Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Replace Capitalism, or Fix it?

Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 8, 2011, 2:05 a.m. EST by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The movement is torn: some argue that we need constitutional amendments to take the money out of politics, others argue that we should take money out of the entire equation; completely shifting paradigms.

What does Occupy Wall Street stand for? Do we believe in a more sustainable "resource based economy?" Do we believe that someone is going to erase the world's debt? (that's a ridiculous idea, it's never going to happen). Do we believe that our government is actually going to take money out of the political system?

Our entire economy is built on War. Our current economic system is unsustainable when you remove multinational corporate power from the equation. These multinational corporations are responsible for maintaining status-quo and they're not going to give it up!

60 Comments

60 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by RG32 (81) 13 years ago

Each person who supports the movement has their own views, and I think we need to respect all of them. We need to first draw attention to the issues, and then discuss potential solutions later on.

I will say that the far left wing liberals who want to destroy capitalism, in my opinion, have it wrong. Obama is a war criminal who should be impeached, for one (so who is going to lead?), and secondly, that type of movement could never garner a majority of U.S. citizens.

Without the consent of the majority, the destruction of capitalism as a policy is dead in the water, and justifiably so. I personally would like to give libertarian ideals a shot in this country and support Ron Paul. Obviously, others disagree, but I don't want to give more power to a corrupt government under the auspices that they will fix our problems.

End the Fed End the Wars End the Drug War End Too Big To Fail End Corporate influence in politics Repeal the Patriot Act

[-] 1 points by LeanneC (62) from Fremont, CA 13 years ago

Drawing attention to the issues without coming up with any solutions just ends up looking like a lot of complaining. I'm just pointing that out.

[-] 1 points by Idaltu (662) 13 years ago

Wall street is not just an issue for the USA. It controls the entire planet and all the governments. And you are right, they're not going to give it up. However, Wall Street depends on the credit system to maintain its existence. To make a change we first change how 'we' operate. It starts with cutting up our credit cards. To topple the Wall Street greed you have to get enough people around the planet to stop using their credit cards. Do this for a 24 hour period and you will get the attention of those in power. Do this once a month and you will topple Wall Street.

[-] 1 points by RAWright (35) 13 years ago

We believe in fixing capitalism but first we must understand the problems. Then we will be able to formulate adequate and reasonable solutions.

[-] 1 points by RAWright (35) 13 years ago

The movement is not torn it is evolving, thinking and debating what our situation is and should be. We will not give up. A new, progressive way of thinking is coming to light. Do not despair. Follow your inner voice and always act with compassion.

[-] 1 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 13 years ago

truth

[-] 1 points by Joerg (2) from Rösrath, Nordrhein-Westfalen 13 years ago

E. g. socialism as ot was is defenitely no solution. Globalisation as it is core problem because multinational companies are stronger than single governments. I think there are 2 ways of solving the issue: the first is to create a really democratic global organisation that is powerful enough to fight globalized companies (the UN is just a joke). Perhaps global trade unions. The other solution would be to make the global companies less powerful by splitting them up. Especially banks. And as a first action there has to be a global tax on stock transactions... Germany is still too well off so people are somehow indifferent. I hope this will change. GOOD LUCK AND SUCCESS! Jörg

[-] 1 points by Joerg (2) from Rösrath, Nordrhein-Westfalen 13 years ago

E. g. socialism as ot was is defenitely no solution. Globalisation as it is core problem because multinational companies are stronger than single governments. I think there are 2 ways of solving the issue: the first is to create a really democratic global organisation that is powerful enough to fight globalized companies (the UN is just a joke). Perhaps global trade unions. The other solution would be to make the global companies less powerful by splitting them up. Especially banks. And as a first action there has to be a global tax on stock transactions... Germany is still too well off so people are somehow indifferent. I hope this will change. GOOD LUCK AND SUCCESS! Jörg

[-] 1 points by wyrdup (3) 13 years ago

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."

-Abraham Lincoln

[-] 1 points by iseeamuse (155) 13 years ago

we should keep money. we should change paradigms. Change what money is based on (trust system, not sound system), and change the mode of enterprise (cooperative not corporate). Devolve government to the local levels, connected in a network. Create two markets, one shared (The Commons). The other traded (The Commodities). Invest in two kinds of credit unions (instead of banks). One containing the membership of the citizenry (Local Credit Unions). The other containing the membership of the professions (Professional Credit Unions). Both generate the same currency, with the value based on the the total movement of the work being done, and the value of the product. Instead of credited debt, or gold. Both of the Credit Union systems under the same regulatory umbrella, acting as moderator, accountant, and maintenance. Everything would be directly democratically decided. Supply and demand would be handled through an open source registry of demand and a open source registry of skills (sorta like craigslist). MOST IMPORTANTLY We need to decide what must be shared, and what can be traded.

[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 13 years ago

What part of "two individuals voluntarily exchanging goods and services for mutual benefit" should we fix or replace?

