixed. The real problem is the federal reserve that keeps printing money and causing inflation on what little money we do have. Also it is the regulations put into place to keep the poor ,poor and the rich rich which was implemented by the 1% by lobbying the government to get what they want like the car manufacturers getting a bill passed to keep anyone from designing a new motor and selling or designing an alternative fuel car and selling it without express permission and paying tons of fees. Just like all the ordinances put in place to keep people from protesting these same bills and to squash freedom of speech. The laws put into place for gun control. this was a direct violation of our civil rights and the right to bare arms, should we not be able to protect ourselves from the government when the government does us wrong. The national guard was meant to to be a state army to protect against federal government and to protect the state and its people in it, not for use as federal troops to fight wars across seas. Like the fema law that was passed that allows fema a federal government organization to declare marshal law during natural disasters and when up-rises like this one is happening so if this gets out of control be prepared to be locked down in fema camps.Things that most people don't seem to think are wrong don't understand that each time a bill or law is passed a freedom is taken. One example is the seat-belt law which doesn't seem all that bad but is against the constitution and freedom of choice of life and liberty, not wearing a seat-belt doesn't hurt anyone except maybe the person not wearing it but that is his choice to not wear it, not the right of the government to say he cant. Yes sometimes not wearing a seat belt cause the person driving a car to die but definitely no more than alcohol or cigarettes which is legal only because lobbyist have paid so much out to keep it that way looks like a double standard there and also looks as the government only passes laws that benefit them and not the people, so whats next the government passing a law saying some one cant be dumb or unlearned or disabled how far will they go in the future if there is not change now. There should never be a law passed that hampers freedom of the people unless it hurts another mentally or physically. Ty for reading i support the 99% read the laws be informed understand what the government has really done because of the 1% There are many more examples.

Stacy Thorpe Occupying the way i can.

[-] 1 points by TTTTT (66) 3 years ago

Right on, stuff the truth down their throats, it's the only way we will be heard.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

Watch Bill Moyers interview the authors of 13 BANKERS, which was published in January of this year. Our current economy is about betting against the so called "American Dream"...because its more profitable. Our economy is hijacked by an oligarchy that usurps political power by law and by fact. http://video.pbs.org/video/1471123509

[-] 1 points by GeorgeWashington (81) 3 years ago

Thank you so much for this....tears are flowing freely down my face in admiration and pride in you for standing up like we should have so many years ago. Our country is a huge embarrassment to the human race and needs to be called out. This I can see is only the beginning. Again thank you so much from the bottom of my heart. It is sad that we should have to go to these measures simply to ask people to be fair and equitable....but that we must.

[-] 1 points by Garybryant2 (42) 3 years ago

The thing about Governor Walker and other Tea Party politicians is that they're belligerent, arrogant and do things with malicious impunity. They like to enact laws without consent of the people, which is a violation of Democracy itself. And they derive enormous pleasure from sticking it to lower classes.

Then, when a loud protest like this happens and disrupts his political ambitions, he wonders "What the hell is their problem? Why are they wrecking my day? This is totally uncalled for".

You ain't seen nothin' yet, Scotty!

Gary Bryant

[-] 1 points by Concerned (455) 3 years ago

Wow. Just like the Tea Party at hose town hall meetings they disrupted........

[-] 1 points by marlonmeiracom (9) from Brasilia, DF 3 years ago

I'm down here in Brazil and I'd be a proud United Stater if I were there at this meeting. I'd have repeated those words with all my strength. Keep it up.

[-] 1 points by americanglue (7) 3 years ago

Fantastic Job guys. You all are wonderful! I wish I could be there. Right now I'm watching my 1 year old grandson so that my daughter and son-in-law can Occupy Phoenix. Keep it up. The whole world really is watching.

[-] 1 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

Citi bank gets slap on the wrist for massive fraud

Not so fast, Mary Judge to SEC: Explain your $285M Citi deal By KAJA WHITEHOUSE Last Updated: 4:57 AM, October 28, 2011

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/not_so_fast_mary_3swYT8jetx2WNtcFf4HdZP#ixzz1cqqOP4P9

[-] 1 points by OooGeeE (21) from New Rochelle, NY 3 years ago

That was f*ckin awesome!!! The movement is spreading like a virus.

[-] 1 points by yoss33 (269) 3 years ago

Keep it up people, beautiful. Let them hear you. Beautiful. Get your f... hands off the camera buddy. Nice try.

I dedicate this song as an Occupy theme song. 'Battle Flag' by Lo Fidelity. I'm sure some of you have heard it. 1Love Chicago!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmLcWQTb-3k

"Got a revolution behind my eyes, we got together and organinze..."

[-] 1 points by hairlessOrphan (522) 3 years ago

This is magnificent. Absolutely the proper method to raise awareness and challenge the power structure - directly, personally, loudly, in a meaningful setting, and without violence or criminality.

We need more of this and less burning and vandalism.

[-] 1 points by mfmfmf (0) 3 years ago

Absolutely beautiful! Warms muh heart.

[-] 1 points by bettersystem (170) 3 years ago

Force Change, Boycott Capitalism

We know what the problem is, let us fix it and move forward together.

When you look at a republican or democrat, congress or FDA official, Judges and Justice Department, you see criminals.

Our corruption dates back many years to when those, who in trying to preserve slavery, had to find new ways to preserve it and so created a scientific and advanced form of slavery.

Only two components were required -- the illusion of freedom & choice and the taking away of the freedom to live off the land.

How else would you get a person to submit themselves to mind numbing or degrading work unless you oppress them into it.

Our current system is rooted in corruption and every attempt in preserving it involves manipulating human thought and turning people against one another.

In America the population has been transformed into two major voting groups but they only have one choice.

They had been distracted up until now with television and American culture which prospered through the oppression of other nations.

Americans allowed themselves to be fooled into using their military and economic dominance to seize resources of other nations and create expanding markets for American profiteers.

Now that technology, competition and conscience have evolved Americans are realizing that our current system of government is damaging and unsustainable.

Our government officials have allowed private profits and personal benefits to influence decisions that affect the health and well-being of people all over the planet, not just in America... how much longer will we allow them to rule over us??

Occupy Washington and demand that government officials resign their posts.

We will setup new online elections with a verification system that will allow us to see our votes after we cast them, put our new officials in office and work toward rebuilding our country and our world.

Pass this message along to any and everyone, we already occupy the world, unite.

