Forum Post: Wall St. and Capitalism Serve A Purpose- Higher Living Standards
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 4, 2011, 10:25 p.m. EST by MikeInOhio
(13)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I REALLY do appreciate what you folks are doing, but blaming Wall Street and capitalism for the world's problems in rather simplistic. 3,000 years of historical perspective leads me to believe that our system is very good but, of course, it could use a some improvements.
I prefer a competitive marketplace - which Wall Street and the oligarchy have almost destroyed with mergers and aquisitions, reversing 3,000 of history, but increasing the take for a very few.
more bibliography at completeconfusion.com Why We Are Occupying Wall Street
I agree with much of what you said. But mergers and acquisitions are the logical outcome of poorly-managed companies. Someone comes in thinking they can do better. What's wrong with that?
On the contrary, it's often up and coming future competition that's bought up. Or the monopolies granted by patent that are really being bought. If you like having one or two companies carving up the business in a sector without competing, that's how to get there.
The law ought to prevent nearly all mergers, but money rules.
Ever heard of something called Anti - trust laws or the Sherman Act?
OK, in a paranoid world. That is simply not the business world that I have experienced.
hhmm good but if true.. what are bailouts? why didnt those companies get 'acquired'? or 'merged'? the system is good until all the money floats to the top.. now it has to be stirred
Excellent points. They should have failed and been acquired- like GM.
Right now the price for those benefits are much too high. That is because they are not coming from capitalism. Capitalism isn't the economic system that we have. We have oligarchy, which from your 3000 year perspective, you know predates capitalism. It came to America in 1620. Oligarchy has never served the populous well, nor has it served honest entrepreneurs and honest business people well. Defending oligarchy and naming it capitalism is dishonest or ignorant.
Disclose which you are trying to support? Oops, I didn't see who posted this. Nevermind.
You actually make an excellent point, which is unusual for you.
I agree with your oligarchy theory. We definitely have a mature corporate environment where the big 3 or 4 dominate most every industry. It makes for consistent supplies and cheap prices.
The thing that you have to understand is that the whole landscape changes every 10 years. The people, or companies, who dominate during one decade don't dominate during the next. Sears out, Target in.
So there is no permanent oligarchy; only a dynamic corporate environment where you or I could form the next great societal change/business. Think Apple
Think Wal-mart. Even oligarchies have changes on the line up cards. But oligarchies always change the rules to allow them to win without providing the best value, taking care of their employees, their shareholders, their suppliers etc. They only bribe those that they have to and steamroll the rest.
The second and purest oligarchy came to America in 1636 and settled in Hingham MA. Non-membvers quickly got their number and 40% of their population moved away. Voted with their feet. That works if you have a whole continent to play with. Now we don't.
Wall Street we got, capitalism we don't.
I doubt very much that WalMart will be a player in 10 years. They said the same thing about Sears. Somebody will come up with a better store. I personally shop at Meier while many people choose Target.
Oligarchs do exactly what they should do. Should they pay suppliers more for their products, just for the heck of it?
If Walmart increases their labor costs by 10% they will be out of business in 12 months
The question is, "Should they pay bribes to politicians and regulators?" Monopolies only benefit monopolists. Is free, unfettered corruption you goal?
Bribes are not common. You wish they were so your world view would hold some sway. Ridiculous.
Bribes are common. In my experience they are absolutely common. What is uncommon is not paying them, This is a disadvantage that US business used to labor under and should do so.
Now that they are global, they have become much more "creative" and corrupt. Many major international corporations e.g. Siemens, BAE, drug companies etc. have paid huge fines in the past few months.
So, is your position that are are uncommon but that they should be paid?
My position is that they rarely happen. I've worked in the business world (at relatively high levels) for the past 30 years and have never seen anything of the sort.
Believe what you may; I'm not going to change your mind.
No offense Mike, but I think the guys he is talking about may be a little bit above your level.
The point is, it is so rare as to not even be an issue. Sure it happens from time to time, but it is not endemic like in other countries.
Well, I doubt seriously 3,000 years ago your ancestors would even understand how they came to exist on this planet, let alone create a great civilization!
So, on that note, why are you on this forum?
Your mentality shows that you have no idea how Wall Street and/or Capitalism (every man for himself) came to be. Unless, like so many others in this country you suffer from amnesia! This country prides itself on slave economics, from its inception up to its demise, pure and simple.. If you believe that this country is better off the way it is as compared to the way IT SHOULD BE...then obviously you are one of the 1% who are deathly in fear of its demise. Unfortunately, that's the way love goes, or lack of it, for humanity, my friend!
Good luck with the new world order. I would suggest reading a few history books.
Really? Written by who, or should I say whom? The founding fathers, Ancient tablets, the Holy Bible, or perhaps we might start with this one....."American Antiquities, Discoveries in the West, Being an exhibition of the evidence that an ancient population of partially civilized nations differing entirely from those of the present Indians peopled America many centuries before its discovery by Columbus, and inquiries into their origin, with a copious description of many of their origin, with a copious discription of their stupendous works, now in ruins, with conjectures concerning what may have become of them. Complied from travels, authentic sources, and the researchers of antiquarian societies" Now I wonder who those people were seeing as how the European migration here started about 1200 on and what has been found here is over 10,000 years old!!! Now who could those people be, where did they go, and why was this kept such a secret in the public school system? Oh by the way, this book was written by Josiah Priest, the inventor of the Noah's flood theory. This book also had the backing of Ancient American Archaeology Foundation and was first published in 1832 in Albany, New York. Wow, can you imagine what other discoveries we are about to stumble upon on these shores?. I'm so.o.o.o.o.o excited! Now, back to your post....Mike my man....it's all hogwash!!!! Now on to the reality of what I first told you.....get it?
Oh, you are one of the euro-haters.
I am well-versed in the history of the Americas. What's your point? You can't go back in time and reverse the course of history.
Should Europeans hate Mongolians because their ancestors invaded Europe? Should Russians hate the Tatars? Maybe we should all hate each other.
Hey my man, you brought it up......."3,000 years of historical perspective leads me to believe that our system is very good....."
You stated a label, (Rasta) I stated the truth....can you handle the truth? The truth is this country was founded on bloodshed, falsehood, and manipulation...so stop acting as if something great or extra ordinary was done here by the founding fathers. Remember, they didn't do it alone and had and misused the strength of many to keep them alive and make them wealthy. Now my question to you is.....what's your point?
You are missing the point. I'm talking about western civilization. Apparently you are incapable of understanding the concept.
What concept? If you are referring to Western Civilization, then so am I. Concept?....a plan, a scheme, an idea? Concept of the land of the free, the home of the brave? That my man was the concept eluded to by the founding fathers and you and I and all others involved are still fighting that concept to this very day.. Why? Once again a concept of falsehood, of lies, of brutality, greed and murder! The rich live and prosper while the poor suffer and die....and that is why people are occupying and fighting the system to this day. Re-read what I wrote above..." The truth is this country was founded on bloodshed, falsehood, and manipulation...so stop acting as if something great or extra ordinary was done here by the founding fathers. Remember, they didn't do it alone and had and misused the strength of many to keep them alive and make them wealthy. The same was done by the European countries, and all others, including eastern civilizations that continue to maintain a falsehood of STATUS QUO, also named as caste system, servitude, racial differences creating inequality and modern slavery!!! Now my question to you is.... once again....what is your point?
As in all civilization, our prosperity is at the expense of ravaging natural resources and outlying peoples. We take more than we need, to create and maintain this "high standard of living" this is the American Way!
Also, as in all civilizations, this is a temporary state and is completely unsustainable. We are currently running up against the reality that this is so.
I agree with much of what you say. However, there is no way of putting the cat back in the bag. It's like all the global warming lunatics that want to slap carbon taxes on US industry. You could shut down every car, and every factory, in the US and it wouldn't have a significant affect on greenhouse gases. The problem is, there are too many people on the planet.
Well, if all civilizations are unsustainable then why should anyone bother to act civilly? Western civilization has been around for over 2,000 years and it will be around for a long time after we are gone.
No we can not un-develop, however we can modify our systems of social organisation, to limit the concentration of wealth/power in the hands of the few, at the expense of the many. If fact we must, or the top heavy structure we have now will most certainly topple and collapse quite badly.
I recently found Thomas Paine's pamphlet from the 1796 that speaks directly to this, I believe this is a good idea that can be updated and implemented to being more equality back to our social structure; http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-basic-income-guarantee-how-humanity-remains-huma/
I suggest reading the whole pamphlet Agrarian Justice written in 1796. http://www.ssa.gov/history/paine4.html
Good luck with your social engineering scheme.
thanks,. it should come off nicely, with your support!
try; http://www.globalsafe.org/
Good luck. You'll need it!
the data shows capitalism has failed every1 except the 1%.
Oh, I'm sorry, if the data shows it I guess I'm wrong. I'm on my way to New York. Thank you for pointing out that the "data" proves me wrong.
Maybe you should read up on wall street scams. It's not capitalism, I'm a fan of capitalism. It's gambling, highstakes derivatives trading that exploded our economy and left the taxpayers on the hook. here's a nice place to start. then read all his books http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102325715
Too much debt was the sympton not the cause. Too much liquidity was the cause. It always has been since we have been keeping records.
My life is finance. I wish it were that simple, but it is not.
Here's the shit sherlock. The American Founders never anticipated what would happen with "right to property" as population grew but land did not. As the need to live kept going, banks lent out risker and risker (NINJA) loans to fill in the gaps. All that would have been fine had America held up to its principles of "liberty and justice for all" (because the principles on which it stands are fairly solid), but we know for some groups (Native People) that has not been the case. In any case, federalism -- a controversial element within the Founders -- has failed because no one is wise or capable enough to lead the nation (the point of federalism) anymore.
You raise some excellent points. I agree with all of it except your characterization of banks and risk. If you are referring to the recent real estate meltdown, the blame rest firmly at the feet of two government agencies- freddie and fannie. Banks no longer had any risk in originating loans, so they originated as prescribed by freddie.