What we have now is not capitalism. What we have is corporatism.

[-] 1 points by iseeamuse (155) 13 years ago

There are things in this world that should not be "owned," or traded. We have no natural right to the earth or it's resources. It has a natural right for us, and we are subject to it. This should be addressed in our discussion/

[-] 1 points by tr289 (916) from Chicago, IL 13 years ago

Holy crap i just got Ron Paul bombed. I don't care about your economic views and I'm not going to debate economics. I'm just going to re post the only part of my comment i even remotely care to discuss or want heard.

" As for taking money out of the political system, It's very simple. Fund political campaigns with tax dollars and make private donations illegal. Lobbyists and special interest groups need to be completely removed from Washington and have 0 access to our politicians outside of an open public forum.

Do this and the people, citizens, of this country would be the ones that own and control our corrupt politicians."

[-] 1 points by liffrea (1) 13 years ago

tax dollars are involuntary 'private donations'... personally, I want to exercise my own choice when deciding which govt. representative to throw my mammon to.

[-] 1 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 13 years ago

haha, didnt mean to rock your world. i don't like to be challenged. to conclude: a resource-based economy will one day enlighten the populus. until then you are correct in your understanding of what needs to be done.

[-] 1 points by iseeamuse (155) 13 years ago

A resource-based economy disenfranchises the resource that we have no right to ownership over. Privately owning water, air, food, anything that occurs naturally is immoral, unsustainable, and will be our end.

[-] 1 points by tr289 (916) from Chicago, IL 13 years ago

listen, i don't talk about economics online because most people that do talk about them have no clue what they are talking about. Most can't even balance a check book. The ones that do know and understand economics, they know more about it then me.

[-] 1 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 13 years ago

truth...no worries. i'm just very competitive when it comes to debating

[-] 1 points by tr289 (916) from Chicago, IL 13 years ago

It's all good i can be at times also. I just wont debate something i don't fully understand. Doing so only makes you look foolish.

[-] 1 points by jart (1186) from New York, NY 13 years ago

How about we stomp out capitalism and replace it with the absence of capitalism.

[-] 1 points by Madhusudana (90) 13 years ago

We don't necessarily have to be concerned with all of that as THE priority.

What's far more important toward furthering our collective aim is that an open channel of discourse that has tangible results is opened- whatever form it may take.

[Deleted]

[-] 2 points by Justakid (40) from Villa Rica, GA 13 years ago

The global economy has accepted the current system. Why is it laughable that we would slowly accept another? Also, you're taking the term "resource economy" much too literally; it does not imply an isolationist economy. As you mentioned before, the term demands global acceptance, and so could not possibly be limited to one country's implementation alone. Which means that once other countries did accept it, especially if it were a success, it would help other countries with "little to no resources" get to the same point.

That's the brilliance behind the concept-- there is no incentive to keep the resource-less countries poor because the concept of scarcity is rendered obsolete.

[-] 1 points by tr289 (916) from Chicago, IL 13 years ago

Because any country with little or no resources would want to move to a resource based economy.

[-] 1 points by Justakid (40) from Villa Rica, GA 13 years ago

The resource based economy is a global economy. >.<

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 13 years ago

That's not a bad thing.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 13 years ago

We don't necessarily have to be a global economy. We have the resources and the technology to run that type of economy initially right here at home. I don't see how we can fix our system. People have been trying to for years, and now with our technological advances, we have the option of eliminating money and establishing a new system. The whole purpose of technology is to make our lives easier. We started by eliminating a lot of back breaking labor with machinery over 100 years ago and now we're to the point where a large chunk of our jobs can be automated, but yet we're now demanding that more jobs be created. That's insanity! I guess we haven't mentally adjusted to the idea yet. If we don't accept the fact that things are changing, then we will go down fighting for a lost cause.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201109/are-jobs-we-know-them-becoming-obsolete

[-] 1 points by piper22 (3) 13 years ago

Yes, but Germany tried to do this with regional trading blocs in the 1930s and look what happened. There must be a better way.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 13 years ago

We have more technology now and we are better educated.

[-] 1 points by piper22 (3) 13 years ago

The period between 1860 and 1930 saw some of the world's greatest technological improvements and strong increases in education as well.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 13 years ago

Yes, but it wasn't eliminating human labor in rapid numbers like it is now.

[-] 1 points by tr289 (916) from Chicago, IL 13 years ago

We are a global economy like it or not. That wont change... I actually wish i can take back my comment about the "resource based economy" because it totally overshadowed the part of my comment i wanted people to see.

I don't care to debate economics.

[-] 1 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 13 years ago

the entire basis behind the resource based economy is that we live in a global society with the technical capability to do whatever the fuck we want to do. don't take this personally, but you don't really understand a resource based economy is if you see it to be a laughable concept

[-] 1 points by tr289 (916) from Chicago, IL 13 years ago

Also, if all you took out of my comment was what i said about "resource based economy" ... You should read it again. That is not the important part of it.

