Forum Post: this is not the time to freak out.
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 17, 2011, 2:28 p.m. EST by vothmr
(82)
from Harrisonburg, VA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
From what i can tell, this movement is simply a bunch of people who got screwed by capitalism. It happens, that's the nature of the system. socialization of private services has never worked. the point of the system is to make money. the "1%" just figured out how to do it before you. part of the glory of capitalism is that people can go from nothing and become super wealthy. The economic problems we are having are just part of the NATURAL BUSINESS cycle. there is no reason to completely redo the entire system. It works, you just have to work with it.
I like the effort but I think you have to redirect it to all the sell out politicians ( senators & congressman's )There is where the problem lies in the United Corporations of America.( not States ) They are the ones that set policies that make it easy for these companies to have there products made abroad and of the all the jobs that go with. It doesn't matter who is President. ( Dem. or Rep. ) His hands are tide. The senate and congress has all the power. Hit all there office locations. ( these jerk off politicians ) A lot of bullshit promises. Find out where they live. Make there lives on unbearable. Put the pressure on them. For me the intentions are good but you have to go to the source. The Government is letting this economy go south. They are contradicting themselves " we want to create jobs and stimulate the economy " really? Then stop letting these companies run this country. Send the message to these fake politicians through the U.S. Get on there asses. Make them seat no matter where there go. Don't stop there, pay a visit to the CEO's. That my friends will make for some good news watching. Enough said.
If you have that kind of drive to make a difference then absolutely go for it. You can make a difference if you have the commitment. My biggest point was saying that shifting our economy to socialism is definitely not the answer... nor will it ever happen anyway.
that is on fact the exact opposite of the right answer. it would make everything worse. capitalism will win in the end. and with it will come good for most and bad for a few
If everything you say is true, then it proves that the system as it is today does not work for most people. That's enough reason to scrap or drastically reform it.
Your chances of joining the 1%, once you figure out who they are, are about as good as mine--nil.
First, the 1% are not people making six or even seven-figure incomes. That can be done by working. The 1% make most of their money from money, not from work. Most of the time, if you try to get into that game, they will eat your lunch.
Second, where you come from, where you went to school, your ruthlessness, your charming exterior, and your indefinable talent and single-mindedness for making money are what will make you money. Hard work is for the rest of us.
That would be and is all fine with me. The problem is that they aren't paying the piper who played the music for their dance--us. Without our contributions, they are worthless. There used to be a give-and-take in the form of a progressive tax rate structure.
Furthermore, we live in exceptional times on the heels of rampant mindless ideologically driven deregulation of finance and two colossally mismanaged wars of choice, and a functionally useless government in Washington DC. We are in a perfect storm. I can safely predict that you will never be rich like the 1%, nor will anybody you know. If you were rich or on your way there, you wouldn't be here now.
vothmr, you would benefit from heeding this information. If simply voting changed anything substantive, we wouldn't be where we are now. In the two party rope-a-dope, your choices are often only between Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dumber. Both parties are owned by the corporatists.
thats due to our electoral system. Duverger's law states that in a single member district plurality voting system (such as we have), it is the natural tendency for two catch-all parties to form. if you want more parties that are more proportional then the electoral system should be changed to a proportional representation system. whoever the founding fathers didn't want this because of mob rule.
Following elections since the late 60s, I can't recall one not followed by a couple of months of people trashing the electoral college and then moving on. Personally I favor the Parliamentary system. Just recently the Brits were forced into a coalition between the right and the left. In our wildest dreams we couldn't concoct a more healthy scenario for this country.
"the electoral system should be changed to a proportional representation system"
That might be helpful. But then we might need to worry about "mob rule" of the sort that afflicts other countries, such as the English parlimentary system.
and that's exactly why we have the system we do now. to prevent mob rule. you can't have cake and eat it too, either mob rule with PR or a two party system with single member district/plurality.
Ding! Ding! Ding!