Really? I spend a lot of time in finance myself. Most of the good books that explain wall street's scams are written but people who's lives are finance. I'd write more complex explanations like how AIG ended up on the hook for 10's of billions to various counter parties though the irresponsible sales of unregulated credit default swaps but how many people would understand that? What is a credit default swap but a 100 to 1(or more than 100) bet that a bond won't default. It's insurance, disguised to avoid having to carry reserves in other words it's a bet. Swaps were sold at AIG by salespeople who had no idea of their underlying risk most due to the departure of Greenberg but ultimately due to an unregulated marketplace that put the taxpayer at risk. That's just one tiny piece of the puzzle
There is no regulator who could have stopped AIG just like there is no regulator right now stopping JP Morgan from taking risks. In fact, Obama needs to get re-elected and has told them to turn a blind eye.
I somewhat agree, capitalism has major faults, but it is the best economic model for human progress. However you are wrong about Wall Street, the goal of society should be to expand knowledge and technical capability to create a better world for everyone.
Capitalism is the engine that fuels innovation, ideally Wall Street should be funneling investment to the individuals and companies showing the most innovation.
Instead, Wall Street has been stifling innovation by only focusing on short term gains. The only way companies can reach these short term goals is by eliminating competitors, reducing staff, cutting cost from all angles and spending less on research and development.
They create huge barriers to entry with the current intellectual property and patent law so nobody can actually compete with them. Cut costs by sending the jobs to countries with lower standards of living and no concern for the environment. And anytime another company comes up with a better way to do business they are bought out and the idea is squashed, or sue the other company into oblivion with other patents they control.
Wall Street is to blame for our current issues, but that doesn't mean we should do away with it altogether. When it works correctly it is the best way to spur human innovation. We need an overhaul so they stop selling out the future for the 99% of humanity to make a short term profit for the 1%.
First of all, Wall St. doesn't send jobs overseas. Individual companies make those decisions, based upon the wishes of their owners. Imagine if your parents left you a clothing company that made $1M per year 10 years ago. You could either move your manufacturing overseas, or lose your business. Would everyone in our country be better off had the company gone under, or are we better off with a few employees here in America, and its manufacturing in Asia?
Wall St doesn't create barriers to entry, and it doesn't stifle innovation. In fact, I would argue the opposite.
Wall Street includes the PE firms and the investment banking activities of the major banks and brokerages. And this group does support, demand, encourage, assist and promote the outsourcing of jobs to Asia. They work hand in hand with the National Chamber of Commerce who encourage it and provide classes in how to do it. They also lobby companies and governments such as China to keep benefits, wages and working conditions as substandard as possible so the US can't compete..
Do you know anyone who works in the investment banking business? I suggest you talk with some people who actually work in finance. They aren't the demons that you imagine, and their industry is very important to the economic health of our country. I'm sorry, but your comments are absolute nonsense. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you really need to understand the nature of the industry.
I was the chief investor relations officer for a public company and later the COO and made many presentations to the trade press, PE firms investment bankers, and private qualified individuals in the US, Asia and Europe. And was successful securing investments in all three locations from names you would recognize. My firm was the cause of the change in Federal policy allowing the creation of the DARPA Venture Capital arm.
As the COO of a privately held company we sought Japanese investment and alliances. Out the big five Japanese trading companies and 20 other Banks and investment groups we selected one of the big five and 10 from the others. The money was in our escrow account before I got home.
What is it that I am imagining?
So did you outsource jobs? what industry were you in? It sounds like technology?
Yes it was technology. At one point I was involved in outsourcing. We contracted tp Burroughs who sub contracted part of it to India. When I was COO of another company, they were manufacturing electronic boards in Hong Kong. I repatriated that to a local company who had been doing aerospace work (at high costs). My manufacturing VP and I showed them how to automate the assembly to reduce costs. We got better quality, wider temperature specs and about the same net cost. I had to do a major recall of products with the Hong Kong boards.
High transportation costs (oil) actually help bring manufacturing back to the US. Manufacture closer to the consumer, is the best way. Automation hurts jobs but it raises wages. You have to manufacture a lot of stuff to get a lot of higher paying jobs. The Chamber of Commerce lobbying the Chinese to keep labor low in slavery conditions is hurting our country a lot. If their wages go up so do ours.
Their wages are already increasing so much so that they are equal to Mexico. The lowering of energy costs in the US due to fracking will increase our cost advantage. Manufacturing is already moving back, I just saw yesterday where Michelin isbuilding a new plant in SC.
That's wonderful. I could be a windbag and list all my accomplishments too. You simply have a twisted view of capitalism and, like many other liberal wackos I know, you think everyone (except yourself, of course) is inherently dishonest and selfish. It's absurd.
Why not reduce the federal corporate tax rate if you are so concerned about jobs going offshore? You libs can't even fathom a reduction is taxes.
Why don't you tell us please Mr. Windbag Troll, Sir? You have been wrong about all of your other judgement about me (whom I guess you are also claiming to know) and now you claim to know what I think.
I didn't say anything about jobs going offshore nor what the solution was. Nor did I say anything about taxes. Speaking about taxes, Dr. Robert Hall (Stanford University and the Hoover Institution), once worked for me as a consultant. He was the source of Forbes flat tax plan when he (Forbes) ran for President, and while he was doing work that cost me $600,000, we had some time to discuss tax policy and if that is your suggested remedy, you are as wrong about that as you are re the other policies you have casually dropped into what you would like to be name calling punctuated by a "debate."
I am not interested in investing more time with a troll. Goodbye.
The flat tax has worked every where it has been implemented.
Yeah those in Europe using a flat tax system sure benefited and suffered so much less in the meltdown.... no wait they didn't.
Huh.
You do realize the difference between Spain and Russia, right? Fought a coon off the other day from getting in my trash can. They are nasty.
The countries that have recently reintroduced flat taxes have done so largely in the hope of boosting economic growth. The Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have had flat taxes of 24%, 25% and 33% respectively with a tax exempt amount, since the mid-1990s. On 1 January 2001, a 13% flat tax on personal income took effect in Russia. Ukraine followed Russia with a 13% flat tax in 2003, which later increased to 15% in 2007. Slovakia introduced a 19% flat tax on most taxes (that is, on corporate and personal income, for VAT, etc., almost without exceptions) in 2004; Romania introduced a 16% flat tax on personal income and corporate profit on 1 January 2005. Macedonia introduced a 12% flat tax on personal income and corporate profit on 1 January 2007 and promised to cut it to 10% in 2008.[22] Albania has implemented a 10% flat tax from 2008.[23] Bulgaria applies flat tax rate of 10% for corporate profits and personal income tax since 2008
Worked? What does that mean exactly? I have had this discussion with Dr. Robert Hall who created it for Forbes in his presidential bid. I paid him $600,000 for consulting in a trail several years ago.
Don't think we want to go there.
GDP has increased when flat tax programs have been implemented. It doesn't get much simpler than that. I have had the discussion as well with him as well as others including Jerry Brown's advisor.
There are multiple ways to increase the GDP. But is that the only criteria that matters?
Increasing GDP puts people to work which puts money in their pockets. It will also decrease any incentive for people to evade taxes and treat all sectors and industries the same. It's a very fair and simple system. In my mind the only question is a consumption tax (VAT) better and I don't have an opinion on that as the VAT can be raised down the road.
Not necessarily. I would suggest you read, if you haven, Kevin Phillips "Bad Money".
Where GDP comes from does matter. The Gini index does matter. And where the taxes come from also matters.
All three of these have had occasions of significant changes and have had significant consequences. I think we agree that the status is not good but disagree on individual aspects goodness or badness and their causes and remedies.
I don't disagree with what Phillips is saying but most of the problems he identifies are easily solved. Go back to the basics. The primary factor in economic growth is sound money policy and we have gotten away from that first under Greenspan. The unwritten story, and someone could win a Pulitzer with this, is why and exactly when did Greenspan move away from the price rule towards subjective decision making. My best guess was around 1995 and I say that looking at his comments about the punch bowl and talking to a couple of governors.
All of the focus on tax policy and who pays what is irrelevant if you have sound money.
Yes, the dispersion is disturbing and the truth is we don't what is causing it since it apparent in all first world countries. By the way I think the Saez study is wrong since it looks at individuals and not households and uses IRS data which automatically takes out the bottom half. The census data appears to be better but the trend is there.
The point I was alluding to re Phillips is that if you become a country like the Dutch and Portugal and the the British where a greater and greater share of your GDP is from the finance sector, even though it looks good the majority of the citizens are getting relatively poorer and that has had bad consequences in those cases, portends similar problems for us.
I did take econ from Greenspan, back when. I think his thinking, or lack there of, may have started even before that, although I can't cite specific evidence of it. His fixation with inflation to the exclusion of all else, just didn't add up.
I'm still trolling, baby!
Maybe you should stick to the UAW website. I don't think anyone will challenge your ideas there.
Proud of being a slime-dweller are you?
Maybe you should stick to the Heritage Foundation site. No one would hate you there.
OWS supports unions and the workers they represent, so Brightonsage is right at home here the site specifically dedicated to OWS supporters, not right wing troll "debaters". It is you who should go elsewhere. (As you actually promised, as I recall. Oh well, another lie from a right-winger. Who'd a guessed something like THAT would happen?)
Again, what makes you think this is a general political debating site?
[Removed]
I'm not going anywhere.
Why are you so offended? And why do you wackos refer to anyone who doesn't agree with you as a "trolls" and "slime-dwellers"? of course I know the answer- when you can't debate based on facts you have to resort to mudslinging.
You simply don't have an answer for my superior intellect!
Us wackos? We are not deluded and psychotically grandiose enough to go to the Heritage Foundation site to promote our agenda, and somehow think that we would be welcomed there.
Your cumming here (spelling intended) is nothing more than an exercise in public mental masturbation. And you think WE'RE wackos? Hahahahahahahah. Trolls are really sick, deluded fucks.
You are a sicko.
Trolls are, by definition, mentally ill.
Calling them out is not the illness, it is the diagnosis.
Lovely sentiments! You were not born a writer, that is for sure, but I'm sure you are well-equipped for your EPA job.
Please leave the thinking to the intellectuals.
Yeah, sure, anything you say.
Go back to fucking your sister like a good right winger.
I would suggest a trip to the doctor to discuss your anger issues.
I would suggest a trip to the doctor to address your public masturbation issues.
I preface this by saying I hate both parties.
Lowering the corporate tax rates will not bring the jobs back. No one pays close to that amount anyways.
The reason all the manufacturing jobs went overseas is zero regs on pollution, and even more so, the cheap labor. Labor costs are by far the most expensive part of making cheap durable goods.
The manufacturing jobs arent coming back anytime soon, unless you want to get into a trade war.
