Forum Post: How can so many people be against these solutions?
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 13, 2011, 3:35 p.m. EST by TrevorMnemonic
(5827)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Occupy America
END THE WAR and bring back trillions of dollars to America. END CORPORATE PERSONHOOD and bring it back to We The People. END LOBBYISTS THAT ARE INFECTING OUR NATION WITH GREED and bring back democracy. END TAX BREAKS ON BILLION DOLLAR COMPANIES and help lower the U.S. debt. REINSTATE THE BANKING ACT OF 1933 and regulate the banks. AUDIT THE FED and find out exactly what the fuck it is they're doing.
How can so many people call me a "freeloading hippie" for being in this movement? I paid 5 grand in taxes last year and I am only 24. I have a job and I work hard. I don't understand the opposition.
There will be many trying to disrupt, discredit and divide us along the way. They want you to fail. They will do anything they can to make sure you do. Ignore them and keep moving forward.
Its called an ad hominim argument. No one can find a reasonable way to argue against these positions, so they attack you instead. Stay strong. We live in a world without secrets. That means a world where all lies are found out eventually.
Good call "to the man" argument classic spin doctoring!!
IMHO it's more about realism. Nobody has much time for a guy standing on a street corner with a sign that says "END WAR", because he doesn't have a plan for doing it. They don't necessarily disagree with him.
that is because the people do not feel they control the government
Agreed, which unfortunately is a self-fulfilling prophesy. While people are boycotting democracy, their ideological opponents are using democracy against them, advancing a focused agenda to make the system even more slanted. The way to improve the situation and make government more responsive to your concerns is to participate in it, effectively.
VOTE, or else this will all be a pointless exercise in futility!
VOTE indeed. Tech Junkie, I am glad to see we can finally agree on something.
We are not in the military and we do not decide their tactics after a position has been taken. When we said "End terrorism" not much else needed to be said. It is not our job to make military strategies. That is the military's purpose. Who are you, a computer guy, to decide how to invade a country you have never been to? Our job is to keep them honest.
Want to know how they can end the war. Bring all the troops home. It's a pretty simple strategy.
You seem to be against social programs to help the poor, yet you want to literally rebuild an entire country and provide everything for them?
All the people want here is a government that represents them, as well as a prosperous job market. We're not asking the uber rich to literally hand us money. We're just saying "Cool it with the greed."
the countries that are fighting us won't be if the soldiers are not there to fight
I have no idea what any of this was all about:
I try not to use the word "you" when posting
Be careful with putting words into somebody's mouth just so that you can have an argument with them because you end up arguing with phantoms.
If you want to end war then your role is to vote against candidates who start wars, and you need to participate in selecting candidates, and reject candidates who support starting wars. (That would include Obama.)
What words did you feel that I put in your mouth?
we will vote
...
ows from start has been democratic and all republicans do nothing but demonize the movement read the signs listen to the people and see tax rich get money out of politics end wars have never been backed by republicans tax cuts for middle class modernize roads and bridges invest in middle class not banking class by raising minimum wage thats the occupy wall street message
Both parties are responsible for this. Do not make this about side. There are no sides here. Only are one voice for change and equality.
It's more difficult to simply end the war then you think, there are so many ramifications of doing so that most people never think about. Ending corporate campaign contributions and restricting lobbyists access to congress on the other hand is not as difficult. Eliminating tax loopholes on corporations is something everyone can agree on,though, what to do with the revenues however, is not. The Glass Steagall Act worked pretty well, though it might take a few years to put back in effect. Auditing the fed could be nearly instantaneous if congress demanded it, or if we demanded it of them.
Awesome comment!
COMMON SENSE SOLUTIONS to fix the economy and jobs crisis...
Lower the SS retirement age to 62, early retirement to age 60. Free up middle and upper management and lower positions for younger, healthier, less expensive workers.
Remove the cap on Social Security contributions to pay for new and future retirees.
Limit consumer credit interest rates to 15% max. This will reduce consumer debt and promote consumption without costing taxpayers a cent.
Lower the eligibility age of Medicare to zero. It's an insurance (not a health care) program. Younger, healthier contributors will dramatically drive down cost and increase savings. Employers will be out of the health care business.
Rescind the Bush tax cuts immediately on those making over $250K and increase the rates on those making over $1M+ to Reagan era rates.
Rewrite underwater mortgages by "splitting the difference" between current market value and what is owed, (4% -30 yr. fixed) both parties take a hit, homeowners have incentive to stay and pay and banks are not stuck with vacant, non- performing assets.
Make all educational expenses tax deductible.
Problem solved.
I think your missing something here. This doesn't represent the 99%.Your first point serves to make SS become insolvent at a much quicker rate. When SS was first enacted the retirement age was 2 years older then life expectancy, what a huge difference now. I could go on but I think I'll leave it at that.
Something everyone can agree on, however, is ending corporate campaign contributions and restricting lobbyists access to congress.
"Your first point serves to make SS become insolvent at a much quicker rate."
Not by my off-the-cuff calculations, because this more than makes up for it: "Remove the cap on Social Security contributions to pay for new and future retirees."
Ahh, gotcha. You want people to pay for everyone eases retirement.
I like it.
Oh! And remember that most of the uber rich make most of their income from capital gains and dividends -
http://www.npr.org/2011/09/19/140599307/does-buffett-rule-add-up-for-obama-deficit-plan
Also - The NPR article is a bit misleading. 50% is still very regressive compared to the post-War era. (where it was 90%)
http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-flat-tax-is-unfair/#comment-70544
http://ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/publicroads/96summer/p96su10.cfm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,155487,00.html
So let's see...back when taxes were "high" we had a moon landing, the creation of the highway system and the microprocessor for three things. Therefore it did -not- kill investment.
Also - you'll see the most regressive tax area to be somewhere around the late Coolidge and the early Hoover era. (Even more regressive than we are right now by around 10%)
I think you know where I am going here.
Meet The Great Depression
http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/depression/depression.htm
There is just no excuse. The 1% have no excuse at all.
Thank you for not being a conservative troll trying to call me a freeloader. Despite my post and informing people of my job and that I do in fact pay taxes, it seems that's all these people want to do. Call us names. It's sad really.
Thanks for the knowledge. Keep up the good fight.
No prob.
The 1% have no excuse it is tragic that anybody falls for their crap...
I believe many people in this forum agree with many of the demands you stated above. Just because a bunch of self-satisfied individuals blast the OWS protesters as filthy, drug-crazed, lazy, spoiled, young brats who need to find a job does not mean you are a freeloading hippie to express your views, which appear quite reasonable. As JFK said, "reason does not always appeal to unreasonable men".
I feel you, I have been getting the same responses and you are right!!!
My name is JIMI KENDRIX a Music producer whose produced records for the famous from JAY Z to Ja RULE , ASHANTI, RUBBEN STUDDARD ,PATTI LABELLE, rICK rOSS,Disney, etc. and the purpose of this is to commend those who stand for something bigger then we are. something that if accomplished can affect our generations to come. This is my inspired contribution song and Weapon for battle in our protest entitled "Get ReaDy" off My [Sitting in a Tuxedo on top of the mOUNTAIN] EP NOV 5
Here is the link for your file https://www.yousendit.com/download/T2dmV28ySytKV085TE1UQw
OCUPPY AND LETS CONTINUE THE DISCU$$ION AMERICA!!!!
Thats a good list i agree with :) i guess i need to learn more about the fed though...many people mentioning that. I think it's the WAY it's said also (not you, but in general). Some people PERCEIVE certain things, so some are leery. others maybe dont understand (yet). many reasons. hang in there and keep it up! Think of the people who ARE agreeing (or at least THINKING) for hope :)
Yes. I think the End The Fed chant is a bit much. I saw it a lot today here in our Omaha protest. I think we just need a fuck ton of regulation to ensure that they're not going to continue to rape our U.S. dollars. Let's start out with an audit.
Also I've never been able to count to a hundred thousand. Trillions almost seem infinite.
Time to get money out of politics on both sides of the aisle and fix our corrupt and bought out trade, tax and banking system.
http://www.getmoneyout.com/
http://www.dylanratigan.com/2011/08/09/dylan-ratigan-mad-as-hell-his-epic-network-moment/
http://www.dylanratigan.com/2011/08/03/job-wanted-jobs-ending-rigged-trade/
http://www.dylanratigan.com/2011/08/04/jobs-wanted-ending-rigged-tax-code-jobs/
http://www.dylanratigan.com/2011/08/05/jobs-wanted-ending-rigged-banking-jobs/
People argue against their own interests for a variety of reasons.
One is the psychological phenomena known as "identification with the aggressor"
This aggression will not stand, man.
Soo many people are not against it. The Corporations have got their telemarketing branches to use their computers and come on here and type in their new 'scripts'.... lol.
They will continue to demonize those speaking the truth and attempt to call all of us hippies , freeloaders and communists. It will become more and more desperate however. Last night on Fox business news the commentary was "businessmen arent bad! Rockefeller saved the whales by stopping the use of whale oil!" And this morning it was Trump calling us all "dirty and disgusting" . It this is the best they can come up with, rational argument will win.
It's sad that they just call people names...
Aren't they adults?
I did not see a discussion below about the "Gini" co-efficient. America's "Gini" coefficient is now worse than Europe's. The Gini coefficient is basically a measure of the distribution of wealth/income.
New CNN poll shows 37% of US population believes OWS is a front for Iranian Qods Force.
No one is against Ending the wars so keep focusing on that! It is the CORNERSTONE of REAL reform. They use the wars to enforce the rest of the rigged system! They will give in to ANYTHING but war. WAR MUST END!
i am about to buy a hud foreclosure but the copper wires on the water heater were stolen.Is it wise to repair?
No. I wouldn't repair it.
Just take some meth and all of the sudden you will have so much copper wire that you'll forget that you stole it.
In terms of adoption of those solutions as central messages to the OWS movement, they themselves are somewhat conflicting with ulterior goals of others involved in the movement. Many if not most want an end to the war, most don't like corporate personhood, there are a whole range of arguments about tax policy and even more over which regulatory acts should be championed. The FED issue is really only deeply rooted in a handful of ideologies and factions which make up this thing.
It comes down to election and lobbying reform. People want a government which has their interests in mind when it comes from everything from foreign policy/defense to domestic policy and regulation. Now what their interests are vary greatly in either substance or rank of importance. But none of them will ever see the light of day in a real debate in government until the institutional campaign financing and lobbying machines are managed.
And I mean "managed," as this nation would be nothing without its industry or its unions. But their ability to purchase influence during elections and during time in office must end and arguments over what is best for this country need to be arguable in an environment where their logic and reasoning is sound and evenly weighed.
Probably the best comment I've read all day.
I completely agree.
i can argue against what some of your fellow OWS supporters stand for though I mean they want all debt forgiven world wide that would crash every single bank in the world and thus bring the entire world minus the wealthy back into the middle ages. Lobbyists are the only ones that are standing up for my retirement benefits that i was guaranteed when i enlisted in the US army. Lobbyists keep our national parks funded and look out for the endangered species and ensure that congress does not pass any laws that violate our wilderness areas. most lobbyists are put there by us the regular guy that donates to a cause. They are mostly there to do good, it is the union lobbyists that are messing everything up. If the Auto workers did not get paid as much as they do the cost of everything automotive would drasticaly decrease and guys like you and me that don't make much money would be able to afford nice cars. Businesses big or small always pass on the regulated costs to the customer that is why things cost so much, it is not because the rich are bad people it is because the government regulates them so heavily that just to stay in business they have to pass the cost off to the customer that is just common sence nothing in this world is free and it never will be so quit living in your utopian world and c ome down and live in the real one.
Good pointing out the legit lobbyists.. I should have been more specific.
I do not agree that debts should be forgiven. I mean in a dream world, but in no way do I expect that or am I asking for that. Because you are right in what you said, I feel that way too. Some people might be saying "forgive all debts." but they are the few. A moron tried to suggest Bank Runs to me today... Some people are foolish. Just like the few racists that are in the tea party. There's always an asshole in every parade.
The rich are not bad people.... I agree. But quite a few of them are. Remember when they tried to take away teachers benefits? And they called teachers lazy and said they didn't earn the benefits? yeah that happened. and shit like that happens all the time. And 90% of the time, it's an idea presented from a rich guy.
We disagree too much on the rising costs and lowering of wages. So there is no need to go further down that road.
I live in a real world. I just expect people to not be assholes. I've seen corporate greed first hand. A company I used to work for set up a shill non profit side that went through a church so they didn't have to pay taxes and the money. The nonprofit never pulled in any money yet every single dollar made by the for profit side went through the non profit side. A lot of CEO's and owners of companies are scam artists. Not all of them but the GREED can be seen.
If you're making 300 million dollars a year as a CEO, why are your workers making 9 dollars an hour? That's just bull shit if you ask me. No individual person can get rich on their own. They need people to work for them and people to pay them for a product or services.
Go out into the woods by yourself and let me know when you can produce 1 millions cars for me.
Thanks for the comment. I always appreciate a legit response.
In the last paragraph it is because the workers did not do all of the work to get to the top, if I started a business and had workers i would not pay them equal pay to my self. I mean the guy that cleans the place at night may work hard but does he really deserve 1 million dollars no he does not i think that wages are based on a heirarchy system like in the military, We get paid based on our rank and our time in service, a brand new private does not get paid the same as a brand new LT for the same reasons as a janitor does not make the same as the owner of the company. I think that Illegal money laundering should be reported. Why did you not report that illegal activity to authorities or at least let someone know what was going on that is everyones responsibility to report that stuff. If i did not have a job i would be gratefull to have the opportunity to work for 9 dollars an hour it is a lot better than nothing. In the real world everyone is an asshole so get over it that is especially true in business it is just a fact of life don't trust anyone and you can survive in the real world but if you trust everyone then you are setting your self up to fail.
I never said janitors should get paid 1 million dollars. I said I think it's ridiculous for a business owner to make 300 million dollars and pay people 9 dollars an hour. Pay them 15 dollars an hour. We do not live in a world where you can live above poverty and only make 9 dollars an hour.
They are calling you a freeloading hippie because most of the group probably doesn't even know who the vice-president is of the United States. If you are going to take a stance on something then you should educate yourself more on the issues and offer solutions rather than just going out and saying that you are just mad. That is what a child does. In my area where are streets are covered with "Occupy", most are high or on drugs. It doesn't help the cause. I think protesting is great, because it is American, but, when you come out with no agenda after you have gotten everyones attention you lose credibility really quick.
You are making assumption based on facts you do not have or may not even exist.
Protesting is great, I'm glad we agree.
I 100% get the message that is being said by these people. It's so obvious that I don't understand how people can say "I don't get it."
They are calling you a freeloading hippie because most of the group probably doesn't even know who the vice-president is of the United States. If you are going to take a stance on something then you should educate yourself more on the issues and offer solutions rather than just going out and saying that you are just mad. That is what a child does. In my area where are streets are covered with "Occupy", most are high or on drugs. It doesn't help the cause. I think protesting is great, because it is American, but, when you come out with no agenda after you have gotten everyones attention you lose credibility really quick.
I will be joining a group this weekend for the first time. I will be conducting interviews so I will have a "real" take on who everyone is. So far none of the people who I have spoke with will be doing meth while they are there. I heard cocaine is optional though hahaha. Joking.
This movement doesn't have backing like the people who were already in politics with the tea party.
John Boehner Sarah Palin Eric Cantor and Michele Bachmann
and all these other people that were already politicians. We don't have a bunch of politicians that have adopted our movement and assume to speak on our behalf. We are literally the people. We are not a political party... yet. Who knows if that will happen. We are the people.
If you promise not to name call and use facts to prove your points I would be happy to debate the issue. I'll first say what I already agree with you on.
Audit the fed yes and reform as well. Reform the lobby's
The other issues Nobody wants war, but we can debate on why we are there, and how to end it.
Corporate Personhood, no such thing lets have at it.
Tax breaks for billion dollar companies, I'll say no tax breaks for ANYONE OR ANYTHING!
Banking act of 1933..... Why? Why is that a solution?
There's so much to type about the Banking Act of 1933 and why it should be reinstated so I will just share this link on that topic.
http://11thlddems.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011-6-Resolution-to-Reinstate-Glass-Steagall-banking-regulations.pdf
Why do you think we are at war? For me, I am no longer sure. I feel we have been lied to about the issue so many times that the war no longer makes sense. I think it needs to be reevaluated comepletely.
I like it, no tax breaks for anyone, all though the softy in me has to say "except people below a 18,000 dollar tax bracket, depending on the number of dependents." Those people literally don't have enough money to feed their kids. The last thing we need to do is take it away from them. I can afford taxes, which is why I have no problem paying them. I also appreciate having roads and schools too.
Any other topic we can discuss?
Lets just stick to what you originally posted. We'll get to banking later. I will read what you have posted first.
On the war, we have to define which one. On Iraq I, the invasion of Kuwait. This was a major error on Husseins part. We were in fact doing business with Iraq and they were a major ally against our real enemy in the region Iran. Why he thought he could get away with invading a small country (with so much oil) is beyond me. We had every reason to go in there with our allies and roust him out. Only mistake was not going all the way to Bagdad the first time.
The second Iraq war isn't so clear or is it? No weapons of mass destruction etc. Everybody hates a Monday morning quarterback!
Lets look at the facts. Every single intelligence agency on the planet, ours, UK, France, Israel, UN etc believed that they had weapons and or weapons plants. He ( Hussein ) was sanctioned by the UN. He violated those sanctions and bribed UN officials in the OIL for food scandal at the UN. He refused to allow UN inspections. Both side in the US House & Senate voted for in favor of war. Very few politicians voted against it. They did so on the information they had at the time. Obama is one of the few that actually voted against it. A major criticism that I had of him then and now.
Why would I be critical after all he had it right! There were no weapons. Here's why. He had the same information as everyone else. How could he come to a different conclusion that the overwhelming majority? If he didn't think there was a good reason to use US troops to protect us then, how would he fair in the future? Look at now. Iran tries to attack us and all he has to offer the Iranians is lip service.Not good enough. Mohammed Imadinnerjacket should have had a cruise missile up his ass before it hit the papers.
Afghanistan. What choice did we have? Allow the Taliban to continue to attack us. Drones would have been nice in 2001 but they weren't operational yet. We did a good thing in Afghanistan. There is a fledgling Democracy there now. Our wasn't so hot when we started. We are still trying to figure it out. Allot more Afghan's want us there then don't
The mistake that is being made now is letting everyone know when we are leaving. Obama is doing that to appease those on the far left of his party. Only problem with that is you don't tell your enemy when you are leaving. The''ll wait you out and pounce when we leave.
Taxes? Everyone should pay the same rate. When I was making 18,000 I didn't go out and get married and have kids. I waited until I could afford it!
What do you mean Corporate personhood?
Everything you said about Iraq and the supposed "WMD's"... I counter with the idea of North Korea.
Why are we still in Iraq?
And back to taxes I've said it before, if the ridiculously super rich people don't want to pay taxes, I more than welcome them to making 18 grand a year. It's awesome! Easily 10 times better than still making a hundred million dollars. We differ on taxes and the outrageously super rich. I don't think we will be able to persuade each other to the other side.
Corporate Personhood is a new term describing how corporations used the 14th amendment to get the rights of a person and used those rights to influence our government.
Don't give up on common ground! North Korea has successfully tested nukes. I agree we should be doing more about that.
On Iraq, We need to finish what we started. You can't trash the place and leave it alone. Right or wrong going in there you can't just abandon the people of that country. And they want us there.
Taxes you have define super rich and what portion of the tax code. Flat tax works for everyone. The Uber rich do not work so taxing heir wages is a waste of time, they don't have any. The current proposal to tax people "earning" $1m per year in wages does nothing to the deficit. It's a fly on an elephants ass.
I am a corporation. How do you address that?
You also can't invade a place based on the killing of innocent people and then in turn be responsible for the death of innocent people. It happens and it happened a lot initially. The fact that it continued to happen and it was known by the military, well that makes it murder.. which in my opinion only inspires more terrorism. So then we'd have to kill them all (all meaning terrorists, I think prison time would be worse for them than death but...) We should just leave them be and hire mercenaries to take them out when we're not looking <-- not a real suggestion.
We shouldn't be blowing things up that are needed for their society. We shouldn't have to rebuild anything. It should have been an attack on their military complexes and that's it.
Iraq Veterans Against the war. http://ivaw.org/
"President Bush enacted his tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, and over their 10-year lifespan, they reduced tax revenues by around $2.4 trillion, with $474 billion of that coming in the first four years."
If you're suggesting that 2.4 trillion dollars is an insufficient number... then I really don't know how to respond to that.
The invasion wasnt based on killing innocents, it was based on dismantling WMD, which they did in fact find massive quantities of Gas and labs to produce more.
Hire mercenaries?
The 2.4 trillion spread over ten years does not take into account the loss's from the recession. Which is a direct result of the housing crisis created by Dodd and Frank!
I never said it was based on killing innocent people. I just said it happened, they were aware it happened, and then it happened again and a lot. Any death of an innocent children on America's hands just makes me sick to think about.
Of course it was Not on a massive scale nor on purpose. But orders that weren't thought out to the best they could have been resulted in a lot of deaths of innocent people.
And back to what you said about taxes... I don't know about that... a ton of sites back that number of 2.4 trillion dollars.
Where were you on 9/11? Where were you in when the WTC was bombed the first time in 93?
Have you ever traveled overseas? Do you know what age they train young boys how to use an AK47 in Iraq, Iran, Lebanon? Syria? They are trained to kill Americans and Jews form the time they are 7 years old. American kids play little league, theirs strap on suicide vest and train how to shoot. Innocent..... really?
Yeah I know Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Other than the plane they trained on for hijackings.
I guess we should just nuke them then?
you didn't answer any of my questions. Why not? What is your point of reference? If your were born before man landed on the moon your accept this occurrence as inevitable. So answer me?
School. I was 13. I remember it distinctly.
I was 6.
Yes, Mexico, Panama, and Costa Rica.
The ages vary.
Not all kids who live in those countries, but yes the ones who have relatives of some kind in those organizations do abuse their children in the worst way imaginable.
So we should just nuke them then, right? Kill everyone?
North Korea
I'll answer as fully as I can:
End the War(s) - Yes. But the wars don't cost us trillions a year so you must temper that windfall . . . and the money we spent doesn't come back when we stop our involvement in the wars . . . can't bring it back. Still, end the wars.
End Corporate Personhood - Yes, specifically the ability to donate to politics - but also the ability for Unions to do so.
Lobbyists don't infect the nation with greed, they convince politicians to support a group (or company's) interests. Lobbyists work for environmental groups and non-profit, charities too. Do you propose cutting them off too? And what about lobbyists for citizen groups?
End tax breaks on billion dollar companies - I think a major simplification of the entire tax code is in order. That eliminates loopholes and exemptions. Let us also make sure to eliminate subsidies to green energy. (Oil companies, for example, have tax loopholes they lobbied for that allow them to pay less taxes. Green energy have tax subsidies wherein tax collected for you and I is handed over to the favored industry to try keeping it afloat since it cannot stay afloat on its own.)
Reinstate the Banking Act of 1933 - this seperates different types of banking from each other, eliminating some of the diversity of a bank portfolio as well as some of the added risk. There is a lot of support for this. I personally am okay with it because it isn't a return to the banking rules pre-1933 (which were far more restrictive on banks having multiple branches and resulted in most of the bank closures of the Great Depression) and I don't know quite enough about it to conjure up any problems. But I would also be fine with leaving the rules alone AND RETURNING THE CONSEQUENCES TO THE BANK rather than tax payer. That is the greatest problem from the rule changes in 1999. The ability to more easily make bad gambles would not have led to as great of a volume of bad gambles except that Barney Frank and Chris Dodd (and others) arranged for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to shoulder the consequences of those gambles rather than the banks themselves. Why those 2 are still in office is a mystery.
Audit the Fed - Yes.
Why the opposition? Look at the TV. They only show "dirty hippies" and drum circles and signs made of torn cardboard.
I have been on this forum for more than a week. I think I understand it well enough to know that the loudest don't represent everyone, BUT it will not be long before they are all that is left if folks like you don't figure out how to guide the movement.
The movement needs to move beyond good ideas (amongst the rabble) to good solutions. Or it will die.
Supporting a company's interest over the people is greed.
I do appreciate the real response here, guy.
Ending the wars will save us trillions of dollars because this war has no end in site and trillions have already been spent. While it will not get our money back, it will stop them from wasting more money, which would be trillions if this war goes another 3 years, which it looks like it will based on the fact it has shown no signs of ending. Hell, the president barely even talks about it anymore.
I guess I don't really watch the news on tv, so I'm not sure what people are watching on the news. I've been watching all the real videos on youtube that the real people have uploaded. Hippies are people too though. I don't know any. Well, I guess I know one. I live in Omaha Nebraska though, so obviously based on that, there's not going to be a lot of hippies. Just hillbillies, haha joking.
Although these are fine goals, they are not in and of themselves the solution for implementing them, which is why what we most immediately need is a comprehensive strategy that implements all our demands at the same time, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management System of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategic Legal Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:
http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures
Join
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/
if you want to be 1 of 100,000 people needed to support a Presidential Candidate – such as myself or another you'd like to draft – at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.
Remember that any candidate, regardless of party, is a straw man, a puppet; it's the STRATEGY that the people organize themselves behind, in military internet formation, that's important. Read and think critically about the 1st link and join the 2nd link and you'll see exactly what I mean.
Fear, plain and simple.
Because your solutions take away HUGE amounts of money and power from MANY people. Consider my favorite quote about Congress: "you can't expect someone to understand a problem, when their paycheck depends on them not understanding the problem."
http://www.JeffBlock2012.com We Have Permission to Change the System
Did you ever see the movie Cube? It's about an elite that keeps putting people in a massive cube with a bunch of cube shaped rooms. Some of the rooms have traps. Anyway my favorite line is
"They have to keep using it or they admit that it's pointless." "But it is pointless." "That's my point."
Basically what I think you're saying is, even though it's wrong, we have to keep doing it because people need to get paid.
Haliburton will just have to find something else to do other than profit from a war that uses terrorism as a smoke screen for imperialism. First it was WMD's. Then it was stopping terrorism, but there were no terrorist attacks from Iraq and haven't been in a long time, then it was freeing the Iraq people and instating a democracy, even though we're a federal republic... what other smoke screens will they use to keep this war indefinite?
At the same time, I do respect your opinions and I am open to all voices as long as presented in a proper debate manner.
Thank you for being respectful even with a differing opinion.
Here are some ways out of the economic "Cube" we are almost all occupying whether we want to or not: "Beyond a Jobless Recovery: A heterodox perspective on 21st century economics" http://knol.google.com/k/beyond-a-jobless-recovery# "This article explores the issue of a "Jobless Recovery" mainly from a heterodox economic perspective. It emphasizes the implications of ideas by Marshall Brain and others that improvements in robotics, automation, design, and voluntary social networks are fundamentally changing the structure of the economic landscape. It outlines towards the end four major alternatives to mainstream economic practice (a basic income, a gift economy, stronger local subsistence economies, and resource-based planning). These alternatives could be used in combination to address what, even as far back as 1964, has been described as a breaking "income-through-jobs link". This link between jobs and income is breaking because of the declining value of most paid human labor relative to capital investments in automation and better design. Or, as is now the case, the value of paid human labor like at some newspapers or universities is also declining relative to the output of voluntary social networks such as for digital content production (like represented by this document). It is suggested that we will need to fundamentally reevaluate our economic theories and practices to adjust to these new realities emerging from exponential trends in technology and society."
Simplified here: http://groups.google.com/group/virgle/msg/1c59bf9a35454b51
actually Trevor, I agree with your opinion and position. I was giving you the answer as to why many people would be against your solutions.
I can give you so many examples. Is there ANY citizen who would vote AGAINST a balanced budget amendment? No? Then why do we not have a balanced budget amendment? I'm also for longer terms (say 8 years for Senators and Representatives) with NO re-elections. I think almost every voter would go for that too, so why don't we have fixed terms? Basically because almost everything you or I would propose as solutions require Congressional approval, and at least according to one Senator:
"The system is broken and dysfunctional...and everyone knows that." ~ Senator Tom Udall, USA Today 9/29/2011
I like quotes from other people to support my position (of course): http://www.jeffblock2012.com/Summary.html
Jeff
Sweet! Genius idea about senators and reps. I also wish the judiciary branch like Lamar Smith could be voted out. It sucks that we don't get to elect such an important position on a national level. Just about anything he doesn't like he can just say "Next!" It's bogus.
the opposition is running on lies and fumes and meth and crack and addiction and propaganda. our job is simple; confront the lies and put forth the simple truth. eventually almost everyone will end up agreeing. right now they just have this little problem with using rush limbo as their brain.
rush limbic is crack, is it not?:)
yeah, fer sure. limbic. lol. about right. limbic system on autopilot. zombot somnambulisms spokesperson.
Propaganda my friend. Unfortunatly many people are blinded by all the media outlets that they get their news from. These media outlets are trying to make this protest democrat vs republican, when in reality it is about power to the people.
They've been fed too much bullshit for far too long from the rich elite and the media conglomerates. That's how.
Those are not solutions, those are issues, problems or "causes". The tea party and nwo love it when people get confused in this way.
Cool story bro!
Issue: Corporations have too much to do with how our presidents are elected because they fund candidates which decides who gets their voice heard.
Solution: Throw the lobbyists out of our government and end corporate personhood.
Issue: The rising debt in the united states.
Solution: End the wars and save trillions of tax dollars over the next X amount of years these wars will last. Raise tax rates on billion dollar companies.
Basically I'm just repeating everything from the original post.
Do you hold public sector unions to the same standard as corporations, because that's just what they are. They fund candidates who make sure their voice is heard while fucking the taxpayers.I agree with you, throw the lobbyists and unions out of our government. Agree with you on the wars. You don't understand how the billion dollar game of checkers is played with companies. I've got a hint for you though: you won't win. I'm not sure all of you even think through your soundbites through to their logical conclusions. All I need to do is ask you one thing: pretend that you are a billion dollar plus company, or for that matter, an individual making, say, $20-$30 million a year with a net worth of maybe $200-$250 million. Now I know being a person of the cause, you'd voluntarily give most of it to the cause, but let's just say you were a modern day company or person living in real, modern day America with a lesser egalitarian inclination, with laws that are on the books right now. What would you do, and how would you react to or protect your company or yourself from the vitriol and hate you have daily directed your way? And, I just have one other damn question that's been buggin me forever (I have an odd predilection for readin DK every day, and watch Howdy Doody, and Larry "Silence of the Lambs" O'Donnell every night and know this topic by heart from listening and reading): If the corporations are as greedy, and "put profits first over people", as espoused daily, and are the source of all the anecdotal mistreatment and abuse contained in diaries and TV segments, why the hell does everyone on the left seem to want to work for them? There seem to be a lot of very talented people on the left, a lot of them at OWS, and a decent amount of money funding it. Why not get them all together and form a capitalistic company? You have a built-in customer base, other progressives, funding, and talent. You should be able to come up with a product or service to sell, make enough money and pay all your people handsomely with good benefits, and don't forget, nice pensions, lest they all starve when they're old. It's a serious question, one that no doubt, I will continue to wait to get the answer to.
I like the proposed idea. I think it is much more difficult than you make it sound.
Honestly, if I was worth 250 million dollars, I would have retired after the first 100 million dollars... so I can't answer your question on how I would react to this as a person still making that much money a year.
I can't see myself paying myself that much money a year either, if I were a CEO. But hey I'm a liberal sap, I guess.
There we agree, I think you probably are a liberal sap. It is not difficult at all to create a business. Especially with the apparent structure and creativity that the OWS people seem to possess. They've got techies, lawyers, probably some accountants and small business owners, and what appears to be pretty good seed money. I say they should start the jobs program by starting to provide the jobs themselves. Jesse Lagreca (Ministry of Truth on DK) would be a fine company spokesperson, he's articulate, not horrifically ugly or anything, but he needs to lose the smokes. I just do not get why liberals sit around and complain about corporations and whine at the government all day about providing jobs, when they have an opportunity right in front of them to be successful. I can tell you why, though. They are afraid that there is a chance they could fail. That would put them in the shoes of the owner of a business now, and present a conflict that currently has an ongoing ready constituency (are they for the workers now, or are they the "1%", figuratively speaking). It is the same reason Al Sharpton has made a career out of what he does, race pandering. He doesn't want it to ever end, keeping black folks upset about their circumstances is what keeps him in the limelight. The OWS people should use a GA to come up with ideas for a business that all could contribute to and be part owners of. They could decide who gets what for what work, whether it's all equal or not, what perks to provide to whom, how much healthcare coverage to offer, and the level of pension benefits to offer, and whether it's a defined benefit plan or not. They can make all the choices, with the budget they have. Even if not successful, it would be an eye-opening experience for many of them, the responsibility and pressure that goes with meeting a payroll, of making tough decisions that are not always popular and how to deal with that, about how they really feel about who is worth what in the organization and how they should be compensated. I posed my question about the wealthy company and individual to just illustrate a point that these people would naturally be afraid, after all the rhetoric you see today, that there is a real possibility that their income and/or wealth is going to be attacked, and they would rightly make plans to avoid that consequence (you would, I would). With the click of a button, capital can simply vanish from the United States. The answer to that I've had many times from liberals is "Good riddance, we don't want them anyway". But you wouldn't say good riddance to the tax dollars that money provided. In fact, if a significant amount of wealthier people did this, liberals would just riot in the streets. If more companies moved offshore because companies were prevented from moving manufacturing or distribution facilities to where they deem necessary, liberals would just riot in the streets. There'd be nowhere left to go. There'd be nobody else's money to take. I guess the next thing liberals would go for would be hunting down CEO's and other rich people if they hadn't already left the country and putting them in jail for life (yea, that will show them!). You see, rather than just try and make government be as small as possible while still providing essential services, make them spend the money wisely, live within our means, and let EVERYONE keep as much of their earned dollars as possible (we have a graduated system in place already), they'd rather run around threatening people that if they don't pay up, "they're coming for them" (you've seen this on this blog and on DK), and potential bloody revolution if they don't get their way. And by the way, if you had put in the years of education, work, and experience, and been responsible for profitability and well being of a multi-billion dollar company, you might very well change your mind on how much you thought you were worth. Me personally, I'd tie my pay to the company's long term performance, not quarter to quarter, but over the long haul, I'd get rich if I made the company and its employees better off.
I'm not sure you understand politics...Lobbyists lobby for everyone because Congressmen simply do not have the time to be well-informed on all issues. Therefore, they rely on lobbyists to inform them. Everyone has lobbyists, including the American Cancer Society, Humane Society, etc.
As for corporations not being allowed to influence politics...why? The truth of the matter is that when corporations grow and succeed, everyone benefits. Everyone. The entire economy grows, and the standard of living for everyone is increased. Therefore, it is in our best interest to help corporations.
Ending the wars is simply irresponsible for our own safety and the safety of those in the Middle East. If we were to withdraw today, a power vacuum would exist and vicious civil warfare would break out. That doesn't sound peaceful to me.
The2percent wrote: The truth of the matter is that when corporations grow and succeed, everyone benefits. Everyone.END---------
As soon as those corporations do not support each human working for them, and their need for clean air, you are wrong. And you didn't even try to drink the water.
Concentrations of wealth have more and better lobbyists, so it is not a level playing field.
Not all corporations are created equal. Which corporations succeed and how they succeed matters, which is an aspect of governmental regulation of the marketplace. It is like owning dogs -- you want well-trained friendly dogs, not ones that chew up your belongings and bite your family members. What kind of corporations do we have now? And when you have a dog the size of "Clifford" and mean and narrowly selfish, then you are in big trouble, and need a really big government to deal with it.
Considering how many people have been killed, injured, and dislocated in the US war (millions), and how the US presence continues to inflame antagonisms and create new terrorists, it is hard to argue that staying is really for the best. I'm not saying your point about power vacuums is completely untrue, but overall, it will be painful however unwinding that disatser is done. The most ethical thing might be to pay trillions of dollars in reparations, and perhaps invite in the UN peacekeeper, since the USA invaded a sovereign country (Iraq) under false pretenses (WMDs that did not exist) or even invaded Afghanistan when the Taliban had offered to turn over Osama bin Laden.
The central problem here is that "War is a Racket" according to Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Recipient Major General Smedley D. Butler, USMC: http://lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm "WAR is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes. ..."
How much of the 1% is tied to the "war racket"?
Corporations are not people.
It's We The People, not We The Corporations.
Corporations are not people but and I agree with most of what you say but I have no problem with tax breaks for big corporations.
They provide millions of jobs, often very good jobs with benefits, to Americans. They also give shareholders, which includes most of middle class America, a continued source of dividend income and equity growth. Yes, the CEOs make way too much but when a company gets Billions of dollars in tax breaks (ie GE), only a small percentage of that actually goes to the executives (Immelt make $14.2M in 2007). Those billions eventually go the workers, R&D, and shareholders.
I guess I work for local companies and myself, so not only do I like the idea of states rights, but I like the idea of local business and being able to have a market anyone can compete in. Big corporations kill local business.