That should be the sound of your irony detector going off.
if you dissolve the two parties that you say are corrupt then you will dissolve the nation into mob rule and we are worse off then we were before
ok first off this is about fiscal and monetary policy not the wars. secondly, that is a very Marxist ideal, that the workers should be the ones in power and not the capitalists ("1%"). Karl Marx was an incredibly intelligent man BUT history has proven him to be wrong. without the capitalists at the top, you would have no jobs at all. without their contributions, your work is worthless. i am most definitely not in the 1%, neither is my family, i am a poor as shit college student.
All economies concentrate wealth, that's just how nature works, this is true in EVERY society ever since the stone age. there is nothing wrong with the system, if you work it then you will be absolutely fine. taking the money away from those who have earned it is not the answer, it only removes the incentive to work harder. the solution to this inequality is to make money from your money, work for it, invest it, make profit. then everything will be fine. don't screw the people who make the most just because they have figured out how to work the system.
Monetary policy and the two ongoing wars are inextricably linked. Most of the US debt right now is the bill for those wars. The bill is being paid on the backs of our most vulnerable citizens, including our new college grads. My first two semesters of college at UC Berkeley in 1961 cost my family $176. That's how a country is supposed to work. Those were also, you may recall, our most prosperous years, thanks in part to the GI Bill. It's all related.
most countries that had those systems, i.e. england, germany etc. have started to charge their citizens for college because welfare programs like that are simply to expensive. most US debt was not created in the wars. we have been spending up the debt since the end of the second world war. its not obamas or bushes or clintons. socializing things that are private right now will only make this country worse and put a huge burden on the government, which in tern you pay for. so either pay for it your self or have the gov take your money and pay for it for you. either way, there is no free lunch. if you want it, your going to pay for it
It doesn't matter which "ism" you employ, it's how you execute it. Today the federal government and the financial sectors are more corrupt and dysfunctional than any time in living memory.
If you accept today's state of affairs as normal and acceptable and extrapolate into the future, you end up with something resembling Zimbabwe or Afghanistan or Somalia or the Soviet Union in its last days. You have a large majority of the population with no stake in the system and nothing to lose, and no reason to behave well, and warring factions ruling regions.
that's a huge overstatement of the facts. there is corruption now and there always has been. none of those countries that you said were ever successful. they have always been failed states or approaching failed states. the reason that a large majority of the population doesn't have a say is because we have an abysmal voter turn out rate. if people got off their asses and voiced their opinions in the polls then the nation would become what they want. the problem is that people just don't care. the government is not corrupt. the same people keep getting voted in because only the same segment of the population actually votes for them. you have a major fallacy in your argument, dislike of the political system does not lead to warring factions. that situation that you just described will NEVER occur in the US, EVER. period
I don't know your age, but I do know that you seem, like many, to be viewing events from a limited historical perspective. Since both parties are equally corrupt, election results make no difference in outcomes. Therefore voter turnout is no longer the factor it used to be.
Since I became aware of events 45 years ago, the government has not been as corrupt and dysfunctional and useless as it is today. It was never perfect, but in the days when the parties nominated candidates in the back rooms, you didn't have the crippling polarization we see today. That system had its own problems, but nothing like we see today. Today the very legitimacy of the US government is questionable, certainly outside our borders, and increasingly within them.
Today instead of functioning parties we have every man for himself grubbing for money most of their time instead of doing the people's business.
The legislators go home on short breaks instead of living in DC, so they never get to know each other and form good working relationships.
Labor unions have been crushed, so there is no longer any popular presence or counterforce in the seats of power. There is nothing but bankers and a few NGOs.
My point in that post is that can all be changed by people becoming active in the political system. there are modes set up in parties for people to be heard but few take advantage of them because they are simply lazy. when people become active then things change, ala OWS. also, why should age have any effect on the validity of my argument? I am viewing this from a global historical perspective. remember the corruption in the 20's? the political parties are as polarized as they are now because thats what gets them elected. if being in the middle and cooperating is what got them they jobs then they would do that but the reason for this polarized system is that the candidates on the far right and far left are getting in their because the people who believe those things are the ones that go out and vote. if the middle got out and voted then the middle would be in power but generally speaking, the people in the middle are the most apathetic group of voters their is and just don't go out and use their voice.