Would you be ok with that if it meant bringing some jobs back?
Manufacturers left because of labor costs imposed by unions, along with the availability of cheap, non-union labor in Asia. There were US autoworkers in the 70's and 80's making the equivalent of $150,000 per year, plus benefits. The unions wouldn't allow automation in US factories, but Toyota and Honda embraced it. It's really not that complicated.
Corporate tax rates have a huge influence on companies' deciding to locate in the US. It simply adds to your cost of producing your product.
It's not a pretty sight, as you articulately point out. We all go to Walmart and buy the cheapest Chinese-made version of the item we want. I'm not in favor of a trade war, but I am in favor of people taking "buy American" to heart.
*turns shirt inside out^
outside in
Can you get those POS teabaggers to repeal the large tax they put on me and my wife? It was to offset yet another corporate tax cut.
My taxes went up under Reagan too.
Come to think of it, (R)epelican'ts raise my taxes a lot.
We should un-elect them all and see if things get better.
You might like this little tidbit, Shooz. The economy, going back to Hoover and beyond, has done better under democratic administrations by far than under republican ones. That includes not only regular wages but also the stock market and return on investments and dividend income. For all the republitard screaming about the democrats being socialists, they themselves have always lined their pockets more under them than under their own leadership. Whenever there was more equity there was also more wealth. (That last bit until very recently).
You mean the "elephant in the china shop" mentality of the (R)epelican'ts, only sounds good on paper, and in reality it just wrecks stuff?
I know, I've read some stuff over the years that has shown the country works best with Democrats in control across the board. I posted a link somewhere on here the other day too, but our conse(R)vative troll population completely ignored it.
They refuse to give up on waiting for their "fair share" of trickle down?
Where are you shooz? Did the rational mind suddenly appear?
Pretty good low info, low thought level, conse(R)vative response.
Now, whet were you saying?
The crazy, anti-republican thing just doesn't make sense to me. Please tell me more.
Teabaggers raised my taxes!!
I used to think you would know that, but then I read all about how much trouble conse(R)vatives have in using their brains.
So now I understand why you don't know that teabaggers raised my taxes.
You just weren't paying attention.
Suddenly so important? I've been calling for an end to this ridiculous looming budgetary disaster in the federal government since my early teens, and haven't stopped no matter which "side" (lol) was in charge. It has always been important. And the .001% has remained in charge and continue to divide up the budgetary pie like hogs at a trough.
No one would profit, that's why it's not going to happen. Except your grandchildren, of course, but hey. Certainly the people selling toys to the pentagon won't profit from a balanced budget, and the people selling overpriced health care to the government now won't profit from one either, so I'm not going to hold my breath expecting health care costs to go down or for us to stop bombing random countries.
Hey!!!!!
That's troll talk, now why would a brand new whipper snapper like yourself come here to quote echo chamber troll talk?
Really? Why would you do that?
Do you find that in actual meat space you ARE an echo chamber?
Here's this will help, as it will take days to read and understand.
It's the reason, deficits don't matter.
http://pragcap.com/understand-the-modern-monetary-system/understanding-modern-monetary-system
Wow. Personal attacks! That ringside bell that indicates someone in an online conversation has lost an argument.
So, can't we use some kind of principle in deciding how much is the correct amount of taxes to pay?
Is it okay to irrationally hate Democrats if they raise taxes on your specific group? No.
It was a Democratic tax cut that the teabaggers repealed, against the State constitution.
(R)epelican'ts have been pissing all over all kinds of constitutions around here.
They don't like 'em much when they get in the way of business.
That's true. Every politician and demagogue wraps themselves in the constitution when it conflicts with something their opponents want to do. It's pretty despicable.
If we could just stop doing what both sides think violates the constitution, maybe we would stop bombing random countries and have a balanced budget. That would be something we could all work towards.
Nothing is random, and we've never had a balanced budget.
Why is it suddenly so important? They all knew it was going to crash, Bush included. Deficits don't matter.
Why try and balance it mow, with the country in such delicate shape?
Who would profit?
I am personally happy that teabaggers raised your taxes. You probably shouldn't be handling money anyway.
Another low thought response.
You really are boring. Have you considered getting education?
Good luck with that, shooz. It's going to be a Republican beat-down in Congress this fall regardless of how much your union spends.
and what will they do ?
Hopefully they will do everything in their power to destroy the teachers' unions.
lol
Pink Floyd - Another Brick In The Wall (HQ)
And pass every one of Romney's Bills.
Mike- Dark Side of the Moon
I always figured you were all for the best congress the Kochs can buy, constitution be damned.
They had to buy off some judges in my State to levy the tax.
I see you think eggs are chickens.
Oh yes, more paranoia. They "bought off" Judges? Please.
Is Soros buying Judges too?
I have no idea about Soros. You'd have to ask your buddy Glenn.
What I do know is that judges were bought in my State to bypass the State constitution, so they could impose the tax.
Teabaggers are a slimy bunch..
It's a shame Obama can't buy off the Supreme Court. The evil Judges are against you, are they?
You sure do like to avoid facing the facts, don't you?
Bored and drunk on a Sunday night?
Please tell me the "facts", as you know them. I love liberal facts!
I already did. In numerous threads.
This one included.
You just got drunker and attempted lame insults.
I'll give you one repeat, since that's all that sinks into a conse(R)vative brain. They are rather lazy brained.
Teabaggers are a slimy bunch.
There are no individual owners of companies anymore and that is the issue. It is also hyperbole to state that these companies have to send the manufacturing overseas or go out of business. Even in union jobs like the UAW less than 13% of production cost goes to labor. Yes, production cost which is a small fraction of retail value.
We could totally do away with all manufacturing outsourcing and see a minimal hit to the bottom line.
Wall Street in theory shouldn't create barriers to entry. However in reality they have been. Wall street's focus on immediate short term gain has forced companies to grow much larger and faster than they should.
They create barriers to entry for companies who are willing to be innovative by abusing patent law. The larger companies own 10's of thousands of patents. Not for the purpose of improving their products or ever bringing these ideas to reality. They use these to sue smaller companies and drive them out of business.
A quick Google of Patent Wars can bring up many interesting results.
You could set up an investment management business tomorrow. There are no barriers to entry.
Nobody creates barriers to entry anywhere that I have seen.. Even the unions can't manage that task, although I'm sure they would love to do the same.
Labor cost is a big deal with virtually any product produced today. If it wasn't such a big deal, why have all the jobs gone to China?
Sue smaller companies? That's just ridiculous.
Higher living standards? For whom? The small majority of the population that can afford to live lavish lifestyles while the rest work like slaves just to live? I think you are confusing technological advancements with higher liver standards.
It simply amazes me how ignorant some people are.
The only reason you can choose your "rasta" lifestyle (and not work) is because many people have worked their asses off to advance our civilization and standard of living..
Take another bong hit.
I'm sorry, Mike, you don't know the first thing about me or my financial status. I will take another bong hit as I illuminate my life with truth; what feeds your soul? Money? Greed? Learn to love. Please, do not judge me nor my Rastafari lifestyle; I can hold my own.
You're right. I apologize. I had a stereotype in my mind, and that was unfair.
No, I am not motivated by money, and I like the weed too. I am motivated by a movement of people who want to make this country better. I'm just trying to make some points that I think are important and, unfortunately, I made a mistake.
Please accept my apologies. Mike
It's all good Mike, thank's for your apology. Try to get past stereotyping and focus all of your energy (make sure it's all positive energy) towards moving this movement forward. Stereotypes can be fun, though they're not helpful in this situation.
Please try to understand my motivation in life. Jah Rastafari.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/steps-to-success/
You are welcome, and thank you for the acceptance.
Is it not great the tolerance that cannabis builds among us for each others ideas?
(granted I would admist that coming together through cannabis may have more to do with its political status than chemistry)
I agree. I am a cannabis proponent (although I call it "weed").
"Rasta?" This coming from a descendant from Neanderthals? My..my....you have a lot of nerve! Get with reality son, this country, the fake idealism, the hidden agendas, which by the way are very much exposed....all that we, you, US have "enjoyed" is on its way out! What makes you think you all are going to recreate a better nation or a "more perfect union" out of one that is seeped in and covered with Blood? Get your head out the sand son....no matter what ideas you all come up with...they are going to be knocked out the ball park until this country and its citizens face the truth about its inception and deal with its own eventual demise for letting bullshyt reign for so long.
Look around.....the ski lift will not be going up the mountains too much longer! You my friend created a thread that is, in reality, a rhetorical joke!
The ski lift won't be going up the mountain anymore because it was financed with too much debt.
That's the point, your entitlement society is coming to an end and your unions can't protect you.
Well, you finally make sense....but this isn't my entitlement society, in fact I don't know who or what those "people" are who make up that category. The society I know and love cares for one another, helps one another, looks out for one another and realizes that we are a part and partial of this government and we live the life accordingly. Now, as far as all the other rhetoric is concerned...people are having a hard time adjusting to the changes being made on this earth. When will man and mankind realize...HE AIN'T GOT CONTROL OVER NOTHING....especially himself? Oh well, hard heads make for soft behinds! You all are fixated on something that has already been mapped out my man!
Like I said, the ski lift isn't going up the mountain anymore. Blame whomever you like.
You mean the free trade people opened up the doors to unfair competition with people of lower standards of living. That is why life the way we know it is coming to an end. Lets keep giving our jobs away to enrich Communist China. How smart is it for us to lose our manufacturing base, with many requirements for defense even going to overseas manufacturers.
Bring back the tariff system that leveled the playing field in global markets.
I agree with much of what you say, but I don't know if tariffs will help us in the long term. Tariffs turn into trade wars, and trade wars cause economic hardship. I think it would hurt the lower-income groups far more than higher-income folks. Cheap, Chinese products allow many people in lower-income groups to sustain a higher standard of living than they would otherwise.
I'm all for Buy American.
I support capitalism, but Wall Street is a giant casino, it's not capitalism
Touche'. Excellent point. But Wall St. is the means by which we move capital to where it is most needed.
No. Not where it is most needed. Where it has most value. That is the problem. Needs are food, shelter, clothing, etc. The money does not go there. It goes where there is most value- diamonds, cars, mansions, etc. The difference is a needs based economy and a value driven economy. In a value driven economy, because value is based of scarcity (see supply/ demand) it makes economic sense to create as much scarcity as possible, thus increasing value. This also leads wealth in a very few hands, because if wealth was distributed evenly, it would cease being valuable.
