Forum Post: im just wondering
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 10, 2011, 12:56 a.m. EST by Thewholetruth
(2)
from Fort Lauderdale, FL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Why is it necessarily wall street's fault for taking jobs from americans? For instance, manufacturing and other jobs have gone to China & poorer nations for cheaper labor, could it be that all we have to do is demand that China raise its currency from how they artificially kept it low, and so then we Americans would have more manufacturing jobs because labor would be comparable with China's cost of labor?
USA's financial sector is a tremendous source of jobs along with health care small businesses, why are you trying to hurt a major revenue maker for america? what is the exact purpose here? Creating a voice for the people as a whole compared to individual corporations?
wall street is failing to support new businesses that would employ the people
If you found out your neighbor's child worked in an ipod factory for 1 dollar a week would you give them some money?
Ultimately you wouldn't want anyone to have to work in a child slave labor camp ANYWHERE in the world for their to be a REAL sustainable World Economy. We know the system is rigged. So if it's collapsing it is by design. They want to force us into war with China. That is the goal. DEMAND PEACE. Peace is Prosperity.
Derivative trading creating a toxic economy. Derivative trading derived in Wall St.
I had another thought: Essentially what occupy wall street is trying to accomplish is changing the entire "american dream" because if you are trying to limit the top position someone can gain, what is there to strive for if you actually cannot be the best?isnt what OWS is essentially saying is that socialism is inevitably better than anything else?
Who's trying to do that? I would just prefer to limit what someone who has attained "top position" can do to me without my consent.
You give your consent when you take the job... If you don't have a job, then exactly to whom are you giving (or not giving) consent?
I do not give my consent to be sexual assaulted or harassed or imprisoned or to not be paid. Are you implying that I transfer my Constitution and human rights to my employer by accepting payment for my services? For the record I'm successfully self employed precisely because I do not wish to consent to the unreasonableness of many employers. But that doesn't prevent governments, corporations, and wealthy individuals from usurping my freedoms anyway.
Ummmm, I'm pretty sure labor laws (and a host of other laws) protect workers from sexual assault, imprisonment, and slavery here in the US... Yeah - as a business owner, I'm very certain I can't do any of those things to my employees without legal repercussions.
So, since you are probably speaking tongue in cheek, I would be interested to hear more by what you mean when you say, "I would just prefer to limit what someone who has attained "top position" can do to me without my consent."
What are those "top position" people doing to you without your consent? My assumption was that you didn't like them dictating pay and benefits -- nothing to do with constitutional rights - so maybe I just didn't get where you were going there. Let's try again.
Let me clear this up for you since you are asking me personally: I would prefer to limit "their" ability to expropriate my property, limit my free enterprise, poison my water, land, food and air. I would like limits on "their" ability to convert our shared environmental and economic resources irrevocably into private wealth (read poisonous cheap plastic crap) without compensation or consent from me. Additionally those labor laws are exactly the kind of limits I like, if you can't compete without f*ing your employees them I'm glad when intelligent regulation puts you out of business and creates opportunities for better competitors to emerge. The problem in this country is that we heavily subsidize environmentally destructive and noncompetitive industries solely because they managed to amass too much influence in a flawed system.
Thanks dank - I see your position now. All valid and fair points. I would like to see the government stop subsidizing corn and sugar farmers and allow those industries to redevelop for our food instead of producing useless ethanol and importing our sugar... I think you see crony capitalism in corporations as the bigger problem (and I agree it is a problem) and I see crony capitalism in government as the bigger problem. Who knows - maybe someday we can all come together and attack the root fo the problem from both sides - corporate and political corruption.
Its a corporatist government, they're the same problem. The only people who get confused about this are us the 99%..
If you lean to the right and you're inclined to look for a scapegoat for your problems then you're likely to blame the government. If you lean to the right and you're similarly inclined, then you're likely to blame Wall Street. The commonality is blaming somebody else for your problems instead of yourself.
I can't speak for anyone but myself, of course, but my opinion on why Wall Street has been made a target is this:
We spent seven-hundred billion dollars in order to restore the financial sector to normalcy, whereas no comparable (or, rather, comparably successful) effort has been made on behalf of the average working American. Further, while it is common knowledge that the financial industry engaged in reprehensibly irresponsible behavior leading up to the current crisis, they have been all but absolved of their crimes while American individuals continue to struggle under the weight of this crisis's fallout.