Occupy Washington, Boycott Capitalism, Force Change -- http://wesower.org

[-] 1 points by MCzarnik (1) from Milwaukee, WI 3 years ago

Anti Walker Union Busting... Check this song by Milwaukee emcee Melissa Czarnik http://soundcloud.com/melissaczarnik/jump-start-melissa-czarnik Free Download "Jump Start" A song for Wisconsin and Worker's Rights.

[-] 1 points by Johnchris (3) 3 years ago

Loved it, Gov. Walker is a BIG FAT PIG!

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 3 years ago

Grand Slam!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This movement is ONNNNNNNN...................

WE ARE THE 99%

[-] 1 points by Johnchris (3) 3 years ago

Loved it, Gov. Walker is a BIG FAT PIG!

[-] 1 points by Johnchris (3) 3 years ago

Loved it, Gov. Walker is a BIG FAT PIG!

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

occupywallst.org can you make it so we can reply more times to a comment tree? It gets a bit frustrating.

[-] 1 points by Reality99 (1) from Oxford, OH 3 years ago

My grandfather was at the Ford Rouge Overpass (5/26/1937) standing up for the same equality we now seek from our corrupt capitalistic system. This fight has been going on for generations. You can’t expect it to be resolved in a matter of months or even years. You must think in terms of generations. So the logical path to a peaceful non- violent revolution is to work through our current system and elect the people that are most likely to have the same or at least similar views as you do. It took more than 30 years to create this economic climate starting with the Ronald Reagan policies of deregulation. You do know he started this mess don’t you? That’s what we get for electing a Hollywood actor to run this country. Just a few years prior to Reagan’s corporate leadership. Dwight David Eisenhower also a republican said “Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.” That was said in 1954, so it took about 50 years to get from that republican position to where we are now. Thank you Mr. Regan! (Sarcasm) Change takes time that can only be measured in terms of generations. Go and vote for whomever you want and we will see if commonsense prevails or will we continue to spiral down into the abyss of inequality. We need to think what’s best for the future generations, not what’s best for ourselves. Greed takes many forms, and there all not monetary. http://apps.detnews.com/apps/history/index.php?id=172

[-] 1 points by Reality99 (1) from Oxford, OH 3 years ago

My grandfather was at the Ford Rouge Overpass (5/26/1937) standing up for the same equality we now seek from our corrupt capitalistic system. This fight has been going on for generations. You can’t expect it to be resolved in a matter of months or even years. You must think in terms of generations. So the logical path to a peaceful non- violent revolution is to work through our current system and elect the people that are most likely to have the same or at least similar views as you do. It took more than 30 years to create this economic climate starting with the Ronald Reagan policies of deregulation. You do know he started this mess don’t you? That’s what we get for electing a Hollywood actor to run this country. Just a few years prior to Reagan’s corporate leadership. Dwight David Eisenhower also a republican said “Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.” That was said in 1954, so it took about 50 years to get from that republican position to where we are now. Thank you Mr. Regan! (Sarcasm) Change takes time that can only be measured in terms of generations. Go and vote for whomever you want and we will see if commonsense prevails or will we continue to spiral down into the abyss of inequality. We need to think what’s best for the future generations, not what’s best for ourselves. Greed takes many forms, and there all not monetary. http://apps.detnews.com/apps/history/index.php?id=172

[-] 1 points by OWS99 (12) 3 years ago

Kudos!!! Really KUDOS!!!

[-] 1 points by nich (57) 3 years ago

Wow. Every politician that tries to speak, as long as they belong to the 1% (and most do or want to) should get this treatment. Rahm Emmanuel really thinks he needs the 1% more than the 99%. Shut him down.

[-] 1 points by SayNO2GovInc (99) 3 years ago

BRAVO!!! "For the People in the cheaper seats, clap your hands, ... and the rest of you, if you just rattle your jewelry!" ~ John Lennon 'Rattle Your Jewelry"-> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYZSEWM6ZlU We the 99%, Rattle their jewelry!
Well Done! KEEP DOING THIS!

[-] 1 points by Honu (1) 3 years ago

General comment: We need to stick to the issues. Old language/categorization like right wing, left wing, socialist, communist, etc. will only mire us down. Forget who said it, put it forward as an idea. Own it or not. Argue passionately. The quality of our lives, ultimately our survival depends on our doing this. Avoid looking at life in the rear view mirror at all costs.

[-] 1 points by Honu (1) 3 years ago

Unions will also need to be reformed. This is simply one more place that we need to asses the history, reaffirm and put into place the mechanisms to make them work for the 99% and move forward with a very watchful eye. In the mean time we need to keep them in place, support and reinforce the power that they have. Collective bargaining is a basic right.

[-] 1 points by GWGhomeboy (17) 3 years ago

WOW!!

[-] 1 points by fbrothers (3) 3 years ago

Great work. Funny how none of this stuff never gets to the mega-corp news media. They still do not get it. They are unable to hide this movement.

[-] 1 points by Search4wizdom (2) from Staten Island, NY 3 years ago

I keep trying to post these video links to my Facebook page but the site wont show the mini video pic. Facebook is such a fraud.

Thank you guys, Keep up the good work. I see the sun rise coming our way.

[-] 1 points by onepeople (49) 3 years ago

This is not the 99%, if you're now endorsing this then I think you've lost touch.

[-] 1 points by davebrestensky (59) 3 years ago

Awesome I just wish I could have helped!! Recall Walker!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by Hardworkingteacher (10) from Bronx, NY 3 years ago

Loved this video. Rham next?

[-] 1 points by Thisisthetime (200) from Kahlotus, WA 3 years ago

Keep Up the Good Work. Fair-ness.

[-] 1 points by Inverness (5) 3 years ago

Bravo, Chicago!!!! We love you! Love, a 99%-er from Queens, NY.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

80,000 jobs added to the economy. They don't reveal what these jobs are, which may further deflate the enthusiasm. In 2006-7, hundreds of thousands of people applied to Wal-Mart for their available 300 jobs. Just a few months back, McDonalds received 1 million applications, and so hired 60,000 people instead of the 50,000 they intended to hire. If you look at the history of salaries of Congress, they have always been well above, very well above, the national average. While their salaries pale in comparison too those of CEO's, it offers some insight as to why politicians feel so intrinsically superior to the people they are elected to represent. Though it doesn't make it acceptable. In American Casino, Phil Gramm, the Congressman responsible for allowing the deregulation of the housing and banking markets, declares that "we've become a nation of whiners." A cute remark when you are not subject to losing your income and being thrown from your home.