You are arguing Communism vs. Capitalism. That's where I check out.
Nope. I am arguing value. You were arguing that wall streets distributes capital where it is most needed. I was just pointing out that you were wrong about wall streets function. I had not argued any system. Just that your definition was wrong.
Sure, in a perfect world. But that simply isn't the case.
Sure it is. We all agree that corruption is the problem, but those who want to blame the system are misguided.
It sounds as though everyone should have some stocks. Of course, there are players on the Wall Street where they would gamble which company would go bust.
Watch "Pelham 1-2-3" and it gives me the sense that you could make an investment on insurance and if it all goes sour, yours doesn't.
Argh! There is no easy way.
That needs to change. Breaking the increasing monopoly that the ever-consolidating banking industry has over capital. Especially when the winners won by selling their garbage loans to banks that went under, and were thus consumed by the big winners. My purpose in going to Wall Street is to speak out against the massive, artificial wealth concentration because it needs to stop if we want to save our system from an oligarchy that will render our treasured institutions meaningless puppets. Edit: Well, already has to a large extent, but hopefully not irreversibly.
sorry, there has never been capitalism. corporate oligarchy is the system we have.
to get serious requires a few things they don't have. like chat admins who aren't ego serving propaganda tools, a wiki, 1001 sub forums, an actual game plan, a straight up political platform... you know.. basic organizational things sane people do BEFORE protesting.. like figure out a diplomacy and logic centered metaprocess to give their chatadmins so that they don't really just drive out even more people than the trolls. Adminatrolla. trollaAdmin. Whats the difference to somebody whos got the truth facing a propaganda tool abusing admin powers to push their agenda? how can you prevent such a thing? Metaprocess. did i mention metaprocess? and science diplomacy science psychology science sociology and all those textbooks to read B4 protesting?
you can't have capitalism without a free(SLAVE) market. but you can have a free market without capitalism. And thats strangely the only way it CAN work.
Marketing 101 was fascinating. I admit thats a lot less than a bachelors but its sure more than enough to see whats really going on given the other things I know. Capitalism is not the problem since it does not exist. corporate oligarchy is the problem. capitalism has never been tried. I am a democracy guy. in order for real democracy to function a free market system is required. Thats not capitalism. thats a free market system. there is a subtle difference there which most people would miss. I will again repeat. Neither capitalism nor marxism nor communism nor socialism has ever existed. All of those governments were oligarchy pretending to be something as a con scam. Telling that simple truth gets one banned out of the Chat by either a capitalist or a socialist whos pissed you just said their pet ideology isn't real. It isn't. anybody who thinks that it is is accidentally playing for team corporate oligarchy as a tool. the ONLY system worth talking about is DEMOCRACY. how democracy HANDLES a FREE MARKET system is dynamic and interesting and NOT capitalism.
o. yes. no. yes. what? making change is not reliant on changing the money system one tenth as much as it is on changing the informational ecology. Going to a gold standard as an idea is a proof of ignorance, not a solution. Really the end game is we evolve out of money. To do that we evolve first new currencies and new economic strategies. this leads to economic singularity in about 50 years. If everyone is a millionaire how much you get depends on exactly the material valuation of that money. Which is to say that by the time money becomes obsolete everyone will live like the current millionaire. Tangible items to other tangible items? the real economy is about ideas, change the ideas and everything changes. the problem with the tangible economy is it does not change; its a static reality. you can't make a meaningful gold standard with only enough gold to represent on millionth of the economy. You can make a purely imaginal money system work; but it has to be subject to moral and ethical laws. This is about pinning down those moral and ethical laws and implementing them in new currencies; not trying to imagine a control freak impossible non solution because of the simplicity with which you go about thinking over the problem.
once again. there has never been a socialist or capitalist economy. in all instances such nations were oligarchies. using a mask and a con scam and telling their dupes and pwns that they were something other than oligarchy. the big hump to get over is that the USA oligarchy and the Soviet oligarchy are in on this lie against the rest of us TOGETHER. Neither of them was ever anything other than an oligarchy. both claimed some other system in order to have US fight over the ideals of THAT system while they secretly shafted us all playing a completely different game.
You make some great points, but some strange ones too. You certainly can have capitalism without a SLAVE. But you can't have communism without a lot of them.
What?
I agree with most of what you say, but you certainly can have a capitalist economy without a slave. Those are all excellent arguments, though. Thanks!
by definition a capitalist system will over value money above people. That creates inequalities which lead always to oligarchy in some kind of entropy.
So you can't have a capitalist system without such inequalities and if you fix the inequalities problems thats no longer capitalism; its a free market system centered in ethics instead of greed.
Nonsense! Money is simply a way of carrying our labors in our pockets.
nonsense, nonsense, nonsense- right back at you. money may be a way to carry labors in pockets. thats a fine basic summary of what its supposed to do. it does not accomplish this in the current system. so there you go. u are spouting nonsense.
Seriously, you need to visit a psychiatrist specializing in paranoia.
seriously, your ad hom is a proof you have no argument.
I don't know what "ad hom" means.
then you shouldn't be attempting to make any kind of political conversation until you do.
Any and all claims you have to be able to relate in this space on the adult level Are thus void. You don't know how to determine what is or is not real, what is or is not true, and what is or is not viable in an argument.
Until you open and read a formal conversational logic textbook, you have nothing to add to the public discussion more than noise.
Thank you. I'll take that into consideration.
[Removed]
When it was backed by gold and silver...now it's just a green piece of paper with no intrinsic value.
What he said.
wow - look at this rant lol!
http://coalitionforsocialchange.wordpress.com/
Its the actors who destroy capitalism check it out on my blog.... actors meaning politicians and businessmen
Oh Thanks! I need another blogger to tell me how it is.
Sure, blame business people and politicians. Everyone is evil except your cohort (ie union members).
the problem lies in the facet of how government is supposed to pertain to its' citizens not corporate influence. It might be nice to not understand the basics of capitalism, but let me know how well off you can possibly be in Ohio
[Removed]
We can't give the whole world higher living standards until technology reaches a significantly higher level than it is currently at, or we have a drastically reduced (around 1-2 billion) size in population. There simply are not enough resources on the planet to make it economically feasible at this time.
What we NEED is to lower the standard of living in America and other developed countries to about 1950s levels as measured by CONSUMPTION (not technology). Happiness is not dependent on economic growth but economic stability and a loving community. We will have neither of those if "capitalist consumption" is allowed to fuck up the vital cycles which maintain a relatively stable climate and ecology. In other words, true capitalists would be concerned about the value of all the environmental services we are destroying (estimated at about 30 trillion dollars even in its degraded state.
Every single human civilization has collapsed before ours, what makes us so special? The decline IS imminent if we do not stop destroying the biosphere, and the following Dark Ages will be more severe than those following the collapse of the last great civilization because we have depleted our ecology to a much greater extent than the Romans ever did.
Joe, I love where you are going with this, but you need to take a look at the facts. America produces 17.8% of greenhouse gases. Our contribution to global greenhouse gas levels is forecast to fall below 10% in 4 years. We could all go stone-age right now and have no discernible impact on global warming. The West no longer controls the situation.
I agree totally with your theory on population. And I agree on your "dark age" theory. There will be a viral epidemic in the next 20 years.
All the liberals should hope for this as it is always followed by a large increase in average wages, especially at the lower end of the spectrum. Real wages in Europe more than doubled in 10 years, and tripled in 20, after the Black Death.
Oh, I know that it is not just an American problem any longer, its a global issue. Well the Black Deaths wasn't what what I meant by Dark Ages, which occur mostly because a civilization has exhausted its resources. I don't think we are about to collapse soon, but on this scale, well we have nothing to judge it by. Previous civilization collapses have taken a process of a few centuries. So Rome declines over a few centuries for example, but before European civilization could rise out of those ashes the environment had to recover (the Black Death was probably a big help in the Europe/Middle East/Central Asia region recovering faster) and given the still deep reliance on ecology at the time, no doubt was some contribution to the wage increase. Ancient Greece for example when through a similar collapse to Ancient Rome, its hard to stop the momentum of all those people just living their lives, even when living their lives is collectively destroying the civilization that they knew. For Rome this was a policy of expansionism, the economics of patrolling such a vast region required so many soldiers eventually that they could not grow enough food within that region. So further conquer, and more soldiers were required. It was this spiral which collapsed the Roman Empire, and made them vulnerable enough to succumb to pandemic and violence.
I also don't mean that we have to go back to the stone age or anything, the collective action problem when put onto a global scale is enormous and the momentum we are facing driving this consumption is even larger.
Like I said, the world could support a 1950's level of consumption, and with current technology we could achieve that, but to attain a higher standard of living and to consume more at this point, is threatening to annihilate the still potentially bright future of human generations to come.
We might not even be in this mess, and we could have certainly supported higher standards of living into the future if it were not for the long period of America doing almost nothing to reduce reliance on oil between 1970 and 1990. If say for example Reagan had not cancelled the Solar Power subsidies that were enacted under Carter, or if Germany had begun its energy transformation a few decades earlier, we would be in a world where solar power would be cheaper than oil, not perfect, but taking oil out of the equation earlier would have saved a lot of future hardships.
Also, if you thought my thinking on population as bad, and if you think we are set up for an epidemic, we are no where near as vulnerable as our crops (granted the vector for a lot of plant illnesses is much shorter than for human diseases).
I am not about a return to the past, but we are very rapidly crashing the future, and making a return to the past almost an inevitability, though who really knows for sure, I just see all the evidence that I have spent time studying stacked that way.
I sometimes think, if we could innovate fast enough, we could break out of this box we are closing on ourselves, but the modeling for the rate of human innovation does not support such rapid changes not so much in the development of technology but its adoption and deployment. Furthermore even the same model designed to allow for possibly much more rapid development, we still require a reduction in ecological inputs and environmental degradation that would need to come from a reduction in consumption, in order to make sure that what has become a truly global civilization, does not collapse in on itself, cutting off other state actors, war, violence, its not a pretty picture no matter who comes out on top.
I've put all my hope for the human future on 3D printing and recycling technology, I truly fear that in 1,000 years, there may be no computers on this planet, I would like to see a civilization that can finally strike a much more stable balance with the biosphere, rather than the cyclic nature of civilization.