[-] 1 points by tr289 (916) from Chicago, IL 13 years ago

I understand it very well. And do you really think that the rest of the world would go along with it ? Why bother fighting about something that is fantasy ? Why not try and come up with real solutions to real problems instead of creating more ?

[-] 2 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 13 years ago

this is not a fantasy. perhaps you understand a resource based economy; if that's the case then you don't understand the state of the current economy. the current economy is unsustainable. the current economy will not continue to function when entire countries default on their debt. reform is literally 30 years too late. we have far passed the point of no return. talk to any rational economist and he will tell you to head for the hills...this is not about fantasizing, it's about what to do when the great depression part 2 comes

[-] 1 points by Justakid (40) from Villa Rica, GA 13 years ago

The rest of the world goes along with the current system, which is based in artificially-created scarcity.Talk about creating more problems...I'd rather fight for a "fantasy" than to live a nightmare.

But I understand your point. We need to stick to an immediate goal of ows solidarity before splintering off ideologically.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 13 years ago

http://occupywallst.org/forum/are-jobs-as-we-know-them-becoming-obsolete/

Capitalism is the greatest system we've ever had, but we will have to replace it eventually.

[-] 1 points by GinaLola (210) 13 years ago

The easiest way to fix a broken bucket of capitalism is to fix the power of decision that drives it. We need to establish another Continental Congress, abolish the indirect voting by proxy that we have fallen in to and replace it with a we, the people, are the Congress of the United States. We need to take back all control, over every law and every dollar. we can vote by virtual Congress on the computer and through the mail, with a one month deadline on each vote. We will have all the laws that were established since the 1950, against our best interests, and vote to dismiss them. and we will take control of every single dollar this government spends on anything. We will investigate every living Congressman, and bring criminal and civil charges against all of those who committed treason against the people of the United states, along with their bed fellows in big Business.

[-] 1 points by Justakid (40) from Villa Rica, GA 13 years ago

I think our entire economy is built on global debt, not war. But I agree with what you're saying-- MNCs are given a global economy to play with because of our financial set up.

This is a bit beside the point for me, though. I think all ows supporters have one opinion in common: get money out of politics. We can only move forward with specific goals if we actually have a say in what's going on in our government. Now, I personally adhere to more of a resource-based economy ideal, but that is another movement for another day. This movement is about the people taking back control so they can decide collectively what is best.

That's my take on it, anyway-- fix the political system so we can have the power to replace/fix capitalism if we so choose.

[-] 2 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 13 years ago

truth. i think it would be an interesting non-violent strategy if the members of OW threatened to withdraw their personal funds from all financial institutions if there was not a sufficient amendment to the constitution to remove money from the political system

[-] 1 points by Justakid (40) from Villa Rica, GA 13 years ago

Interesting idea.

[-] 1 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 13 years ago

also, the economy is built on global debt accumulated a la the military-industrial complex.

[-] 1 points by Justakid (40) from Villa Rica, GA 13 years ago

No, global debt a la fiat currency. Fiat currency based on the US dollar has given other countries incentive to buy US currency (which is backless). The US then borrows its currency back in t-bond (loan) form at an incredibly low interest rate. The US then uses the loan to spend ridiculously on aforementioned military-industrial complex.

[-] 1 points by FUCKTHENWO (280) from RIVERDALE, MD 13 years ago

ah yes, the complexities of the best ponzi scheme ever schemed.

[-] 1 points by Justakid (40) from Villa Rica, GA 13 years ago

Sigh. D:

[-] 1 points by GeoffH (214) from Jacksonville, FL 13 years ago

Fix it... but the Financial War is going to be long and bloody. The Financial Revolution won't be pretty but, it is long overdue.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/what-it-all-means-and-how-we-can-fight-from-where-/

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

can't replace capitalism, since our system is corporate oligarchy not capitalism. The assorted things you listed are still in the adolesecent arena. real solutions are a lot more complicated and details and thought out than any of that. So whats needed is open source direct democracy working on those problems on a wiki and 1001 sub forums. Its been a week since i was promised sub forums and they ain't here yet. Thus- questions like these exist instead of you having that question answered inherently by the forum organization.

[-] 1 points by jart (1186) from New York, NY 13 years ago

You got something better. The new thread sorting. That'll hold you over till the categories are done.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

sorting what amounts to the garbage created because the organization does not exist is hardly something better. most of these threads wouldn't even be posted if people could easily have navigated to their subject matter. Hold me over? how long? because pretty much i keep telling myself i quit and then logging back in. sooner or later that won't happen. Same thing with a lot of other people. We need this emergency, now, immediately.( last week) Not modded out to peeps who may get back to us in 3 weeks. This is past super critical. You should be able to put in new sub forums in under two hours.

[-] 1 points by jart (1186) from New York, NY 13 years ago

two hours??