[-] 1 points by jlivermore (8) 3 years ago

if they 1% had any sense of humor they would use their wealth and power to have people show up and disrupt your whack-ass "general assemblies"

[-] 1 points by Occupytheimf (134) 3 years ago

The trolls are not unemployed folks. They are paid with your taxes to disrupt our solidarity. Pay them zero attention. They betray the 99% & their own families & neighbors. Our success will be the downfall of baglicking serfs in ca & rickperry land. Get a job agent trolls & quit wasting our taxes. Apply austerity measures to the paychecks of agencies & their serf trolls. Boycott businesses that support pushing us out of our occupation sites. Run for office. The corruption is thorough & bipartisan so clean house. Make history not accept the old status quo. Lay off the mayors & cops gassing nonviolent protests. More than 4 billion $ withdrawn from wall st banks last month., over to local credit unions. Keep occupying. 1 00% will see the light soon. Peace.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

My incone is not dependent on your taxes.

[-] 1 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Scott Walker,.........Great man.

[-] 1 points by stephenadler (118) 3 years ago

wow. True Inspiration!

[-] 1 points by cat7757 (18) 3 years ago

OWS, Great job, 650,000 people opened accounts at Credit Unions in the past month. Last year only 600,000 people joined credit unions. Stick it too the big banks whose only concern is how much money they can stick in their fat wallets. Keep up the great work OWS!!

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 3 years ago

Great street theatre!!!!!!!!
Reminded me of the time I went to a Nixon speech at a Billy Grahm crusade and handed out hundreds of "wanted poster" flyers - with a large image of a hippie looking face - heading
"WANTED FOR VARIOUS CRIMES"
such as turning water into wine and feeding the poor and advocating peace.
I was arrested!

I know that we dont want to be party labeled but there are a few people - such as Walker - that we must actively work against. And there are some people we must activelu work for - such as Elizabeth Warren. How about a thankyou to R Alan Simpson for his anti-Grover rants?

[-] 1 points by isupportu (0) from Elizabethton, TN 3 years ago

GREAT job! Keep giving those bastages h3ll !!!

[-] 1 points by Occupytheimf (134) 3 years ago

Global solidarity people. Dc & wall st are merely franchises of the entirely & morally bankrupt global slavery. Austerity measures must b imposed on the imf. 1%ers must suffer before 99%ers endure decades of despair. Not a moment too soon to give a collective finger to the imf.

[-] 1 points by modernmonalisa (8) from Seattle, WA 3 years ago

would it be possible for people to at least keep their comments relevant to the OWS movement so that I don't have to scroll through stuff about hockey to see what people are thinking? what the heck?

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 3 years ago

Fantastic!!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 3 years ago

Fantastic job, Occupy Chicago!

[-] 1 points by Corium (246) 3 years ago

I don't agree with everything the 99% say.... But I gotta admit THAT IS BEAUTIFUL!

[-] 1 points by Fredone (234) 3 years ago

you. need . a better . speech. This one just is nowhere near as good as it could have been. Not enough background knowledge behind it mostly.

[-] 1 points by monoxide (0) from North Little Rock, AR 3 years ago

is it just me or does MikeyD make anyone else think of herman cain?

[-] 1 points by MadCat (160) 3 years ago

That was AWESOME! Excellent work. Walker is a scum bag.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 3 years ago

social services are slashed so that tax money can be sent as welfare to pakistan and other countries getting foriegn aid

[-] 1 points by airplaneradio (50) 3 years ago

To all those people complaining about why Rahm Emmanuel wasn't chosen. That's because he's the godfather. The OWS wouldn't dare. I'm sure there are orders not to. And for anyone ready to just post and contradict me, I ask after doing so to just keep watching the actions from here on.

[-] 1 points by Ghost126 (1) from Pittsburgh, PA 3 years ago

We are the 99%!

[-] 1 points by OfeliasSon (10) 3 years ago

Nicely done.

[-] 1 points by HitGirl (2263) 3 years ago

I love you people.

[-] 1 points by Shanty23 (11) 3 years ago

We need more of this everywhere. Truth is impotent when spoken in designated protest areas designed by the 1% to keep the perpetrators of injustice from hearing it. Our resolve should always be pacifist but never passive and complacent. We need to disrupt the lives of the 1% everywhere they go through free speech, strikes, boycotts, and most importantly perpetual occupations.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 3 years ago

i hear they get really mad if the sidewalks arent shoveled

[-] 1 points by zoom6000 (430) from St Petersburg, FL 3 years ago

Can some one tell how gov. walker won the election??? when there is so many people against him

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

This is fucking genius!!!!!! I LOVE IT!!!!! GO, 99%, AND FUCK YOU, Scott Walker and his pimps!!!!!

[-] 1 points by cpollero (1) 3 years ago

awesome!! well done, I admire your courage!

[-] 1 points by RiskAverseAlertBlog (19) from Rochester, NY 3 years ago

So nice to see fascists meeting resistance! Looking forward to the blindsiding of Chicago's fascist native son, Obama.

(Just to be clear. The President's "Infrastructure Bank" is a page out of Mussolini's Italy, which is a fact not well-understood, yet easily proven. It's the "public-private partnership" aspect, something Mayor Bloomberg, as well, has been a big advocate of ... along with Ed Rundell and California's former governator, among others.)

[-] 1 points by beardy (282) 3 years ago

public sector union employees lost some of their collective bargaining rights

i don't understand why public sector employees should be allowed to unionize. it is a complete conflict of interest.

[-] 1 points by socialmedic (178) 3 years ago

Why? Are not public sector employees members of the public?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

How so? Workers have a right to organize regardless of who stamps their paychecks. If teachers in New York hadn't organized, class size would be even larger, and teachers would still be payed about $5000.00 per year (adjusted for inflation, BTW.) Do you really think your sanitation workers, police force, fire department, your children's teachers, etc. should be relegated to live in poverty? What kind of civil society would be left?

As it stands now, public sector employees earn FAR LESS than their private sector counterparts at the same level of education doing the same work. Why would you want to take even that away from them, and harm the public services you receive in the process?

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

They are fucking brainwashed by their right wing puppet string pullers. They don't have a clue.

[-] 1 points by beardy (282) 3 years ago

not brainwashed, just able to think rationally

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

There is nothing rational about ignoring fact and history, or distorting them to accommodate a rigid ideological stance.