My thoughts on this topic are deeply inspired by a class I took in the politics of Sustainability. Probably the best work to understand these would be Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood (if you are a fan of dyspepsia this is up your alley)
I ramble a bit, but I hope it's good stuff. Quick on that reply too :)
I suppose it you actually had Capitalism instead of Neo-Corporatism that could be true.
I think I know what you mean, but I don't agree. The notion that corporations are "bad" is ridiculous.
I wouldn't go as far as saying corporations are bad. I'd just say they are too overly influential. You could make the claim that they are overly influential because of the laziness of the electorate, and there would probably be some truth to it.
so i have to ask, are you OK with the status quo? Is everything hunky-dory as far as you are concerned?
Of course I'm not happy with he status quo. I wouldn't be doing this if I were. But folks have to have some common sense. These are not easy problems to resolve, and there are very intelligent people working to solve them. The corporate model has served society very well for many hundreds of years.
I won't deny that the corporate model has some benefits and some costs. But i think their power to effect politics is too strong and needs to be checked. We need to be thinking like the Founders and devise a check to their political power. Now, you could say that unions are that check but the unions only defend their interests, not the interests of the average citizen. Also the fact that the most influential corporations are multi nationals kinda makes their interests different than most Americans.
I agree with everything you said, except for the union thing. Corporations are nothing more than groups of people working for the same purposes. They've been around for 10,000 years, but they weren't called corporations.
When a group of hunters went out to kill an animal, they formed ad hoc corporations to split the kill. Heck, there might have been old men and women who "financed" hunts (bondholders) by providing their labor to produce arrows and spears. They received their share first.
These concepts aren't evil, they are human nature.
True. Corporations are just factions, interests if you will. But I believe that their influence has eclipsed all other American interests. Now I know that corporations are just groups of people, but do you believe those combined groups are fifty percent (plus one) of the population? If not, then they are way too influential. If so, then they are decimating the minority, and that is where the Federal Gov't is supposed to step in to protect the rights of the minority. I believe even if you count the janitors that mop corporate property, Corporations still are not half of the population. But I'm guessing at this point.
No, you are paranoid. Just like most of the OWSters here.
It is called being well informed, prick. You should try it. If you would try it, then you could battle with facts and not with attempts at character assassination, like a child. I hate bragging about my educational credentials that you are so hung up on, but my views come from my education, not my flights of fancy, as judging by your posts, seems to be your only form of rebuttal. The only part of my response that was a guess was whether corporate America, you know, the people getting all the major welfare checks, makes up the majority of the population, which I believe they don't.
Please accept the fact that you have nothing to add to the conversation.
The serve a purpose. Higher standard of living...for the 1%.
Keep your eyes closed and you'll never learn anything.
It hasn't led to higher living standards for the millions of Native Americans.
Yes, I agree. Native Americans, and the Cree and Dene in Canada have really gotten the shaft. I don't think anyone disagrees with that.
I've spent quite a bit of time in northern Canada and have serious issues with the native-cannuck relationship.
There are two kinds of capitalism, one has indeed served humanity quite well for the periods that it has been put in practice, the other has been quite harmful to humanity.
The harmful form of capitalism was that practiced by America's original enemy the British empire. It is written out in the works of individuals such as Adam Smith.
It taught that greed was good, and supported the dealing in drugs, such as opium to the Chinese, even if it was necessary to fight a war to force them to accept such a fine product. The remnants of the English empire, City of London and Wall Street banks, still make quite a tidy profit off opium grown in Afghanistan and sold to US citizens and throughout the world.
The Empire also used their theories of free trade capitalism to justify the dealing in slaves, and to this day strives to pay the lowest wages possible by diverting production to countries possessing lower levels of protection for their workers.
The other form of capitalism, which we fought for in the American revolution, seeks to raise the level of the worker by paying a fair wage for his labor. It profits by paying its workers enough to educate and develop themselves, enabling them to make creative contributions to the production process, reducing the cost of production and developing all kinds of new products.
The fine results of this American form of capitalism are seen in the bursts of economic growth following the presidencies of its supporters such as Abraham Lincoln, FDR and JFK.
Thank you, Arturo! At least you have a thoughtful argument.
I'm sorry, but claiming that Wall St profits off Afghani opium is absurd. I know that crazy conspiracies are all the rage here, but that just defies common sense.
We all know about the opium wars, but that was a time when most races considered others to be inferior. Do you realize that the Chinese considered Westerners to be backward subhumans? Heck, as recently as WWII various peoples considered themselves to be genetically superior to others.
Please define a "fair wage". I hear people talk about this all the time. I know that OWS was advocating a $25 minimum wage last fall (until they figured out how stupid it was) and decided to take that off their "list of demands". There is no such thing as a fair wage. A fair wage is what 2 parties negotiate between themselves. The notion that people are forced to accept unfair wages is ridiculous.
The American Revolution had nothing to do with your notion of fair capitalism. It was founded on resistance to oppression, people's desire to do for themselves.
I guess the great economic growth spurts ended with Carter and Obama.
The international banking system however most certainly profits from almost all black market transactions at higher levels in the organizations (not obviously the street dealers, but the cartels, the "terrorists", and the terrorists). Much of this money is hidden away in accounts in countries with strict privacy laws protecting their banks from international scrutiny, and the owners names are kept completely away from the money they own, so it can never be seized without jumping through so many international investigatory hurdles, that this money becomes essentially impossible to track. Banks in almost every country are complicit at some level in this trade.
My information source is an article written in the Dollars and Sense publication, titled Real World Globalization. The article itself is titled "The US Banks and The Dirty Money Empire by James Petras, it is a truly enlightening read (the entire collection of articles is really incredibly informative when it comes to cases in the international political economy).
Thanks, Joe.
I don't want to poo-poo your black-market theory, but that article grossly exaggerated the size of the problem. It's so hard to launder money these days that most drug dealers face a huge problem- where to hide all the cash. One million dollars in 20's occupies a lot of room.
The offshore and Swiss accounts are almost a thing of the past. No one can hide from the tax man anymore. We have bigger fish to fry.
It also an article from 11 years ago (it cited congressional hearing record, so I am not sure how much spin that discussion may or may not have had, hopefully some real experts where the ones giving testimony and not some industry hired scientist thugs). Its old enough that it has probably lost some relevance, but I could not see a good reason for the US banks to deny themselves access to money, if they can skirt under the eye of any regulatory agencies or laws which would prevent them from doing so.
But as I see it there will always be a few countries that will be glad to take your dirty money, and inject it into the international banking system, and as we crack down in these countries, like Panama, Switzerland, and Guatemala (as some past examples), these dirty money operations, just like drug producers, and arms dealers, will simply find another place to do business (and enjoy whatever monopolistic advantages they might have due to the ban).
If it helps, by the time it reaches an account with a US bank's international name attached to it, its already been laundered, its now being deposited and its trail obscured by protective privacy laws for banks. Cartels and terrorist organizations have stock options too they understand the need to make sure that all their fish are not in one barrel (cash).
I appreciate it. You raise some great points.
Well, even if you don't agree with me, thanks for appreciating the thoughtfulness of my argument. Why does claiming that Wall Street benefits from opium sales seem absurd? Drug money laundering happens inevitably in many banks.
Now, undoubtedly you will consider my source a crazy conspiracy theorist, but if you really appreciated the intelligence of my previous argument, at least have a look to humor me:
Dope, Inc. Is $600 Billion and Growing http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2001/2848dope_money.html
I know that the Chinese considered Westerners backward, I lived in China for a year. Many of them still do, I experienced it every day. The most common expression of it is their resentment for foreigners who learn Chinese. They think we shouldn't be smart enough to learn it. Ironically, I'm thinking of going back soon, just because I like teaching there and to see old friends.
I would define a fair wage, not in dollars and cents, but functionally in terms of what it would allow the worker to do, and what the benefit to his employer would be. In this sense, a fair wage would be enough for an industrial worker to own a home, car, support a healthy family, and send the kids to college.
The benefit to the worker is obvious, but in this era of free trade we generally forget what the value of the unionized, well paid American worker once was to the capitalists who owned the companies they worked for.
We often forget that America once produced high quality fairly priced products that were desired all around the world. And we can do it again, not by lowering the wages of the worker, but by increasing his intelligence and creativity.
The key is for the capitalists to look upon the workers as their allies and as people in whom they should invest.
To learn more about industrial capitalism and its relation to the American revolution, check out the following page, humor me:
The Development of American Machine Tools http://www.schillerinstitute.org/educ/hist/devo_machine_tool.html
Here is a taste:
The Americans of 1758 were very familiar with that policy, for Great Britain had just passed the Iron Act of 1750, which forbade its American colonies to produce worked iron products. Nevertheless, Americans continued to produce iron in locations more distant from the prying eyes of British enforcers, and by the time of the Revolution, Americans were producing one-seventh of the world’s iron. The American Revolution and the War of 1812 were fought against that type of miserable repressive policy, which always seeks to put a lid on human creativity and production.
You are a breath of fresh air, and I thank you for that.
Drug dealers tend to have lots, and lots of cash. In fact, their biggest problem is laundering the money, as I'm sure you know. I just don't think that most well-run banks have an interest in taking drug money.
You still have to define the fair wage. Base upon what you said (and I agree) I would say that here in Ohio $18 per hour will allow you to manage a reasonable life. If you have kids, add $3 per hour per kid The problem is, you can't expect a business to pay someone $27 per hour just because he/she has 3 kids.
As a small business owner I would love to pay my employees $27 per hour, but I would be out of business in 3 weeks. The pricing of my competitors doesn't allow me to pay it. There are certain jobs that I simply can't pay more than $12 per hour. If I go out of business, we all lose our jobs and everyone is in a worse position.
The idea that management doesn't value labor is based upon concepts from the 30's and 40's. You can't profitably run a business in the long term without good labor relations. Who the heck doesn't want a happy workforce? Honda has been in Ohio for almost 40 years (non-union) and they have a very, very happy workforce. They are well-paid and well-regarded by management.
The cost of shipping an item across the Pacific or Atlantic has decreased by 90% (in real terms) since the 70's. Cheap goods are all the rage here now, but don't forget the Germany example. They export high-priced, high technology items, while offering some of the highest labor rates in the world.
Yes, I will actually look at your links. They are the first I have seen today that didn't come from Huffington Post.
Thanks again for your appreciation.