Those who jeer at our efforts for economic equity will eventually become part of the movement. The reason is simple: the entire global economy is not sustainable. The raping of the world economy by the parasites of Wall Street will catch up to everyone; including the 1 %. Its not rocket science. When a parasite kills off the host the parasite also dies off
how is it not sustainable? i refer back to the image in the original post. as i read it and many other sources, capitalism has been working in one form or another for thousands of years, my point is that we are going through a small hiccup and it will be back on track in not to long
You've got it all wrong... The point is that the "NATURAL BUSINESS" cycle has been and is continually being corrupted by those who have BEEN GIVEN the right, by corrupt lawmakers, to WORK THE SYSTEM IN THEIR FAVOR. THAT IS AN UNACCEPTABLE "NATURAL BUSINESS" cycle.
did anyone you vote for get in office? if so then you are just as much as the perceived problem as all of those people that you say are corrupt. you probably gave them their jobs
No I did not. I voted for someone who was forced out of the race by the major media and corporations who hold this country hostage. Mike Gravel
SO A BIG N...O... to your question.
you voted for someone who didn't represent everyone. he was a highly polarizing figure. you preach equality for all but try to force your beliefs on others.
no one represented everyone you douchebag... and who the fuck are you talking about?! OBAMA?! I didn't vote for obama or mccain or any of the front runners. force your head OUT of your own ass
"He who knows not, and knows not that he knows not . . . . etc."
Much of what the financial industry now does was illegal in my lifetime. The Mafia have better business ethics.
name 5 things that they have done that is flat out illegal and have never been prosecuted for?
I said "was" not "is."
I'm not sure I feel like naming 5. And if I did, what will that prove to you? I suspect nothing. But here's some off the top of my head -
Searching my failing memory would provide plenty more, and a little simple research, tons.
The thing that amazes me most about people with your perspective is that when you look around, you see most people just struggling to get by, and their conditions getting worse, and a very few people who've benefited out of all proportion to their contribution. And you deduce from that, that you're going to get rich. It's a rigged game, son. You're just the hamster on the wheel.
you are not factoring in the peoples choice. they didn't have to take a single one of the credit card offers or anything like that. they chose to take out mortgages that they couldn't afford, take out loans they couldn't pay back. the responsibility lies as much with the people who let themselves get con'd. blame the people as much as the companies
The point is that all of these provisions were once prohibited because they were understood to be predatory. I don't think blaming the victims of these predations for being victims shows you in your best light. To suggest that desperate, private individuals, many with limited knowledge, are somehow in fair competition with corporations with near infinite resources and herds of attorneys is laughable.
did visa force you to sign that 30% credit card offer? were you somehow forced with a gun to your head to take a sub prime mortgage on that house you can't afford? did you really need that 70000000000 inch plasma tv when you struggle to pay rent? the fact of the matter is that people spent what they didn't have and it bit them in the but.
Natural business cycle? I graduated from a small private business school back in 1994. I was taught that natural ebbs in flows in the market are created by innovation, supply and demand along with other mitigating factors. What we are seeing today is anything but natural and is primarily a result of speculation, lobbying, false information and corruption.
I do agree that the protesters, the media and the powers that be need to remain calm. It would help out if all involved reported factual information instead of exaggerating or downplaying the events at hand. The market is unstable enough as it is...
it was not driven by corruption but by people seeking profit, as the system is designed to do. the problem was not only with companies but with utterly stupid people spending more than they could afford on houses. i don't think that government intervention into the market place with laws and regulations can help anything. greed is human nature. i garuntee that if any one of those people in zucotti park were making millions, that they would be advocating for massive change. also, where can i see a list of demands? i haven't been able to find one
Was the system "designed" or "natural"? You can't have it both ways.
See this is the problem with these sorts of critiques. Even if you accept all of the false premises they're built on, 100%, they still don't make sense because they're not even self-consistent.
As far as a list of demands, it took the revolutionaries who wrote the Declaration of Independance a few years to put one together. OWS has been around for 2-3 months. That being said they do have draft documents in the works, such as the 99% Declaration (try Google).
PS radical libertarianism and pure capitalism are not only not natural, they have never existed before. Guess what, we've always had taxes. For thousands of years. Cuckoo! Cuckoo!
yes we have paid taxes forever in a system DESIGNED to enable free market to not collapse. i never said there was pure capitalism or socialism. however there are natural times of decline and growth in the economy. read the wealth of nations, it clearly lays out the natural state of an economy at perfect liberty and it includes the place for the government. if you do nothing then capitalism will naturally emerge as people are wired to trade and accumulate wealth as much as possible.
Capitalism is more than just simple trade. Capitalism is based on particular laws, in particular those that govern just exactly what the "bundle of property rights" consists of. Human beings in primitive societies of course traded, and they even had an idea of notions like owning land contrary to popular belief - if one tribe encroached on another tribe's land, there would be trouble.
What they didn't have, and what defines capitalism, is a notion of owning something you aren't using, didn't produce, and may never even have seen. The idea that someone could demand money from another person to inhabit a place or use an object that the other person didn't make themselves, and hadn't ever seen or touched, was totally alien. There's nothing "natural" about this and people certainly aren't "wired" for it. They're wired for the idea that I made this, so it's mine. I possess this, so it's mine, and I can use it or sell it as I please. That isn't capitalism.
What capitalism is "designed" to do, is concentrate the ownership of capital into fewer and fewer hands through the profit mechanism and things like interest. Originally this was justified by economies of scale, as the industrial revolution began taking off - concentrate the capital and instead of, say, weavers working out of their own shop (who own their own capital, separately) you can bring workers under one roof in a textile mill, put the weavers out of business by the increased efficiency and lower cost, and now you'll have a new supply of labour, to build another mill and hire those freshly unemployed weavers and make a profit from their work, since they don't own any capital anymore and have to work for someone else to make a living.
As far as Wealth of Nations, I have read it. I suggest you try this passage:
The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable.
It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
Nope. Not buying it. Both Adams and Jefferson clearly stated that when the government is no longer of the people, by the people, and for the people... it should be resisted by all means necessary including a popular Revolution. And this, my friend, is the beginning of the NEXT Revolution. And it is time to clean the slate and start over again with representatives who adhere to the original Constitution-- and not the bastardized, ear-marked trash we live by today.
Hear, hear!
According to our nation's own foundational text: “... when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government..."
Bingo. And tell vothmr (below) that he can kiss my arse.
Most of the "Americans" were opposed to the Revolution. It took a few (aka the wealthy) to muster the troops and throw Britan back across the sea. This country was founded by the 1%. George Washington and the founders, for the most part, were very wealthy men. You guys crack me up.
Wrong. The percent of loyalists during the revolution was estimated to be between 15 and 20 percent. Most of the Americans were for the revolution.
Thoes were the estimated out spoken "Loyalists" who actually fought with the British. Not the number of people who were actually for fighting against the most powerful army on Earth. MOST colonists were British and they were happy with that. History lesson over, nothing more to say.
Okay. Let me specify. 40-45% of people in the American colonies were known to support the independence cause. 15-20% were Loyalists. The rest were either undecided or kept on a low profile.
Again, thanks you. Most were opposed. Thanks for googling.
And you believe that camping out in front of a building and complaining is going to accomplish this? i say to you no sir it will not. there is just no support for that kind of overthrow of the government. you have no way to overthrow anything other than vote the people out of office which i think is the way to get things done. spread your word, what ever it may be, and hope that the people that you perceive as causing the problems are removed from office. your not starting any revolutions, (especially violent because i have an sks with 1000 rounds of ammo that says you won't win). your never going to change the human nature of greed. That's the way we are programmed form birth. no one can change that.
I never advocated and never will advocate a violent "OVERTHROW" but rather a peaceful "OVERHAUL" of the system, as decided BY THE PEOPLE in a national referendum. Check your pocket dictionary if unsure of the difference between the two words.
As for your "sks with 1000 rounds of ammo"... do you know how many firearms there are in America? The latest estimate is : about 270,000,000. It's very easy to start shooting - the tricky part is knowing HOW TO STOP.
We would all be wise to remember the words of Jesus : "He who lives by the sword will perish by the sword".
That is what voting is for. If you want to OVERTHROW the government then pick up a frickin weapon and put your $ where your mouth is. If you want to OVERHAUL then get off the streets and meet with local reps to find a represenative you like and VOTE for them.
Can you read?
I wrote: "... a peaceful "OVERHAUL" of the system, as decided BY THE PEOPLE in a national referendum."
I never advocated and never will advocate a violent "OVERTHROW" but rather a peaceful "OVERHAUL" of the system, as decided BY THE PEOPLE in a national referendum. Check your pocket dictionary if unsure of the difference between the two words.
We have a peaceful OVERHAUL of the government every two years. Educate the sheeple that who they elect to Congress and the Presidency actually means something.
LMAO
A recent poll indicated that only nine percent (9%) of the American people still have faith in Congress!!!!!!
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20125482-503544/congressional-approval-at-all-time-low-of-9-according-to-new-cbs-news-new-york-times-poll/
"Congressional approval at ALL-TIME LOW OF 9%, according to new CBS News/New York Times poll"
HA!
It is the most peaceful overhaul of government ever devised. If the people we elect are as bad or worse than the people we throw out, thats our problem and not theirs. We no longer hold our politicians or media to the highest level. They no longer need to adhere to any sense of Honor. They just need not get caught.
Our system of government is deeply DYSFUNCTIONAL, rotten to the core like a disgusting apple that needs to be thrown in the garbage... not even on the compost heap!
I repeat, we need a peaceful "OVERHAUL" of the system, as recommended by Thomas Jefferson ("every twenty years"!) and as decided BY THE PEOPLE in a national referendum.
tell that to the people who got stabbed in those camps in oakland. i agree that the movement started properly but they fail to realize that they need hierarchy or it will just collapse into anarchy. it was a joke, i do not advocate violence EVER however when placed in a situation where there is a violent revolution going on, every man for himself. i do not agree that would ever happen because like i said earlier, the government has tanks and you do not haha
"vothmr" writes : "like i said earlier, the government has tanks and you do not haha"
They can't kill us ALL!!! Who would pay the taxes? Certainly not the 1% who are experts at tax evasion...
WE ARE THE 99% and they can't kill us all.
they only need to get a few thousand before you back down. if i was in your guys camp, i would be doing everything in my power not to be confrontational with the authorities because all it does is create bad press and the last, absolutely last thing that anyone in the movement should do is try to be anarchist, which i have seen a lot of. A that is just plain ignorant, and B you won't win.
So does that mean no social net (no Social security, no Obamacare, no welfare, unemployment, disability?) Sounds good to me, but that's not what your breathern are saying.
revolutions are started by the people, not a few hundred camped out in front of wall street. idk your knowledge about the extent of the political system but we overthrow our government every 4 years. if you want to change the nation then get out and vote. as i see it, there are just people sitting around bitching and screwing up traffic patterns. they haven't actually done anything. also, is this movement about political corruption or corporate greed? not a single person has been able to clarify this for me.
Ahhh... you forget the original Tea Party in 1776. The British called the protesters a "hoard of lowly rag-a-muffins". Come to think of it. You sound a lot like those British. And remember what happened to them? :oD
yes i do, you sound like someone who does not fully understand the system that you are trying to overthrow. literally EVERY SINGLE GROUP in the world has hierarchy in some form or another. the reason the British failed is because they did not maintain a monopoly of violence in the colonies. last time i checked, the government has tanks and you do not haha. i agree with all my heart of your right to bitch and moan about whatever you want. i myself complain about a fair number of things. however there are systems set up for you to lobby your complaints. also, popular revolutions require the support of the population to succeed and last time i checked, OWS has around a 30% approval rating and most of those people are so apathetic to actually do anything. the movement in its current form is set up to fail. overthrow the government the way its been done for 200 years, get out and vote.
Vote for who? The same schmucks over and over again who are nothing but puppets for the Banking, Insurance and Pharmaceutical industries? If the OWS has a 30% approval rating, do you not realize that is almost 100 Million people and growing? The Revolution of 1776 only had a 40% actual participation rate-- with most people being unable or disinterested to actively participate. Wake up, man. The U.S. people have been scammed and ripped off to the tune of $16 Trillion dollars-- with NO ONE on Wall Street or in Washington D.C. being held accountable. Jesus, man, wake up.
We have bigger problems. This system ruining it all. Watch this!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G43zl4fzDQg
The 1% just don't want to bankrupt us, they want to control us with laws, less freedom, and make us beg for the few crumbs they throw at us. THis will be the new reality in the next decade.
first off, its not capitalism, its corporate oligarchy. second off, its a fundamentally broken system in pretty much EVERY respect.
http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Corporate_Oligarchy
privatization of social services has never worked.
"natural businesss cycle" what is that, exactly? theres nothing natural about anything going on in this civilization, which is experiencing fatal entropy.
it doesn't work, its a self defeating system which is factually doomed.
http://www.oligarchyusa.com/
http://www.brianrogel.com/the-100-percent-solution-for-the-99-percent
http://may15internationalorganization.blogspot.com/2011/10/ows-revolution-reasons-capitalism.html
http://theprogressiveplaybook.com/2011/09/occupywallstreet-an-american-tahrir/
http://www.istockanalyst.com/finance/story/5390832/some-fascinating-stats-about-our-corporate-oligarchy
http://occupywallst.org/forum/corporate-oligarchy/
http://last-lost-empire.com/blog/?tag=global-corporate-oligarchy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ght22PnCXy0
try arguing with non biased sites first, and secondly, look at the chart. 70 years of growth doesn't lie
the fact of the matter is, its not capitalism, its corporate oligarchy. Calling sites biased does not answer them, its just a rhetorical invalidation. and 70 years of growth looks pretty stupid and evil when you look at what kind of growth has gone on compared to what kind of growth could have happened if things were not fascistically controlled. Nazi Germany was very good at fast growth also, that doesn't make it a model society.
economically, Hitler was one of the greatest leaders there ever was. no one can argue with that growth, if it weren't for his complete insanity then there would still be a powerful Germany today. where did this term corporate oligarchy come from? is it published in some respected economic journal, perhaps peer reviewed? rapid growth also leads to rapid inflation which then retards growth. the only way to grow is to slowly lumber with 5 or so percent growth rates.
Great Post ! couldn't have said it better myself !
Who said "disolove the two parties?"
I'm kinda riding the fence here. Yes there are some serious issues in the government that need to be addressed. Banks have been giving loans to those they shouldn't, and companies are selling homes to those who can't afford it. This is very much their fault however I have to admit that with the amount of corporate dollars that go in to fund our "leaders" is getting a little bit excessive. The government is indeed in serious trouble, there are too many full pockets in congress and in the media created by the corporations. HOWEVER... I see no reason why these cannot be fixed by vote. You talk about problems with our society? Lets start with voter apathy. You show me an election where we have a turnout that's historically significant (70-80%) and have the new government still be unsatisfactory THEN we'll talk about an overhaul of the government. As for the apparent horribleness and tragic wrong doings of our capitalist society, i suggest you spend some quality time in Russia or other sites of failed Socialism and you let me know how fun that is for you. Fact is, America is EXTREMELY wealthy if you look at it on a worldly scale. I'm happy and consider myself insanely fortunate that I live here and not in Africa for example. Idk about the rest of you, but I'm going to vote in the next election and not take what I have for granted. Y'all can have fun whining and complaining when you don't know how good you really have it.
but on the flip side of the coin, people have been taking the loans that they shouldn't. personal responsibility. people were preyed upon because they let themselves be prayed upon. no congressperson makes a dime from corporations. they can have their campaigns helped out but cannot get a check in exchange for a vote. the gov't is in trouble because we let it get in trouble. we have been voting the same people into office over and over again. once the majority of people actually start paying attention to politics and the state of the nation then things will start to change. so solve voter apathy and then you will start to see policies change.
Pure capitalism creates dysfunctional (and profoundly unequal) societies. People are much happier and healthier in socialist states. The 1% are destroying social mobility. If you want to live the American dream, you should move to Denmark.
Watch this TED talk:
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/richard_wilkinson.html
im sorry, your argument is just false, all socialist states have failed and the ones that haven't are just complete shit holes. socialism doesn't work. history has demonstrated that
Black and white thinking will do you in every time.
But perhaps I should agree. Down with ALL socialism! Let's get rid of -
And how about reverse socialism?
Like the home mortgage interest deduction. You know, the one that is in effect a subsidy for the mortgage and realestate industries, among others?
Ah, I love the free enterprise system!!!
you said that we should revert to socialism. we lived in a mixed society, not lassie-fair and not socialist. every sociatlist country in the world has failed, USSR-fail, North korea-fail, cuba-fail, china-heading for capitalism and private enterprise, bruma-fail, the list goes on. what we live in is mixed like 99% of the rest of the world and it works.
First, I never said anyone should revert to socialism. I think you may spend too much time listening to Fox News, and the like, where terms become boogeymen used to scare the not very well informed.
But your second sentence is correct. Every country has a mixture of private and governmental enterprise. The U.S.'s current mixture isn't necessarily the historic mixture, and most certainly won't be the futures. When scare mongers ignorantly use words like socialism and offer bizarre regimes that have little resemblance to any true socialism as examples, it's just silly.
I LIKE capitalism. I LIKE socialism. They aren't mutually exclusive. Study a little, look around, EVERY country has both. The questions are; what should the mixture be, and who gets to make the rules? For a long time the corporatists have been making the rules to benefit themselves. Isn't it time that the people of America have a voice equal to their interests?
i have an international affairs degree, trust me, Ive studied.
"Pure capitalism creates dysfunctional (and profoundly unequal) societies. People are much happier and healthier in socialist states. The 1% are destroying social mobility."
first off, this is practically a direct summary of the Grundrisse, and secondly, you say right there that we should move to socialism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mkRFCtl2MI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EewGMBOB4Gg
http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/
http://blog.thezeitgeistmovement.com/
http://www.thevenusproject.com/
yea well I'm Freaking Out!!! OK
I don't know how to work with corruption or cronyism. Can you teach me?
restructuring the system is not the answer. the answer is to wait this whole thing out because its worked fine for 200 years and will work fine for another 1000. I support OWS right to protest however they see fit but there is no reason to call for revolution. use your right to vote to overthrow the government if that's what you want to happen. My whole life philosophy is that if you didn't vote than you can't complain because you didn't try to influence the government to your will. also, keep these comments intelligent. please have some verifiable facts to back up your comments. i embrace debate but only intelligible debate
From what I can tell, World War II was just a bunch of people who got screwed by fascism. It happens, it's the nature of the thing. The point of the system is to aquire power and money. Hitler just figured out how to do it before you, so be quiet and stay in line while you march off to the gas chambers. This is, of course, just following the same line of resoning as the above post.
i can't even respond to this because its just so out of the realm of reason
More likely you can't respond because it is a perfectly logical analogy.
no its not. first off WW2 was between nations, it had nothing to do with economics. the Americans and Russians were not screwed by fascism. Hitler was insane. last time i checked, no Americans are being murdered for being non-Aryan. you are comparing apples to a helicopter. they have absolutely no similarities and are in no way analogous. ww2 was fought over pearl harbor and the invasion of Poland not political corruption and economic inequality. the mere fact that you would consider that a valid argument shows that you know nothing about the issue you are talking about. I may disagree with OWS but they have valid points and arguments and can present them in a comprehensive way. you have done none of that.
exactly, the nature of capitalism just like every single other economic system is that some people win and some lose. most people live perfectly comfortably are quite happy.
Agreed, but also remember, these "poor" that are protesting have smart phones, are probably inoculated against all kinds of disease, live in houses (their parents' most likely) with clean hot and cold running water..... all this GIVEN to them by the evil capitalist system.