I'm sick of seeing fucking Wal-Marts with a CVS across the street and a Super target down the road.
Not that I'm saying I want to shut down these companies, because I have no right to say such a thing... I just don't buy from them. My only guilty pleasure is Best Buy... but that's because there are no locally owned electronic stores where I can buy a PS3.
I do support national businesses in a sense, because many are necessary to provide mass quantities of products for our exponentially growing population. I just think billion dollar companies don't deserve tax breaks before the people.
Nothing wrong with that. Think of all the people who need WalMart though because they wouldn't be able to afford everything on their weekly shopping list going to mom and pop shops.
And I agree with the states rights. The US is way to diverse to have one federal tax code work for everyone. The more that can be done at the state level in the way of services and taxes (as opposed to the feds) the better.
TrevorMnemonic wrote: Solution: Throw the lobbyists out of our government and end corporate personhood.-----
Love the sentiment, but that is not a solution. That is an action we do not currently have authority to do. FAIL. Action to gain the authority by invoking an Article V convention will open that action to being solution.
Cool. instead of being a complete asshole you should have said that's what you meant.
I did mention the Banking Act of 1933, but I'm sure you'll just be a dick and find another way to try and dog on me for no apparent reason.
i could also tell you that corporations earned the rights of a person based on the 14th amendment which was originated mainly to give black people rights.
I could also refer to a web page I've assembed over the last 8 years that finally has all of the legal history surrounding the entire problem which basically begins with the civil war. http://algoxy.com/poly/emergency_powers_statutes.html
How legit is the source?
...
Okay, maybe you are not interested in solution, the nwo appreciates that.
What is your problem, guy? Be constructive with your feedback.
I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish right now because it seems to be filled with arrogance and bitterness towards me... I'm not sure why.
Because I said get rid of lobbyists instead of saying Article V?
You waste your words if they do not have the authority to accomplish what you suggest. Nice sentiment, love the intent. No teeth. Article V give it teeth. Why take offense so soon? Do you think that is functional?
Hmmmm... so outside of not saying Article V, do you have any other criticisms?
Honestly, I'd rather know more than less. I would just appreciate a little respect. You respect me and I'll respect you. No one likes arrogance except the arrogant person who loves the sound of their voice.
Also when you say Article V, what does that mean to you? Got to love google, it's free knowledge.
As I said. I love the spirit and the intent, uh the choice of words can be made to work against you/us. I point that out. The other criticism would be priority. "END CORPORATE PERSONHOOD END LOBBYISTS THAT ARE INFECTING OUR NATION WITH GREED END TAX BREAKS ON BILLION DOLLAR COMPANIES REINSTATE THE BANKING ACT OF 1933 AUDIT THE FED"-----
Logically, the 1st thing we need is the truth. Cannot make good decisions without it. Currently, if we have it, we cannot share it effectively. After we know each others opinion on what is seen as truth, then we need an election system with fidelity. At that point we must plug the drain on the economy that is so offensive to the planet, war. Oop's priority gets muddy here, we can't even be sure we can do that until we deal with the military industrial complex. We might have to formally end the civil war, . . . I'm serious. Okay then we get to corporations. There is a very good chance as soon as the defacto military government is removed (the corporations were illegally empowered by it) and a constitutional one is created, your issues may just go away on their own.------
Whereas, if we focus on your priorities, we end up confused without unity and any way to effect a change to the issues you present. Here is that page again. http://algoxy.com/poly/emergency_powers_statutes.html
I am always open to knowledge and opinions. I will be the first to admit that I am only 24 and I didn't really start paying attention to our government until I was 22. And very loosely before then back to when I was 18. You have to remember you guys in your 30's and 40's have years of life experience and paying attention on me.
Why do you think we're still in Iraq and Afghanistan?
I'm 58, I've been an activist since 1970. This seems to mean nothing in society generally, just that I'm too old to be social with 24 year olds. The middle east is a religious agenda.
poll http://blog.richardkentgates.com
/starts slow golf clap
Take your ron paul hate speech back to the tea party.
Oh, and because some people paid $250,000 in taxes...out of $600,000. That's almost half. Now unless you made only $10,000 last year, you are a free loader.
LULZ I didn't receive any money that I didn't work for. So I am therefore free loading on nothing.
I am not talking about people who make 600,000 dollars nor am I talking about taxing people at all.
So everything you said is out of context.
While not technically free loading, you share much less the burden.
If a rich person want to pay zero taxes, I more than welcome them to make less than 20 grand a year.
Mark Cuban said it best, "What a great problem to have..... and your 3rd thought should be a recognition that in paying your taxes, you are helping to support millions of Americans..."
It's nt a burden for billionaires who can barely feel the affects...but for the 'top 2%' who make $200,000 a year and still contribute the same percentage of taxes, it is very difficult.
I could only imagine how hard you must struggle only making more than triple my wages, AFTER your taxes.
"Stop whining."
I never mentioned anything about YOUR tax rates. I am not for higher taxes on PEOPLE, unless it's in the millions... and even then I think there are other ways for the government to get money before raising taxes on people.
You are really good at spewing political rhetoric. I'm seriously impressed. You realize this is the liberal equivalent to the conservative that says, "ill tell you whats wrong with america, liberals are all lazy hippies"
Maybe you can actually contribute instead of spewing your arrogance.
I do. I am a contributing member of society. I help the economy run, and I represent the future of the economy and society as I will always pay my taxes and work my hardest.