You don't think well run banks are interested in drug money? There are studies showing that international banks, such as HSBC - Hong Kong Shang Hai Banking Corporation, were originally established for the purpose of handling the drug money of the opium wars. They never got out of the business, its just not talked about in public now.
There is thought to be 100s of billions, if not trillions dollars, these days, in drug money that's regularly processed through the international banking system. From what I hear, it is the primary source of liquidity in international banking today.
I understand how not all workers can be paid in the range that I described. I was talking about semi-skilled workers in heavy or high tech industry. While workers in retail, for example, may not make as much, at least their stores would be busy with the industrial workers who are making that kind of money.
As you can imagine, I don't think that all the workers in the Chinese factories that took our jobs are happy campers.
I think you're right about the German example, we should be doing that again. We were doing it before Germany did, in fact, they got the idea from us. We could do it once again, and lead the whole world.
Glad to hear you are reading the links, please let me know what you think once you finish them. Also, what kind of business do you have?
I agree with all of it except about the bankers. I don't know any Swiss bankers, so maybe I am naive. Great stuff!
As a victim of an Ohio education I can tell you this idiot believes.
Please! What a ridiculous statement.
indeed, records of knowledge and the spread of technology have been very beneficial
You should pay more attention to the history you read. Democracy not Capitalism (Wall Street way) is responsible for your higher standard of living. Please travel to some capitalist non democratic countries and you would not believe what you will see. Wall Street does not spur any innovation (except for financial innovation: CDOs, Mortgage backed securities ... those we are paying now for). Most innovation comes from small companies which Wall Street does not fund. 3,000 years of history should teach anybody that the increasing concentration of power in fewer hands and the polarization of our society (which increased significantly over the last 30 years) is not a good sign.
For anyone interested to reverse the power concentration in our society I started an online petition to tax speculative financial transactions, please review, sign and pass on!!! http://signon.org/sign/tax-speculative-financial
Grouping financial instruments into one category is dangerous. Sure CDO's, MBSs, ABSs, and the like are a result of financial innovation but so are mortgages, insurance, pensions (all financial innovations that have contributed to the prosperity of millions worldwide)
I agree, not all financial instruments are the same. Though Wall Street mostly represents the speculative part. My insurance company is a mutual company, definitely not an Wall Street figure. In human history, some financial innovation helped money circulate faster which helped the economy, but when money becomes a goal in itself (casino way) there is no much benefit to the economy. The two main causes for our prosperity are democracy and technological advances (most of them generated in garages or at small companies). Financial speculation can give individuals power, make them rich, but it does not create new wealth, just moves it from on pocket to another. The proof to all this is the "Great Recession" we are still feeling it......
Wall Street is just a tool to help fund companies and hence innovation. It has become very efficient at funding new ideas.
Small businesses are funded through the banking system.
I'm sorry, but you are just wrong. Go spend a week in Russia or Ukraine. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Your "thoughts" on Wall St are simply ridiculous. Have you ever known someone who worked on Wall St? Have you studied finance?
I think that you are the wrong one and I am sure I can prove you wrong. I have a very good understanding of finance and business and I have first hand experience with the communist system. Do you really understand money, debt and their impact on society? If you want a discussion, please tell me what do you think is the role of Wall Street?
What was your area of study in school or your profession? Where does your knowledge of finance and business come from? What experience have you had with communism?
Do you want to debate? Do you have an open mind searching for the truth or are you indoctrinated in the "official" ideology. Generally, official ideology is wrong, no matter what field we are talking about. Official ideology serves somebody's personal interests. Probably that is why A. Einstein recommended: ""Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning.""
im interested in what UFstudent asked
You're a lost cause , brother.
<<<I'm sorry, but you are just wrong. Go spend a week in Russia or Ukraine. You have no idea what you are talking about.>>>>
Unsupported assertion, non-sequiter, ad hom.
<<<Your "thoughts" on Wall St are simply ridiculous. Have you ever known someone who worked on Wall St? Have you studied finance?>>>
unsupported assertion/ad hom, appeal to inappropriate authority, ad hom.
Tell me mike, do you have ANYTHING to contribute to the conversation?
Nothing? Just snide assertions?
Uh, that's all we want - improvements. Like, how about corporations that actually pay taxes? How about a $100 limit on both corporations and individuals donating to political campaigns? How about corporations don't person hood unless they're going to get jailed like real people? How about regulations on lobbyists that don't allow for any "gifts," and don't allow politicians to work in that private sector for a decade after they hold political office? How about money for more than just 12 years of school, since it makes no sense to cut people off at 12 years? Is that really too much to ask?
Well, you might want to note that we have the 2nd highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world.
We all need Wall Street and for Corporations to do well, but only WELL REGULATED capitalism provides higher living standards for all. There was capitalism out the ass in 1840's England and more than a million Irish starved to death in a land of plenty. There was capitalism to boot in the Gilded Age, and that is a period of our country we should be ashamed of, the way the rich treated the poor.
So be careful. Praising capitalism for our fine standard of living is rather simplistic.
I'm really sorry you feel like that. I just don't know any people in the corporate world that need a Federal regulator telling them to be honest. You are talking about a tiny percentage of businesses.
No, sir. You obviously don't know history.
But, at any rate, they may not be aware of how harmful their actions are. At the same time, the actions of a few nearly destroyed our economy in 2008. They were working in an unregulated market. I'm sure they'd be the first people to tell me to my face how honest they are. But they needed regulation.
Not all regulations are good. But good, strong, well-enforced regulations are necessary. Try reading Upton Sinclair's The Jungle sometime.
You can look through history and find anything you want. You're claiming that a business, do to its nature, is inherently dishonest. That is ridiculous.
Which industries need regulation? How much regulation? Who controls it?
The industry that provides poultry to grocery stores needs regulation. Are you denying that there's problems there?
The automobile industry needs regulation. You don't think there's a reason for those recalls?
The financial industry, as I said before, needs regulation. Do you honestly believe all those derivatives traded were on the up-and-up?
Look, I know you want to be able to say, "Hurray for our side!" but you really need to be honest about that ugly baby you've got.
And the American government-- of, for, and by the American people (corporations are not people) should be the ones doing the regulating.
Can I ask you a few questions? Where are you from and what is your religion? What's your education background?
I am not trying to be nasty, I'm just curious about your background. You raised some good points.
I'm from Ohio and raised as a Protestant.
I'm from the great Southwest. I was raised in the Church of Christ (which was strii-ii-ict when I was a boy), my mom was Baptist, and I was baptized at 21 in an Evangelical non-denominational church where some folks pretended they were speaking in tongues. They weren't (and I knew that because my mom's Baptist), but I never said anything.
Plus, I was born on a farm. I drove a tractor. I tromped cotton.
I have advanced degrees in Biology, Chemistry, and History.
I teach college-level science, but I also know how to tear apart a Ford 351-Cleveland engine, and I know why the Cleveland is superior to the Windsor.
Thanks. I was raised in a traditional Methodist church. No snake-handling or speaking-in-tongues, but I'm really not that far removed from it. I haven't been a practicing Christian for since I was 5.
You are obviously a very intelligent person and I'm trying to figure out why you feel like you do about businesses.
I'm a lifelong European history nut and feel strongly that we are fortunate to live in the era of the Anglo-Saxon business model. Obviously you feel differently. Please convince me.
A corporation has one legal reason to exist: To make money. That is it's sole reason for existence. And it is good at it. And we can benefit from that.
But we've seen examples over and over of how, unregulated, these corporations go too far. So, they need regulation.
Do you believe that children need rules to live by? Limits that they need to learn to understand?
I'm sure you do.
Do you love your children? Do you want them to succeed and grow strong? To one day be wealthy?
I'm sure you do.
And yet, you give them limits. You regulate them. They are good children. You have raised them with love and to be good people. And yet they still must have rules and laws and... regulations to live by.
I don't see the difficulty here.
I can offer no hope. Your demonization of companies is pathological.
If you can honestly say that after my last reply, then you are not listening.
The ugly truth. America's wealth is STILL being concentrated. When the rich get too rich, the poor get poorer. These latest figures prove it. AGAIN.
According to the Social Security Administration, 50 percent of U.S. workers made less than $26,364 in 2010. In addition, those making less than $200,000, or 99 percent of Americans, saw their earnings fall by $4.5 billion collectively. The sobering numbers were a far cry from what was going on for the richest one percent of Americans.
The incomes of the top one percent of the wage scale in the U.S. rose in 2010; and their collective wage earnings jumped by $120 billion. In addition, those earning at least $1 million a year in wages, which is roughly 93,000 Americans, reported payroll income jumped 22 percent from 2009. Overall, the economy has shed 5.2 million jobs since the start of the Great Recession in 2007. It’s the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression in the 1930’s.
Another word about the first Great Depression. It really was a perfect storm. Caused almost entirely by greed. First, there was unprecedented economic growth. There was a massive building spree. There was a growing sense of optimism and materialism. There was a growing obsession for celebrities. The American people became spoiled, foolish, naive, brainwashed, and love-sick. They were bombarded with ads for one product or service after another. Encouraged to spend all of their money as if it were going out of style. Obscene profits were hoarded at the top. In 1928, the rich were already way ahead. Still, they were given huge tax breaks. All of this represented a MASSIVE transfer of wealth from poor to rich. Executives, entrepreneurs, developers, celebrities, and share holders. By 1929, America's wealthiest 1 percent had accumulated around 40% of all United States wealth. The upper class held around 30%. The middle and lower classes were left to share the rest. When the majority finally ran low on money to spend, profits declined and the stock market crashed.
Of course, the rich threw a fit and started cutting jobs. They would stop at nothing to maintain their disgusting profit margins and ill-gotten obscene levels of wealth as long as possible. The small business owners did what they felt necessary to survive. They cut more jobs. The losses were felt primarily by the little guy. This created a domino effect. The middle class shrunk drastically and the lower class expanded. With less wealth in reserve and active circulation, banks failed by the hundreds. More jobs were cut. Unemployment reached 25% in 1933. The worst year of the Great Depression. Those who were employed had to settle for much lower wages. Millions went cold and hungry. The recovery involved a massive infusion of new currency, a World War, and higher taxes on the rich. With so many men in the service, so many women on the production line, and those higher taxes to help pay for it, the lions share of United States wealth was gradually transfered back to the middle class. This redistribution of wealth continued until the mid seventies. This was the recovery. A massive redistribution of wealth. Then it began to concentrate all over again. Here we are 35 years later. The richest one percent now own well over 40 percent of all US wealth. The lower 90 percent own less than 10 percent of all US wealth. This is true even after taxes, welfare, financial aid, and charity. It is the underlying cause. No redistribution. No recovery.
The government won't step in and do what's necessary. Not this time. It's up to us. Support small business more and big business less. Support the little guy more and the big guy less. It's tricky but not impossible.
No redistribution. No recovery.
Those of you who agree on these major issues are welcome to summarize this post, copy it, link to it, save it, show a friend, or spread the word in any fashion. Most major cities have daily call-in talk radio shows. You can reach thousands of people at once. They should know the ugly truth. Be sure to quote the figures which prove that America's wealth is still being concentrated. I don't care who takes the credit. We are up against a tiny but very powerful minority who have more influence on the masses than any other group in history. They have the means to reach millions at once with outrageous political and commercial propaganda. Those of us who speak the ugly truth must work incredibly hard just to be heard.
Oh, thank you!
We have been mislead by Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama, and nearly every other public figure. Economic growth, job creation, and actual prosperity are not necessarily a package deal. In fact, the first two are horribly misunderstood. Economic growth/loss (GDP) is little more than a measure of domestic wealth changing hands. A transfer of currency from one party to another. The rate at which it is traded. This was up until mid ’07′ however, has never been a measure of actual prosperity. Neither has job creation. The phrase itself has been thrown around so often, and in such a generic political manner, that it has come to mean nothing. Of course, we need to have certain things done for the benefit of society as a whole. We need farmers, builders, manufacturers, transporters, teachers, cops, firefighters, soldiers, mechanics, sanitation workers, doctors, managers, and visionaries. Their work is vital. I’ll even go out on a limb and say that we need politicians, attorneys, bankers, investors, and entertainers. In order to keep them productive, we must provide reasonable incentives. We need to compensate each by a fair measure for their actual contributions to society. We need to provide a reasonable scale of income opportunity for every independent adult, every provider, and share responsibility for those who have a legitimate need for aid. In order to achieve and sustain this, we must also address the cost of living and the distribution of wealth. Here, we have failed miserably. The majority have already lost their home equity, their financial security, and their relative buying power. The middle class have actually lost much of their ability to make ends meet, re-pay loans, pay taxes, and support their own economy. The lower class have gone nearly bankrupt. In all, its a multi-trillion dollar loss taken over about 30 years. Millions are under the impression that we need to create more jobs simply to provide more opportunity. as if that would solve the problem. It won’t. Not by a longshot. Jobs don’t necessarily create wealth. In fact, they almost never do. For the mostpart, they only transfer wealth from one party to another. A gain here. A loss there. Appreciation in one community. Depreciation in another. In order to create net wealth, you must harvest a new resource or make more efficient use of one. Either way you must have a reliable and ethical system in place to distribute that newly created wealth in order to benefit society as a whole and prevent a lagging downside. The ‘free market’ just doesn’t cut it. Its a farce. Many of the jobs created are nothing but filler. The promises empty. Sure, unemployment reached an all-time low under Bush. GDP reached an all-time high. But those are both shallow and misleading indicators. In order to gauge actual prosperity, you must consider the economy in human terms. As of ’08′ the average American was working more hours than the previous generation with far less equity to show for it. Consumer debt, forclosure, and bankruptcy were also at all-time highs. As of ’08′, every major American city was riddled with depressed communities, neglected neighborhoods, failing infrastructures, lost revenue, and gang activity. All of this has coincided with massive economic growth and job creation. Meanwhile, the rich have been getting richer and richer and richer even after taxes. Our nation’s wealth has been concentrated. Again, this represents a multi-trillion dollar loss taken by the majority. Its an absolute deal breaker. Bottom line: With or without economic growth or job creation, you must have a system in place to prevent too much wealth from being concentrated at the top. Unfortunately, we don’t. Our economy has become nothing but a giant game of Monopoly. The richest one percent of Americans already own nearly 1/2 of all US wealth. An all-time high. More than double their share before Reagan took office. The lower 90 percent of Americans own less than 10 percent of all US wealth. An all-time low. Still, the rich want more. They absolutely will not stop. Now, our society as a whole is in serious jeapordy. Greed kills.
Those of you who agree on these major issues are welcome to summarize this post, copy it, link to it, save it, show a friend, or spread the word in any fashion. Most major cities have daily call-in talk radio shows. You can reach thousands of people at once. They should know the ugly truth. Be sure to quote the figures which prove that America's wealth is still being concentrated. I don't care who takes the credit. We are up against a tiny but very powerful minority. The rich have more influence on the masses than any other group in history. They have the means to reach millions at once with outrageous political and commercial propaganda. Those of us who speak the ugly truth must work incredibly hard just to be heard.
another brilliant rant lol!
I really appreciate your opinion, don't get me wrong, but this isn't a false dichotomy. It's not a "either you get rid of it all, or leave it as is" situation. When there are flaws in the machine, the machine gets repaired. Similarly, the system as it is today has flaws that need to be fixed. Not so it can be dismantled, but so it can more effectively, and efficiently produce.
No, I don't think so.
yes
get republicans to vote yes on jobs bill- by any means necessary
It's a jobs bill for UNION workers, not regular people. Are you kidding me?
"They see me trolllinnnnn...."
What does that mean?
I agree but we need to fix unemployment by boycotting imported goods until they bring our jobs back!!!!!!! They have gotten too greedy for those low wages and its left so many of us unemployed and looking in vain for a decent job like manufacturing!!!!!
I buy American every chance I get. I hope everyone does the same.
They don't you should hear the stupid crap they tell me...well then we will harm those people when they lose their jobs and they're poorer than us...what about our iphones....what about gasoline......they don't get it they've never been unemployed!!!! I really don't give a shit about people in other countries we need to do what is right for us!!!
This free economy must operate by the laws of this democratic republic which must be returned to being unquestionably by the People for the People, not with any potential to be by the Corporation for the Corporation. The foreclosure crisis and the Great Recession and the resulting popular movements have taught us that, if nothing else than due to just the appearance that specific business interests wield far too much influence, there must at the very least be a clear separation of Corporation and State in this democratic republic that is unprecedented in its' history.
I don't dispute that. But you need to direct your anger at the right people.
Hold the phones! All this time I thought our country was less than 300 years old!
People did actually engage in business activities thousands of years ago. That should be obvious.
To MikeInOhio:
A lot of us are interested in making "some improvements", as you mentioned. You will find a wide range of views at this site regarding the efficacy and track record of capitalism - it ain't goin' nowhere for now, but meanwhile we CAN zero in on the greed and lack of adequate regulation of Wall Street, which is central to our country's problems, and is exacty why OccupyWallStreet is taking off so fast. Stay tuned ...
I've been doing this for weeks now and have noticed a significant change in posters. It has become a union/marxist movement as opposed to an anti-corruption cause. My interest is fading.
Well, you happen to have caught my very first post ... and I'm no Marxist. There are certainly going to be a lot of "extreme" views (a relative term), but it is possible we may be onto something similar to the Populist/Progressive era 100 or so yrs ago in this country. It was a 'failure' in one sense (electorally), but there is a legacy of numerous important things we go from that era that we still have today: an environmental movement, popular election of US senators, women's suffrage, anti-war movements (complete with jail terms for WWI protestors), anti-trust legislation, farmer's co-ops ... that's why I said stay tuned - it might be a flash in the pan or it could be the start of a genuine Populist uprising, although they are indeed rare ...
Thank you. I am pleased to be your first post. I've been doing this for 3 weeks now and have enjoyed the debate.
I really hope something comes out of this too, I just think the venom is directed at the wrong people. The March should be in Washington, not NYC. And I agree that the banks, and GM, and AIG, should not have been bailed out. The system doesn't work when fear of failure is negated by the Federal government.
In fact, the root of the whole corruption issue is Fannie Mae. They started the real estate bubble by refusing to factor risk into the underwriting standards. I would take my protests to the front doors of Barney Frank and Maxine Waters- they fought underwriting regulations tooth-and-nail
Yes .. right now the thing is all over the place - I like the debating etc too, and have a keen interest in repetition of historical trends - ie my comments on Populism ... and we really don't know where this is going - it will of course have to zero in specific issues, recommended fixes, etc but right now we're still in the "venom-spewing" stage, apparently!
I'll probably log back on tomorrow & jump in - thx for the thought-provoking posts .. Peace .. IP
Keep it up!
Yes, but our real living standards seem to have been declining for the last thirty years. I paid ten times more for college than my parents did, and I am having a much more difficult time finding a job.
Also, one could say the same thing about Hitler. The standard of living in Germany for most people, with notable exceptions, was much better during his rule than during the preceding system. This extreme example should serve to illustrate that our support of leaders shouldn't be ENTIRELY about money. There are ethical principles that are more important and should not be so quickly sacrificed for an easy life. However, in general, I believe the majority will be just as comfortable without corporate rule.
Many of the great advances in the standard of living for the poor and middle class -- shorter hours and other labor rights, access to healthcare, public education -- were not done under the auspices of capitalism. They were fought for and won by workers and enlightened leaders. This tendency, call it progress if you like, is a separate, parallel phenomenon, and hopefully most people down at Occupy Wall Street support it.
If the current tendency toward deregulation, government subsidies for certain industries, and cutbacks in social services continues, most people won't enjoy this high standard of living.
So, while I think your argument is interesting, and I have heard it many times, you have be somewhat skeptical that we have corporations (which I assume is what you mean by "capitalism") to thank for the things we most enjoy. Technological advances, for example, usually begin in the public sector (the military, universities). One could just as easily view corporations as parasitic entities that use their wealth to siphon off and control the bulk of the real advances made by society as a whole.
Yes, our real standard of living has been falling since we opened our markets to China and India. There is no doubt that cheaper labor in Asia has sucked jobs, and real wages, out of our country. But look at Germany, they pay a higher average salary for industrial workers, yet they outperform the Chinese in export to import ratios. There is a way to make it work.
Your Germany example is appreciated for another reason. The Germans went from financial ruin, with a worthless currency, to relatively high standards of living in 15 years. That is an amazing turnaround, you must admit. Societal change can be quite rapid and I believe we can tight our ship quite easily. We don't need revisionist Marxists to show us the way.
People have owned slaves for thousands of years, and it wasn't until a few hundred years ago that most cultures abandoned the the practice as abhorant. Think about it; In Rome and Greece the ability to own slaves was a zeus-given right! I believe that viewpoints change quite rapidly, and 99% of people find child labor and 13-hour workdays as inhumane. I know you are trying to give the unions credit but I reject the notion that any modern corporation could be successful operating under this type of strategy.
I agree, we owe a lot to Universities and the military. But we owe far more to the free-market system. Sure, NASA, Battelle, and the like have developed many great technologies, but I think you are way off base with that argument.
If you had knowledge about the world, you wouldn't have written this as it is demonstrably false.
What do you think we are trying do?
We need to minimize casualties on both sides! We are here to heal not destroy.
I'm still positive, but my faith is fading.. You need a list of demands/platform.
Watch the documentary called "The Corporation" for a nice view of what unregulated corporate activities are possible. This is the kind of stuff people are mad about.
Yes, I've seen it.
I hope you don't think that is typical. My experience has been very different.
Where do you live?
re: Anglo-Saxon
Are you sure? It doesn't seem like most those countries fit the bill for that claim.
From some quick Googling around as I'm not an expert on foreign economies:
"Most countries on continental Europe (such as France, Italy and Germany) possess a macroeconomic model called continental capitalism (also called Rhine or Rhenan capitalism).[6][7] Yet some see Spain and also the newer members of the EU as (non-English-speaking) examples of "Anglo-Saxon" economies. The debate amongst economists as to which economic model is better, circles around perspectives involving poverty, job insecurity, social services, and inequality. Generally speaking, their advocates argue that more liberalised economies produce greater overall prosperity,[8][9] while defenders of continental models counter that they produce lesser inequality and lesser poverty at the lowest margins.[10][11]"
You are talking about insignificant differences between, say, England and Germany. I should also point out that the Nordic countries do add a greater social safety net than most, but these countries are also the most homogeneous in terms of ethnicity.
Sorry for the long delay. I'm talking about the anglo-saxon market-driven capitalist system. If you look at the rankings, here are the countries that fit that bill:
That's 18 out of 20
It is also fascination to note that all these countries, except Ireland, Japan, and Hong Kong are predominately Protestant countries.
Do you see any correlation here?
The fact that it's possible is the problem, not that it's typical.
We have the least amount of systematic corruption of any country in the world. Corruption is a part of human nature, but our system seems to regulate it best. Of course it needs improvements, but walking around with "Eat The Rich" signs is ridiculous.
No we don't. Where do you get that idea from?
It's been studied over and over again.
The Economist (magazine) actually publishes a top 50 every year. The US is #1 every year.
Nope.
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results
Trusting a corruption survey from a US company called "The Economist"?
It's British, actually.
My bad!
Check your sources. The Economist has been around for over 100 years, Transparency is a political organization.
By the way, virtually every country in your top 20 is a market-driven economy.
Interesting, little regulation in those countries?
The more regulation, the more corruption. Just take a look at Europe excluding the protestant countries. You need to separate regulation from the economic and legal systems
These top countries, by the way, all share an anglo-saxon market-driven system.
I think you take the cover story of Wall Street as the reality of the situation. Wall Street hasn't moved capital to where its "needed", ever. It's move to where it can make more profit, collapse a government, or both.
You are naive, and have learned from your Liberal masters. That is exactly what it does.
I would suggest studying finance before casting dispersions on something you don't understand.
I understand history. Theories on economics cannot trump that.
As do I. Our history has led us to this point, and it is the logical outcome of thousands of years of trial-and-error. Socialism and communism died in he 1980's.
I can't don't argue "ism"s and I don't associate with them. Adam Smith conceived of Capitalism and Karl Marx along with Fredrich Engles conceived of Socialism: Both serve imperial interests.
Adam Smith was the first person to write down the tenants of capitalism. It had been around much longer.
Marx and Engels identified an alternative theory to capitalism that hadn't been practiced anywhere in the world, other than during the stone/bronze/iron age. It was based upon the lifestyles of the pre-Roman Germanic tribes.
'm sorry, but his has little to do with modern American society.
I agree.
Thank you! At least I'm not talking to a wall.
DON'T LISTEN TO THE NONSENSE ON YOUR TV!!!!!
This is not an anti-capitalist movement.
Well then, what the heck is it? I can see people carrying signs on television. It certainly isn't a Republican meeting.
99% are anti-fascist. A much smaller percentage are anti-capitalist,communist,anarchist,libertarian,left-wing, right-wing, etc.
I wish that were true, but this has become a Marxist protest. Two weeks ago I had very different debates than I am having now.
oh well maybe it's been co-opted already and there's nothing we can do. I can't participate in a Marxist revolution.
Our system hasn't been around 3,000 years, or Wall St. hasn't at any rate. Have you ever considered anything other than the status quo?
It has. The Egyptians engaged in capitalism, that is why they were so successful.
I certainly don't like the current system, That's why I'm talking here. You simply can't just shout out Marxists slogans and expect to make a successful movement. You have to have coherent, RATIONAL, demands.
Are you certain it was capitalism or something else like being a colony for awhile or their most recent dictatorship they recently ousted? I don't know, why do you automatically assume it was capitalism, or that they were even successful or successful for what?
Because capitalism gives everyone a chance. There is nothing from stopping you or me from starting our own business and becoming successful. In Egypt, that is all people want- a chance to succeed.
Colonialism had an affect, of course, in the fact Mubarek was in power. Free markets removed him.
I disagree that capitalism gives everyone a chance, I think quite the opposite, but true democracy, I think a much better chance at giving everyone a fair shake, or at least a voice than does capitalism. I also disagree about the starting of a business. I would agree with you if everyone started from the same place, but that isn't realistic. I would also agree with you if the government acted the same toward small and large businesses. They didn't, or at least that I know of. How many small businesses were bailed out? I was one and wasn't. I know several big ones that were though.
I agree. Wall St firms, GM, and banks were bailed out by the Federal Government. I was hoping they would all go through a normal bankruptcy. None of them did, of course. You can blame "hope and change" and Eric Holder for that.
They didn't bail out our 50-year family business either. Why should they?
I don't think Eric Holder deserves the full credit, it's the past and current system. I didn't say anyone should have been bailed out. I remember a few years ago how the talking heads justified high ceo salaries, because they knew how to keep corporations solvent, and thought it was hilarious when all the auto execs jetted to Washington for a bailout,lol! I suppose now that the secret is out anyone is qualified to be a ceo of a major corporation.lol!
No, Eric Holder doesn't deserve the blame, I agree.
An old friend of mine is the CEO of a fortune 500 company. He makes well in excess of $5M per year. From 1st grade on it was pretty clear he was special- smarter than hell, a great guy, someone you could trust implicitly.
He went on to excel at Ivy league schools, worked at some of the top companies in the US, and now runs one of them. What the heck is wrong with that?
His pay is based upon what the owners of the company think he is worth. That just makes perfect sense to me.
I would say Wall Street is Capitalism at it's purest, they are all about Capital not people. I would say they are not free market. But I'm an anti-capitalist I think Socialism done right would be a better system.
Thank you for the rational response.
I agree that socialism (done right) has wonderful intentions, but it simply doesn't work in diverse countries. It can work in Denmark, but everyone feels like they are a part of the ethic tribe. Sharing is easier when you are sharing with a cousin.
My wife grew up in Russia. She has a saying, "if you want socialism, go to Russia and see how it works there." It is not compatible with human nature.
I disagree, I think cooperation is very much a part of nature but we only do it with people we like and feel a connection with. That's why we have to end all the hate and separation. Socialism is just as much social as it is economical.
I do not agree. The guys who works the hardest will feel slighted by the guy who works the least. I wish that wasn't the case, but that is what I have seen during the course of my life.
Cooperation doesn't mean the everyone will have all the same of everything. That's an unfortunate misunderstand of socialism. The who contribute more will have more, until society gets to a point where they receive based on needs. I don't think you can say it can't happen when it's never been tried. What you are thinking about is egalitarianism and it's a form of exploitation. I'm talking about socialism.
We can argue the finer points, but someone (in the government) ultimately has to decide who gets what. Do you see any hippie communes in CA anymore? They may work in the short term, but human nature gets in the way of long term success.
For one, I don't like Hippies (bad for the left). To fuck communes (socialism in a sea of capitalism will never float). Three again about the human nature thing there is no innate human nature our beliefs and behavioral patterns can change.
Human beings don't like feeling like they are getting screwed. I know I don't.
That's the basis of the movement, right?
Socialism is, by its nature, based upon sharing of resources. The people who work the hardest don't like sharing resources with the people who work the least.
For the majority of humans alive today, capitalism has not sustainably raised living standards. If it had, we would not be protesting. These are the facts.
We understand why you are frighted. Change is unnerving. This must be very difficult for you. You and the others who are posting negative comments on this forum are feeling threatened and uncertain. We understand. These are anxious times.Try to consider this from the perspective of those on "the other side."
Keep in mind that there is no "other side": there is one country, under God.
951 cities in 83 countries have joined the protest. In the entire history of the planet, we have never seen anything like this.
Join us.
All I know, brother, is that we will be seeing a Republican President here shortly, and you folks are making it all possible.
Keep it Up! Fight The Power!
Capitalism gave you everything you have, you are just too ignorant to realize it.
So, your true motive comes out. You are here to elect a republican. Thank you.
Flames cheerfully ignored.
Geez, you got me.
I am absolutely motivated to see a Republican President elected to replace Obama. Are you kidding me?
Your "hope and change" has turned into Marxist demonstrations on Wall St.
Obama isn't exactly a democrat.....
Socializing losses and privatizing profits isn't exactly how capitalism is supposed to work either. The efficient use models (where money is supposed to go to the places that will be the most beneficial to society) has failed and is still considered the most efficient use of our monetary resources by those with an authoritative and vested interest.
You made a great point. Your man, Obama, is an utter failure. Who do you intend to vote for?
Thank you for the lesson in economics. How would you dole out our monetary resources?
Who am I going to vote for? Not sure... Next summer is gonna be pretty fun and interesting though!
If the system worked properly, we wouldn't have to dole out to any specific cause and for the most part, it would take care of itself (overlooking government oversight and other factors for the purpose of simplicity). I'm a firm believer in education. Something is definitely wrong when our brightest minds are working in finance as opposed to the sciences. I'm sure that your next question will be "What would you do differently to change it?" Well, here's my answer:
For starters, I would enforce the rules that are already in place like RICO, