Forum Post: Idea for a possible general set of goals
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 11, 2011, 1:47 a.m. EST by ARod1993
(2420)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I-Addressing current and past Wall Street misbehavior: Civil suits by DOJ against all the main investment banks, criminal investigations against any and all higher-ups at these banks. Penalties to include confiscation of all assets, physical and otherwise.
II-Preventing further Wall Street misbehavior: Restoration of Depression-era bank legislation beginning with Glass-Steagall. Breaking up of all financial conglomerates; each division becomes an independent company with a new CEO, directors, etc. Compensation limits on financial higher-ups, including the end of golden parachutes Federal regulation of the derivatives market, either ban CDOs outright or subject them to special scrutiny Expand fraud legislation to include conflicts of interest; no more short-selling someone whom you're financing or advising, no more staple financing or similar practices Full disclosure of asset portfolios to federal regulators, regulators to retain independent analysts to rate portfolio elements and assign value to overall portfolio Leveraging regulations; the ratio of exotic assets (including but not limited to CDOs) to hard cash capped at 5 to 1 Redesignate PACs, political organizations, etc. as for-profit corproations and regulate them as such Eliminate the 501(c) designation and redesignate its current members to for-profit institutions
III-Tax reform Uncap the FICA; all income subject to Social Security and Medicare taxation, not just the first $106,000. New income tax brackets starting at $250,000 annual income, $500,000 annual income, and $1,000,000 annual income, taxed at 45%, 55%, and 65% respectively. Restore the estate tax for all estates/trust funds/portfolios over $1 million in value and set it to 70% Set tariffs on all imported goods in order to give companies an impetus to begin manufacturing in America.
IV-Mortgage relief: Funds obtained through procedures outlined in Section I against financial conglomerates used to take all struggling mortgages out of the hands of the banks. Fannie and Freddie unwound and replaced by a new government loan/mortgage agency with entirely new staff The new agency takes struggling mortgages and refinances them in such a manner that homeowners can reasonably expect to pay the balances on time. In cases where that is clearly not possible (i.e. both adults in household unemployed), the agency forgives the mortgage.
V-Student loan relief: Same process for student loans as for mortgages In order to attract talent to the federal government, set up a sponsorship program: high-performing students in qualifying programs of study will have their education paid for by Uncle Sam in return for five years' service in the government agency corresponding to their area of study (i.e. economics and finance majors would do their time in the Fed or in financial regulatory agencies)
VI-Unemployment relief: Use the funds garnered through tax reform as per Section III to begin actual projects that put people to work No disbursement of the money to states, all relief-eligible projects to be initiated and overseen at the federal level All parts for infrastructure projects to be obtained in America (i.e. a bridge replacement would only purchase steel manufactured in a plant in America) Project staff (excluding federal overseers) to be exclusively hired from the unemployed (where it is possible to find unemployed people with the necessary qualifications), all the way from the construction worker to the project manager.
I know that this is probably not complete nor far-reaching enough in terms of scope, but what do people think about setting these inital goals and seeing what happens?
You're still promoting a set of principles, which though I agree with personally, will not resonate as effectively thoughout the movement as a whole as the simple message of reforming our elections and lobbying...
http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-central-message-we-need/
It isn't the longest term plan, but it is something that all of the groups, ideologies and factions of our movement can get behind and if we can achieve this one thing, all of our specific respective ideas will have the opportunity to be battled out and argued and debated over in a clean government which reflects the true mass will of the people.
I believe for the time being its too far reaching and too specific. This is a list of goals only a select portion of the movements' whole can adopt. Much of these proposals would be hotly contested by factions and elements within the movement and while I do believe these are issues that should be discussed, debated, argued and voted upon at some point, this movement is still in its infancy, and should it wish to affect any real change, it would be best for it to start by striving for and achieving one big particular goal collectively.
Thus do I propose campaign finance and lobbying reform as just such an issue. Whether you are a Ron Paul libertarian, a marxist, socialist, anarchist, constitutionalist...the question of elimination of the private money chase game in our elections and legislative efforts is one which almost unanimously receives support and recognition.
So lets clean up our government first so that down the road we can battle it out over our differing and specific views in an environment where our voices matter more than those who can simply buy the influence they want.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-central-message-we-need/
All those of you who camp out in the wind and rain and cold...you are heroes. Lets keep showing the pundits and naysayers that we are not just a flash in the pan. We will remain, we will occupy this city!!! I think we should make a request to the media and general public, that they put up information (phone numbers, emails, addresses, form letters, petitions and websites) of our local/regional elected officials and publish that we are asking for specific reforms regarding the creation of an equitable tax structure, anti corruption laws and corporate regulation. If we have specific demands attached with specific instructions on how members of the general public can get involved in this process (even from home...without coming down and protesting, which is honestly what most of the 99% will be willing to do).We need to be the change that we would like to see in the world, and we need to remind the public sitting at home, of this notion. If we outline some very specific, yet broadly inclusive actions (by this i mean, no "radical" demands for abolishing the DEA or saving the whales....or whatever other causes may also seem important to many of the factions within our movement. We need to reform our nation one thing at a time...one by one, checking things off our list of grievances and then moving on to our next demand. To do this most effectively we should start with demands that include the most members of our movement as possible...ie; something to address the Wealth Gap, Corporate Accountability or Tax reform. Once one demand has been met we will have far more credibility in the eyes of the public, not to mention in the eyes of the 1% and we will make some tangible progress, while building exponential momentum. ), we will make real progress. We will have people willing to be arrested en mass and engage in civil disobedience in an entirely new and even bigger way than they are currently) I think the sooner we have some basic demands and calls to action (like the facebook organized plan to switch enrollment from the "big banks" and to join a local credit union this week) then the larger this movement will get. people are simply apathetic and overwhelmed as a whole. We need to empower the 99% and create an outline for real, measurable, social change. I am willing to participate in any peaceful civil disobedience for this purpose and would love to see others give me some input on this idea. Give the occupiers a productive reason to get arrested hehe. If you agree with my ideas, please try and suggest this course of action to others so we can discus it at the GA soon. Thanks for listening, Alex
We should not be looking for a bail out - IV, V, and VI are going to cost tremendous sums of money and where is that money supposed to come from? China? US debt has already surpassed US GDP at $14.5 trillion.
What we should be demanding is a representative, functioning democracy as envisioned by the founding fathers and the constitution as well as an end to tax loopholes and special treatment for Big Businesses. In short, Campaign Finance Reform and a reinstatement of the Glass-Steagall Act in order to prevent such an economic catastrophe from happening again.
Then do I, II, and III first; I never said a word against campaign finance reform and Glass-Steagall and I do in fact believe that these two things will prevent crises in the future. However, there is still the matter of picking up the pieces of the crisis that happened now. IV, V, and VI will all be very expensive, but they were a major part in what saved us the last time this happened.
To get the economy and the country running again we're going to need to build a strong working and middle class, and the way to do that is to bring manufacturing jobs back here and/or expand technology into a sector that can provide quality jobs for a large number of people, but that will take time. In the meantime we need some kind of kick to get people at work and spending and productivity growing again, and that is what IV, V, and especially VI are for.
Identify and expose who the bad guys are. Individuals, names, etc. That is a start. I don't know if it is possible to expect compassion from psychos, but at least us telling them we know who they are could scare them into doing something merciful for us other 99%. So, who exactly are this 1% that is causing us all the grief?
The 1% is a symbolic number, and I don't think you're going to be able to get a list of everyone involved in creating this mess. That said, if you look at the upper echelons of pretty much all the financial conglomerates you'll get a pretty good look at the people directly responsible for the current crisis.
If you're speaking more generally about how we wound up where we are, thank Ronald Reagan, Milton Friedman, and Allen Greenspan to begin with, for it was the financial and general corporate deregulation they promulgated that in large part made this mess possible.
The Solution can be found in a man of unwaivering consistency for over 30 years!
http://youtu.be/BeHHq8s6V7U
Possibly but not necessarily; while I do agree with Ron Paul on a number of things I'd be loath to endorse all of his views simply because I believe in policies rather than people. If Ron Paul is willing to take the steps I outlined above and deal with campaign and lobbying reform as outlined here: http://occupywallst.org/forum/do-counter-arguments-for-focusing-first-on-campaig/ then by all means I'll vote for him. Otherwise, you're out of luck.
End the wars
Easier said than done. Iraq already is being wound down (thank God for that) and I want to see us finish it as soon as possible but Afghanistan is still highly unstable. I don't know how to get us out of there successfully but I don't know how risky walking away is either.
is the fear rooted in the idea that the women are oppressed in Afghanistan?
Partially, yes; the situation in Afghanistan right now is ripe for human rights abuses. The country is still mostly tribal and incredibly conservative, and we have failed to deal with local warlords aggressively enough to remove them from power. If we leave now then those parts of the country we have made better will most likely revert to what they were, and that is NOT a pretty picture.
The other thing is that because of the continued presence of the drug lords and Islamic militants, if we walk away while the Taliban has any support, either from the warlords or the people, ten to one it'll spring back up stronger than ever the moment we leave.
if we keep fighting these "war lords", they will keep fighting back
it seems if we were to get popular support from the afghan people, it already would have happened
You're probably right, and we might do better if we walked away from Afghanistan for a decade or so and then if necessary came back Marshall Plan-style when the country has had time to heal. That would also give us time to get our own house in order.
I agree with these items, especially because they address specific ways to fix the issues first stated in the list of demands a couple weeks ago. The "revolving door" of regulations officials, to corporate positions has to be addressed, if we are to enforce the importance of improving environmental conditions. The cost effectiveness of pollution, toxic waste, and hazardous chemicals vs. the fines and chances of getting caught for these practices, needs to force corporations to invest in ethical ecological practices of production. It is not enough to simply have tax breaks in place for environmentally sustainable efforts. This will be a huge sacrifice to our way of life as consumers, but the repercussions otherwise will cripple this planet exponentially, until even the wealthiest 1% can't even afford the treatments necessary to sustain life's symptoms of the disease of our "bottom line" model for corporate trades.
In short, corporations' pollution cannot be an externality for humanity to absorb.
What good will any of that do if we don't first remove the money from Washington ? We can pass all the bills and laws we want. If we don't first remove the ability of the rich to buy and own our government... They will just throw piles of money at our politicians and get all the changes we made undone.
You're right; I forgot to list lobby reform in there. How about this, then:
-Ban all campaign contributions by corporations, for-profit or otherwise -Ban group contributions in general -Cap donations by individuals at $500 per candidate -Personal and family wealth disallowed: you may "donate" up to $500 to yourself and each family member over 18 may donate up to $500 to you, but other than that nothing. -Cap total donations at $100 million -Provide a base public fund to each candidate to work from
If you allow donations of any kind you open the door to more of the same. You know that some one will find a loophole that will allow the rich to throw piles of money at our politicians. I want a government of the people, one where the beggar in the street with not a penny in his pocket has the same power and say as the richest man in this country.
Fund political campaigns with Tax dollars.
Remove special interest groups and Lobbyists from Washington. Special interest groups can have no contact with our politicians outside of an (( open public forum )) .
Make all donations to our politicians illegal. And i mean all and from every one !
Do those 3 things and we will be the ones to own and control our greedy politicians.
I agree with Point 1 (that was my baseline fund comment) and Point 2, but I'm not sure about Point 3 because I don't know whether we want the government to absorb the entire cost of funding around 900 campaigns every two to four years. The $500 limit prevents utterly egregious tipping of the scale, and if you require an SSN and employer info to donate money it should make it fairly easy to track and prevent donation fraud.
. #2 Doesn't step on corporate or special interest groups right's to have a voice. They need to have a voice and need to be heard. What they don't need is special accesses to our politicians. They don't need to meet with them behind closed doors where the back room deals are done. They can say what they need to say in front of all of us.
3 Our politicians are not for sale. When you allow donations, even $1 donations you are taking the voice and power away from the person that doesn't have $1. Donations of any kind just open the door to greed and corruption, something we have to much of in this country.
Hell, I have no problem with requiring all meetings with lobbyists being "on the record" with written transcripts and possibly streaming video whenever such a meeting occurs. I also would like people (and whoever else wants to speak) to register to do so before hand (once again with an SSN, employer, and job title, the last one so that an advocate or lobbyist must make known what he is before speaking) so that we all can have access. That said, I still don't quite like the idea of making the government pay for all of campaigns because of the burden it creates on taxpayers. I still feel that the donation criteria in my point above should be enough to minimize both corruption and election costs to the taxpayer.
the part about funding the political campaigns with Tax dollars. some others have said the same thing...
My responce is, If were not willing to spend a little of the nations wealth to ensure our government is free of greed and corruption. We deserve to be exactly where we are now.
Fair enough; your goal sounds like where this country eventually belongs. I do feel, however, that it's easier to gradually strangle something as pervasive as campaign finance corruption than to try to shut it off at once. I'd therefore argue that we start by imposing my criteria, then give it an election cycle to see what happens, and then move from that point to what you suggest doing.
The reason I suggest this is what you suggest is very easy to promise during a campaign and almost impossible to implement at once given the current state of our government. My proposal is more likely to get through DC relatively unscathed, and then once people adjust to the reality of limited campaign donations your proposal will most likely follow of its own accord.
" The reason I suggest this is what you suggest is very easy to promise during a campaign and almost impossible to implement at once given the current state of our government. "
That's where people get confused about the OWS movement. We don't care much what our politicians say do or think. They will do what we tell them to do. This isn't about politics or campaigns or left or right. We are taking control because the spoiled brats in Washington obviously can't do the job.
Ever notice how their are no political candidate sings at the protests ?
I'm no friend of our current crop of politicians either, and yes; if they're scared enough of how we'll vote then all the donations in the world won't sway them. The problem is that we still have to either demand reform for the ones we have now or put forth some sort of a slate for 2012 or both if we want our ideas to matter. Incidentally, I really miss the idea of having each candidate put forth a written platform addressing his or her views on the real issues and preferred policy choices based on those issues. I completely agree with you about the end of private campaign finance being a great thing for America, but getting it through in that form is gonna be one hell of a fight. Getting it through in the manner that I suggested would be no picnic either, but it would be more likely to go through that way.
You keep going back to the broken system thing. We know it's broken and voting, campaign promises, political rhetoric is not going to change that . That's why we are ignoring them and our politicians and the MSM. We will fix our government and if the politicians , MSM or corporate elite don't like it. To damn bad. lol
Except that voting coupled with what we're doing now CAN work. If we make a strong unified showing in 2012 we can scare the fools in DC into listening to us, but only for a few things at a time. Yes, the OWS movement as it is now is a vital part of fixing the country, but at some point change and reform have to go through the existing governmental structure if you want them passed into law.
Now, you may argue that passage of such things doesn't matter as long as our presence is strong enough that politicians do as we ask. The reason passing this into law matters is because nations forget. We won't, and our children most likely won't, but what about their children? Maybe it's the engineer in me talking, but I feel like the only way to ensure the permanence of change is by writing it into the law.
hehe, you are almost getting it... The political process does not matter. It's broken. Our politicians can not even be trusted to write the laws or bills that we will make them sign. They can just leave. They are no longer needed, we will sing them into law if need be.
What exactly do you mean, "we will sign them into law"? To do that we have to get our asses to Congress. To have much of a shot at getting our asses to Congress we need campaign finance reform. To get campaign finance reform we have to be very large, very strident, and only so controversial. What I suggested could probably pass if this movement gets big enough, and then once our people are in office we could do away with donations altogether.
We will sign them into law, maybe a bad choice of words. It's 4AM here in Chicago and my brain is shutting down. lol
I guess a better way to say it is that our politicians will do what the OWS movement tells them to do. If they don't we will continue to protest and grow in numbers. If that doesn't work ... I don't know whats next but i do know most of the people supporting the OWS movement are totally fed up with our government and willing to do what ever it takes to change it.