There is nothing rational about harboring contempt toward those you educated you, made sure your housing was sound enough to live in, make sure your water is clean enough to drink, police your streets to keep you safe, won you every right you have at your current job, etc.

And there is certainly nothing rational about supporting policies and people trying to take those things away from you.

[-] 0 points by beardy (282) 3 years ago

First and foremost, I applaud your strawman argument and your attempt to create a politically motivated baawww thread.

public sector employees have a captive audience, the taxpayer. Obviously it is a conflict of interest for those who work in the public sector to have unions, which will work to elect those to political office that will kowtow to their demands.

If public sector employees are butthurt about making less than their private sector counterparts, then they should go work in the private sector. And lets be brutally honest, lets not assume that just because someone who works in the public sector makes less than their private sector counter part, has any chance of getting that private sector job at all.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

Public sector unions have no more influence on elections than do private sector ones, and both have FAR LESS influence than the 1%. If there is a straw man argument here, it is yours. In elections, as in all legislation after elections are over, it is money that talks most loudly. Unions of all stripes are at a significant disadvantage in terms of deep pockets to corporations, banks, industry in general.

Your implication that public sector workers are too stupid to get comparable work in the private sector is not only insulting and simplistic, but is pure conjecture based on zero evidence. Do you really believe that school teachers, for example, are that dumb? Are you aware that the requirements for teaching in public school are far more stringent in most states that those for teaching private school, including especially the requirement for having advanced degrees? Many of the professional public sector employees are willing to take a hit to their day to day salaries because they feel a need to serve. I have met many such people. Some other do so because not because of idealism, but security - they are willing to forgo salaries sometimes 3 times higher for the sake of stability; they have families to support. And not least of all, especially in terms of the non-professional employee, there is a history public sector work available to racial minorities, most especially blacks and hispanics, that was not available in private sector, and that shameful legacy still effects the job force today. The results of racism, not any lack of intelligence or skill, determined the kind of people who filled the ranks of many public sector union jobs. (Did you not know that, or are you conveniently forgetting it?)

If you believe that public sector employees are so inferior to private sector ones, all public schools should be immediately shut down, the amy should be replaced by paid mercenaries, hire all the police out to the highest bidder, by all means don't drive over any bridges as they are likely to collapse. And for God's sake never take a flu shot!

The very internet we are using was invented by pubic sector employees: how dumb were they? The NIH has among has among the best research doctors in the world working there: they are public sector, too. The list goes on.

Finally, even if you were in least bit correct about either political influence or lack of comparative intelligence, public sector workers work for a living. They have a right to earn a living wage, as does every other person who works for a living. Disallowing them the ability to secure a living wage is undemocratic, discriminatory, and unethical. It guarantees they work at slave wages, which they most often did before deciding to unionize, (Is that who you want to entrust your children's education or soundness of the next bridge you drive over to, or the safety of your yearly flu shots?) On top of it, it's piggishly ungrateful.

The only thing you have convincingly demonstrated with your reply is your contempt of working people and your willingness to insult them. Apparently only those who work for greed rather than for the public good are worthy of respect in your eyes. Somehow, the private sector is smarter and more worthy. The last flies in the face of all evidence.

And yet, somehow these dumb people have secured for YOU every safety regulation, every dollar of overtime pay, all the pressure for your employer to provide health insurance or a 401K plan, etc, you currently enjoy and take advantage of at your job. Virtually all the rights you have at work, which you yourself did nothing to gain, were won for you by unions, public and private.

Rather than berating them or supporting their impoverishment of loss of democratic rights, you should be thanking them every day for the advantages and rights you have due to their sometimes heroic efforts.

People have a right to earn a living through working, even if it means working for the public: working for YOU.

[-] 1 points by beardy (282) 3 years ago

tl;dr plz. i am not reading that wall of text.

[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

Clearly you don't want to make an effort to go beyond what you already believe, counterfactual and irrational as it is.

Continuing to post here, without so much as the courtesy of reading a response to your numerous false assumptions would be utterly shameless. If you're too lazy to read, perhaps you should be equally lazy about posting.

As of now, you increasingly come off as someone who is trolling. I hope I'm wrong. But until you post something beyond blanket insults of public workers combined with declarations that you need not bother even reading a response to you, that is what you appear to be. Until you decide to participate here with civility, there is no option other than to ignore you completely.

If you decide to behave differently, I will be happy to "talk" with you. Otherwise, good-bye.

[-] 1 points by beardy (282) 3 years ago

no, wall of text posts tend to be emotive and teeming with ad hominems, ie: you stating that i said public sector employees are stupid. I did not imply that. Generally speaking, these kinds of arguments about how I should feel sorry for the public employee that they are passing up on a higher paying private sector job and choosing to do civil service are fallacious at best.

give me a logical, concise argument. I personally don't care what private sector unions do as long as the public doesn't bail them out (oh wait we did bail out GM to save UAW pensions).

Also, here you go: http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

As you can see, The American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees have donated $11 million more than that evil 1% company, Goldman Sachs, from 1989 to the present. The idea that unions do not influence politicians as much as the single rich person is false.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

I never said you should feel sorry for anybody. I said that they are being put in a position that no one in the private sector is being put in: they cannot negotiate for themselves and their own salaries. That is unique and unfair.

At least you responded this time. Too bad it had to take some prodding. What's more, you did indeed imply, strongly I might add, that public sector workers only worked for the public because they couldn't hack it in private sector jobs. And I quote:

"And lets be brutally honest, lets not assume that just because someone who works in the public sector makes less than their private sector counter part, has any chance of getting that private sector job at all."

Sorry, but that's saying they aren't qualified, aka: too stupid. Deny it all you want, but it is what you wrote.

I made no ad hominem attacks on you, made no inferences that you should be disbelieved because of an affiliation, character flaw, etc. Instead I am saying your position is so wrong, so evidently contemptuous, so completely based on distortion and animus, that it reveals a character flaw. Before you sling big phrases like "ad Hominem" around, perhaps you should learn what it means.

GM was bailed out to save pensions? Tell me another one. GM was bailed out because it was a huge industry that employed, directly or indirectly (as in third-party suppliers), hundreds of thousands of people, and letting them go down the drain would have crashed the economy even further. I understand that the response to all the suffering that would have caused falls under the Libertarian heading "shit happens" but it would have been unconscionable by any other, more human standard. And the bail-out has been largely, if not mostly repaid, so the taxpayer, far from losing, has a net gain form the process, particularly if one considers the savings in unemployment payments, defaults on loans, etc. Your view of economics is slanted by ideology, it seems, and has only passing resemblance to the truth.

$11 million dollars in advertisements and lobbying efforts by the total combination of municipal, state and federal unions is a drop in the ocean compared to what private business spends per year in any one of those categories. It more closely matches what is spent in a single day in Washington. In 2011 -- so far -- 2.44 BILLION dollars was spent by in Washington on lobbying efforts, with over 12,000 lobbyists roaming the less than 1% of that. It is not an issue of entire unions compared to one wealthy individual, but the public sector compared to the private one. And I suspect you know that, but are simply trying to distort the issue. You don't appear to be dumb, just intellectually dishonest.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Of course, there is no response to your post from beardy. I'm sure they have no clue as how to answer what you said. Instead, she/he makes comments like "not brainwashed, just able to think rationally".

[-] 1 points by AmericanCuChulainn (72) 3 years ago

Wow, these people are so beautiful! I love it! That must have been how it felt for the Minutemen to stand up to the tyranny of King George!

Long live the Occupy Movement!

[-] 1 points by beardy (282) 3 years ago

seriously? the tyranny of king george vs teachers having to contribute a minor portion of their salary to their own pensions?

seriously?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 3 years ago

First:

Yes, like King George's tyranny. It is about the same thing today; taxation without representation, when all that is represented is corporations. Much like the East India Trading Company was the primary voice in George's ear way back then today it is big business. It creates and disseminates the propaganda (successfully hoodwinking people like you), supports the politicians, and reaps the rewards. And ordinary working people are left to pay the price without a real say in making the laws.

King George is the perfect analogue. . .

Second:

Do you conveniently forget or simply don't know that the union OFFERED to pay more for their pensions and health benefits, and Walker refused? The issue is loss of collective bargaining, a right every other worker has.It turns teachers into workers without any rights whatsoever, barred from negotiating for themselves. Even the need for the concessions the union offered UP FRONT were entirely unnecessary; there was no budget crisis until Walker gave tax breaks to some of the wealthiest corporations in the state, (who just happened to be big campaign contributors - go figure!). It was those tax breaks that precipitated the unsustainable budget shortfall, not benefits for workers. Walker LIED about all of this. Of course, it was all exposed, but conservatives preferred to believe the lies, since they harbor a preexisting antipathy towards the union, even there is not a single reason for it.

[-] 1 points by socialmedic (178) 3 years ago

Yea, contribute to your own pension funds - tell that to the workers of Goldman Sachs.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

You're delusional.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

And you're not?

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

No, I'm not.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Right. You're not delusional in your little world. You're right about everything. <gasp>

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

No. Im not. Like every other human being , I make mistakes.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

And saying epa1nter was delusional was one of them. :)

WAY too easy.

[-] 1 points by Courtney (111) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Amazing job

[-] 1 points by bkoatz (14) 3 years ago

Beautiful. One of the worst things about America is the prevalence of these thinly-veneered "democratic" institutions, where our politicians are paid off and make decisions behind the backs of the people, and then hold "conferences" to "include us in the process." This demonstration brought it straight to the people who propagate that kind of crap. Now they can't sit easy. Now they squirm. And if they get uncomfortable enough it'll be in their best interests to change. You can't ignore the people forever.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Right on!!

[-] 1 points by Sanchez (76) 3 years ago

Very reminiscent of protests in 1960s and early 1970s. This is the kind of stuff we need.

[-] 1 points by democracy513 (-2) from Union City, NJ 3 years ago

GO Chicago! This scene warmed my heart. It has been a long time coming....

[-] 1 points by bornandraised (0) 3 years ago

YES!!! Inspiring... We need to keep up this pressure everywhere. Great job. Thank you so much!

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 3 years ago

I don't know what percentage it was but it wasn't 99%. I like private unions but public unions negotiating how much they can take of my paycheck, doesn't get my support.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 3 years ago

I wonder when the topic of getting money out of politics comes up, if some are thinking of excluding unions.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 3 years ago

it's too bad that they can't see that the problem is the polarization and division of left/right partisan politics.

[-] 1 points by derek (302) 3 years ago

You might find this related essay of interest: "The Left and the Right in Thinking, Personality, and Politics" http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/change/left_and_right.html

[That site is suddenly down; it is available at archive.org still: http://web.archive.org/web/20101205044401/http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/change/left_and_right.html ]

And also this site about thinking in color instead of black and white (left/right): http://anwot.org/

[-] 2 points by number2 (914) 3 years ago

hey you and i are on the same page. Dichotomous thinking....doesn't just apply to the republicrat party. It's bad anywhere. The victim mentality wreaks havoc on whoever gets it. I fall in to that trap at times and have to pull myself out. I always think of the word "harmony" and how a society would obtain it, whether it is in utopia, heaven, nirvana or wherever. One thing that harmony would require is an acceptance and even celebration of differences, unless it is a society of clones.

[-] 1 points by derek (302) 3 years ago

Thanks for the reply. Yes, Donald Pet at ANWOT.org is really onto something. He is a psychiatrist, so he has spend decades helping people overcome problematical "black and white" thinking and learn to think in color, and now he is trying to help the whole world, especially to deal with the problem of nuclear weapons, where problematical thinking could lead to some people choosing to blow up the whole world with technology instead of building a world that works for everyone.

Here is something echoing your point on diversity: "In Professor’s Model, Diversity = Productivity " http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/science/08conv.html

And here is something suggesting humans are adapted to work towards the truth collectively, not individually: http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/researcher-responds-to-arguments-over-his-theory-of-arguing/

You might also like this item on "Ego Development" about where different people are coming from and how few are at a "unitive" stage at any one time: http://areas.fba.ul.pt/jpeneda/Cook-Greuter.pdf

Still, it may only take a few "uniters" at one time to make the world a much better place.

Ideas about tools to help with thinking collectively: http://barcamp.org/w/page/47222818/Tools%20for%20Collective%20Sensemaking%20and%20Civic%20Engagement

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 3 years ago

It is interesting that you use the word "collectively". I am a libertarian and very much an individualist. I think that individualism is how we can celebrate diversity and denounce prejudice and really treat each other as a unique autonomous being rather than an animal in the herd.

But if we collectively had a goal to treat every individual with respect and honor their freedom, rights and sovereignty - then I think we would have harmony in the society.

[-] 1 points by derek (302) 3 years ago

Yes, all real systems are mixes of bottom-up meshworks and top-down hierarchies: http://www.t0.or.at/delanda/meshwork.htm "To make things worse, the solution to this is not simply to begin adding meshwork components to the mix. Indeed, one must resist the temptation to make hierarchies into villains and meshworks into heroes, not only because, as I said, they are constantly turning into one another, but because in real life we find only mixtures and hybrids, and the properties of these cannot be established through theory alone but demand concrete experimentation. Certain standardizations, say, of electric outlet designs or of data-structures traveling through the Internet, may actually turn out to promote heterogenization at another level, in terms of the appliances that may be designed around the standard outlet, or of the services that a common data-structure may make possible. On the other hand, the mere presence of increased heterogeneity is no guarantee that a better state for society has been achieved. After all, the territory occupied by former Yugoslavia is more heterogeneous now than it was ten years ago, but the lack of uniformity at one level simply hides an increase of homogeneity at the level of the warring ethnic communities. But even if we managed to promote not only heterogeneity, but diversity articulated into a meshwork, that still would not be a perfect solution. After all, meshworks grow by drift and they may drift to places where we do not want to go. The goal-directedness of hierarchies is the kind of property that we may desire to keep at least for certain institutions. Hence, demonizing centralization and glorifying decentralization as the solution to all our problems would be wrong. An open and experimental attitude towards the question of different hybrids and mixtures is what the complexity of reality itself seems to call for. To paraphrase Deleuze and Guattari, never believe that a meshwork will suffice to save us."

So, if that is true, at any precise moment, or precise location, or precise context, we can argue over what the best mix of meshwork and hierarchy should be for some purpose. Most US firms are run as hierarchies, so endorsing the meshwork marketplace, for example, often means endorsing hierarchies. It's an odd sort of puzzling problem. I don't think the level of discussion in our society has yet broadly come to appreciate the "complexity of reality". Maybe it never will. We are always trying to build simpler models that are good enough to be useful.

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 3 years ago

speaking my language.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 3 years ago

I don't know if that is a legitimate moderator though. Maybe they got hacked because I also saw some THC advertisement coming from them. Whoever "occupywallst" is doesn't have a clue unless they are a troll.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 3 years ago

Well as long as OWS is legitimate, I'll participate. If it becomes illegitimate, which is a good possibility, then hopefully a legitimate replacement will come.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

Your Tea Party is dead. You killed it yourselves by selling out to the religous right. It's our time now. Your 15 minutes is up.

[-] -1 points by MikeyD (581) from Alameda, CA 3 years ago

Yah yah. I'll be laughing next November as the politicians trying to take ownership of OWS are trying to deny ever having had anything to do with it.

Btw, seeing you are from Florida, say hello to Allen West. Before too long, I suspect the congressional black caucus will be all Republicans.

[-] 1 points by d3bug (29) 3 years ago

define: foreigners

by Tea Party you mean: white right?

NOTE: This country was founded by 'foreigners' who took the land by force from the 'natives'

/history lesson over

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 3 years ago

Founded by foreigners? The founding fathers were born here

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 3 years ago

I am a pragmatist libertarian. I think we should go as a country in the libertarian direction but it's not all practical at this time.

I also think we should scrap the 2 parties but practically if we want to be effective, we have to vote. I pretend to be a republican in my state so I can be a republican delegate, where I vote against republicans in favor of libertarians/tea partiers.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by rva (4) 3 years ago

The Chicago Union League Club has pictures up on its Facebook page of Walker as if none of this ever happened. People should let them know what they think of Walker being invited to speak there in the form of comments on that Facebook page.

[-] 1 points by mandywaz (1) from Tarcoola, SA 3 years ago

Well done, guys! Once many of those people in the room who weren't protesting with you lose their jobs, homes, investments etc. due to the coming global monetary collapse, they'll actually be joining you in your protests! Be patient, they'll eventually "wake up," and join your 99%!

[-] 1 points by BethesdaMD (25) 3 years ago

Wow.

This is one of the most powerful things I have ever seen.

Thank you young man for commanding for their attention. They will have no choice but to hear us soon enough.

The 1% was acting their part...and even having a jolly ol laugh while they were at it. Your fire made him powerless. Our fire collective will do the same.

[-] 1 points by sqrltyler (207) 3 years ago

Right on Occupy Chicago!

Scott Walker is a perfect example of the simple puppets we get to choose from, in this farce of democracy that is our two party system.

We must fight to get ALL MONEY OUT OF POLITICS. When you and I can only donate $2,500 to a political campaign, and global corporations can donate millions, we have no voice. The Koch Brothers should only be allowed two votes, but instead, they were able to BUY a caucus. NEITHER SIDE WORKS FOR US. We can't afford their favor.

We must fight to END THE INFLUENCE OF THE K STREET LOBBY. Lobbyists we did not vote for are dictating our government's policies.

Until we do these two things, we can not have a government OF the people, FOR the people.

[-] 5 points by bensdad (8977) 3 years ago

We need to pick an issue that is simple - that is popular - how about an issue that 83% of Americans agree on - that 56% of TP agree on - that will cement the people in OWS with the people outside of OWS

Our only goal should be to pass a constitutional amendment to counter Supreme Court decisions Citizens United (2010) & Buckley v. Valeo (1976), that enable unlimited amounts of anonymous money to flood into our political system. It will be as short and concise as possible, a legally constructed “corporations and other organizations are not a persons and have no personhood rights” and “money is not free speech”.

We don’t have to persuade people to accept our position – we have to persuade them to ACT based on their own position. Pursuing this goal will prove to the world that we, at OWS, are a serious realistic Movement, with serious realistic goals. Achieving this goal will make virtually every other goal – from jobs, to taxes, to infrastructure , to Medicare – much easier to achieve – by disarming our greatest enemy – GREED.

THE SUCCESS STORY OF THE AMENDING PROCESS The Prohibition movement started as a disjointed effort by conservative teetotalers who thought the consumption of alcohol was immoral. They ransacked saloons and garnered press coverage here and there for a few years. Then they began to gain support from the liberals because many considered alcohol partially responsible for spousal and child abuse, among other social ills. This odd alliance, after many years of failing to influence change consistently across jurisdictions, decided to concentrate on one issue nationally—a constitutional amendment. They pressured all politicians on every level to sign a pledge to support the amendment. Any who did not, they defeated easily at the ballot box since they controlled a huge number of liberal, and conservative and independent swing votes in every election. By being a single-issue constituency attacking from all sides of the political spectrum, they very quickly amassed enough votes (2/3) to pass the amendment in Congress. And, using the same tactics, within just 17 months they were successful in getting ¾ of the state legislatures to ratify the constitutional amendment into law. (Other amendments were ratified even faster: Eight—the 7th, 12th, 13th, 15th, 17th, 20th, 21st and 26th—took less than a year. The 26th, granting 18-year-olds the right to vote, took just three months and eight days.)

If they could tie the left and right into success - WHY CAN'T WE??????????

[-] 1 points by sqrltyler (207) 3 years ago

I agree 100%. All of the other goals are achievable once we regain control of our government. The slogan is simple, "GET MONEY OUT"

This is an issue that practically all Americans will rally behind. The legal corruption of our government must end, and this is the very root of most of our country's problems.

[-] 1 points by katerhoades (0) 3 years ago

That sounds like a good idea.

[-] 2 points by dakota (62) from Canton, MI 3 years ago

I agree. I am grateful to those who have the courage to represent the 99%. My deepest thanks and appreciation.

[-] 2 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

Right on!

[-] 1 points by addaloria (0) from Woodbury, MN 3 years ago

Love love love. Very proud of what occupy wallstreet is doing.

[-] 1 points by SocratesPhilosophy (231) 3 years ago

I would have liked to see someone calling for a debate, but mostly just pissed off people that refuse to listen to anything outside of their world view.

What was the woman at the end so bent about?

[-] 3 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

That is the point, that the space for rational debate has long since gone. We are dealing with highly irrational beasts, be they politicians, corporations, wars or governments. This is what happens when power resides in the hands of the few.

[-] 3 points by Echoes310 (15) from Wantagh, NY 3 years ago

True as that may be, It's still a bad idea to fight them with a bigger more irrational beast. Shouting loud and covering your ears won't get us anywhere, and quite honestly it is very childish.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 3 years ago

Hardly childish...and why are people so inclined to malign children when they disapprove of adult behavior? The thing is that we are accustomed to artificial and well edited displays of human behavior and so are not receptive to more crude tactics. It does not mean that these tactics are lacking. We do what we can.

[-] 1 points by d3bug (29) 3 years ago

yeah, protesting and yelling never solved anything... it's just childish.... we still have segregation right?... wait wut?

[-] 1 points by socialmedic (178) 3 years ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8znB2UF9d2c&feature=related

Pay attention to what Micheal Lewis says in this video .... what he predicted people were going to do with their anger at Wall Street. Be glad that their anger is voiced in yelling and shouting and not in bullets.

[-] 2 points by hometownboz (0) 3 years ago

Good point. A Good debate earns my respect. Shouting inappropriately and not allowing others to speak shows poor character and is counter productive.

[-] 1 points by BethesdaMD (25) 3 years ago

lol. good question socrates.... her boys didnt even have her back. the were like 'nuh huh judy. i have your back when you act like a whacko with bruce in the office. but, i'm gonna have to sit this one out tiger'.

[-] 0 points by Dio1313 (69) 3 years ago

Wow! Did your parents or teachers not teach you that it is rude to interrupt someone? If you want people to take you seriously you need to act like adults.

[-] 0 points by JohnnyO (119) 3 years ago

Awesome the way he shut those pig SEIU jerkoffs down.

[-] 0 points by Dio1313 (69) 3 years ago

Unfortunately your gatherings (peaceful yes) also draw in stupid thugs who like to blend in with the crowd and then act like an ass. The "Bullies with guns" are just there to keep the peace and try to control the "stupid thugs" that mix in at your gatherings and ensure that normal daily activity is not hindered by your presence. I have also watched enough videos of people screaming in officers faces, refusing to move out of the way of officers vehicles, hitting officers vehicles, and even pushing over officers motorcycles. How long would you be able to put up with that before you punched someone in the face? If you tell me you could take it, then I call you a liar. Stage your protest, (and please keep the stupid ones from acting like spokespersons, they are only hurting your cause) (such as,"but the bullies with guns cannot keep it non-violent"), but if the police say that an area needs to be cleared then clear out. I am a Veteran who believes in your right to protest, I just believe that the bad comming from this will prevent you all from making any changes. And please pick up your trash. All gathering sites look as if a dump truck exploded there. Also, please consider the fact that keeping the police busy dealing with you guys is preventing them from chasing down the real criminals. I think you are wasting your time, but I agree that it is your right, just think about some of the things I have said. Dion

[-] 0 points by Unimpressed99 (0) 3 years ago

You are embarrassing America with your nonsense.

[-] 0 points by LetsGetTheFactsStraight (30) 3 years ago

Visit LetsGetTheFactsStraight.com

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by outsidenyc (11) 3 years ago

You filthy slobs should get a job. I worked my whole life, I didn't ask any rich people to give me money that THEY earned, I earned my own.

I washed dishes, swept floors, served burgers and any other job I could get. When I didn't have a job, I didn't sleep in some park protesting and whining that some other people had more money than me and I want some of it. I WENT LOOKING FOR A JOB!!

I got married, had kid, got a better job bought a house, had grandkids and saved some money so I could retire. NEVER ONCE did I expect someone else to give me money for nothing.

You filthy, lazy hippies should get your ass whipped. Go out and work and earn your OWN money, you effing lowlifes. If any of you were my kid, I'd give you an ass whuppin you'd never forget.

By the way, the only people who are rooting for you are other filthy lazy slobs like yourselves. They rest of us would kick the crap out of you if we had the chance.

Lazy ungrateful slobs.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

Wow, you can cut and paste. We already read your tired rant in this forum. think of something new to say.

[-] 0 points by MikeyD (581) from Alameda, CA 3 years ago
[-] 0 points by VladimirMayakovsky (796) 3 years ago

This was really well done. There is a musical quality to this, that makes it sound almost as sweet as a Puccini aria. Then there is the tempo and the dance, to union-busting-is-disgusting. Bravo! This should be made into a musical.

[-] 0 points by Killumination (80) from Los Angeles, CA 3 years ago

I've always wanted to do something like this!

[-] 0 points by NewWorldNow (83) 3 years ago

As an early and ongoing supporter of OWS, I find this appalling. What does this have to do with limiting corporate corruption of government? Worker's pensions? Poverty? Public sector unions? The 99% is not a leftist cabal. We have to stick to common ground. I do NOT support any of this. In fact, I think Walker is a fiscal realist who tried to address a problem that would have cost a lot of people their jobs.

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 3 years ago

On the "money"! That's what it is. Chicago is MY KIND OF TOWN Chicago is...

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 3 years ago

Drones

[-] 0 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

long live king scott and lets kill slaves

[-] 0 points by ray4444 (69) 3 years ago

long live the king scott and slavary

[-] 0 points by FreeMarkets (272) 3 years ago

MARK STEYN (National Review):

I don’t “stand with the 99%,” and certainly not downwind of them. But I’m all for their “occupation” continuing on its merry way. It usefully clarifies the stakes. At first glance, an alliance of anarchists and government might appear to be somewhat paradoxical. But the formal convergence in Oakland makes explicit the movement’s aims: They’re anarchists for statism, wild free-spirited youth demanding more and more total government control of every aspect of life — just so long as it respects the fundamental human right to sloth. What’s happening in Oakland is a logical exercise in class solidarity: The government class enthusiastically backing the breakdown of civil order is making common cause with the leisured varsity class, the thuggish union class, and the criminal class in order to stick it to what’s left of the beleaguered productive class. It’s a grand alliance of all those societal interests that wish to enjoy in perpetuity a lifestyle they are not willing to earn.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 3 years ago

This is great, I love it. Where I live we have a Dem governor, a Dem controlled state legislature, a Dem County Exec, and a Dem controlled county legislature. And they have been actively breaking the backs of our unions for years. I'm so tired of seeing the civil service employee bear the brunt of their spending, the untold sinecures they provide to friends, the filling of their campaign coffers with corporate contributions... while their employees bear the brunt in an effort to hold the line on taxes and get them reelected. It's just not right to deprive thousands of employees to get yourself reelected because you can't tow the line on spending.

[-] 1 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

where is this place with all the democrats doing these very GOP type things? As usual, no actual place mentioned. Lots of the people here are tea baggers trying to spread lies of their right wing masters.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 3 years ago

Suffolk County, NY

[-] 1 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

yes, I have heard they are conservative up there. Sorry for doubting you.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 3 years ago

I wouldn't label them as conservative; I'd label them as extremely corrupt and decidedly anti-labor. More, I see the degradation of basic labor rights as Un-American. As brutal as former Republican management was it was still possessed of a much higher humanity in respect to basic rights.

[-] 1 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

I was trying to use a polite term since I really am not that familiar but do know from those recent elections that you have to be pretty right wing to get elected in some parts of NY state

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 3 years ago

Suffolk County was traditionally a farming community. For decades all were Democrats because the party represented the working class but during my lifetime they have been primarily Republican. We're not right wingers, just rather intelligent moderates. But I'm not happy at all with the present Democrat attack on labor rights which I see as utterly despicable because these are basic protections that took the working class of various roles decades to achieve.

[-] 1 points by Barbara555 (78) 3 years ago

yes that sounds like that other community where that ultra right wing guy was trying to take a seat and the democrat won a surprise victory in spite of tea party. It was a farming community, I remember. Well all the Blue dogs might as well be right wing Republicans, not a dimes worth of difference; and Obama has supported BD and GOP from the get go.

He is a traitor to progressives everywhere as far as i am concerned. When he came out in those debt ceiling talks and put SS and medicare on the table, that was the last straw as if his extension of Bush tax breaks wasn't enough!!!! And it was Obama that chose all those SS haters to be on that deficit reduction committee.

[-] 0 points by Jasonc44 (0) 3 years ago

nice

[-] 0 points by Jasonc44 (0) 3 years ago

nice

[-] 0 points by isupportOWS (1) 3 years ago

This is exactly what we need, and more of it! Many thanks to these wonderful activists!

[-] 0 points by katerhoades (0) 3 years ago

Awesome.

[-] 0 points by bohratom (22) 3 years ago

Ok, when do I see the video of the same for the Messiah Obama when he does his $35,000/plate wall street dinners?

Till then its hypocritical...

[-] 1 points by d3bug (29) 3 years ago

I am sure those events are well screened... I doubt they would get inside.

[-] 1 points by georgetaylor (67) from Tampa, FL 3 years ago

His time is coming. We just won't be replacing him with a republican.

[-] -1 points by hometownboz (0) 3 years ago

Sounds like the Unions are getting the Occupiers to do thier dirty work to keep thier overpaid union jobs and benefits while the little guy has to share what little wealth he has left. Steal from the little guy to pay for big unions. I thought Occupiers were suppose to take from the rich (Unions) and give to the little guy.

[-] 1 points by HelpingOthers (10) from Wall, NJ 3 years ago

i think your getting unions and corporations mixed up, those with corporate interests often fight unions because unions have since the progressive reforms of the early 1900's been the voice and protector of the rights of the small man. i don't see the ceo's needing unions to protect their rights, thats because they have control. the workers do not have control and before unions were implemented and enforced primarily by names such a Teddy Roosevelt the corporations underpaid and overworked the little man, they still want money just as bad as they did then, whats to stop them from doing the same injustices that required unions to step in and protect workers. and if the unions are the bad guys, then who are the little men you speak of and whos protecting them, its sure not the union opposing corporations.

[-] 0 points by nikka (228) 3 years ago

Well said.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by ark99 (3) from Jonestown, PA 3 years ago

MikeyD? Same MikeyD that trolls youtube hating on Christians and other religions? You sure sound like one and the same. It's funny how you and other small minded people see unions as the problem or a threat. Reagan pulled most the union teeth back in the 80's. Your mind seems to be buried under a ton of elephant manure. People are waking up. You should give yourself a good shake and join the waking world and the 99% that care about our countries standard of living, freedom, and justice for all.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 3 years ago

Do you deny that the right wing gets almost all of its campaign money from corporations? Are you OK with that?

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by d3bug (29) 3 years ago

they were not complaining "to" Walker, rather citing an example.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by d3bug (29) 3 years ago

I'm sorry, was there a point in there somewhere?

[-] 1 points by powertothepeople (1264) 3 years ago

I think Rahm was there. The meeting was in Chicago at a public policy breakfast.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by powertothepeople (1264) 3 years ago

It's only we the people who are at war with one another based on D and R.

The powerful rub elbows all the time.

I saw a write up somewhere on the net that said Rahm was there, sorry I can't recall the link now. but check into it if you'd like

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by KirkVanHouten (123) 3 years ago

Rude little brats.

[-] -2 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 3 years ago

Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights

[-] -3 points by KirkVanHouten (123) 3 years ago

This video would have been better if had ended with some police "brutality."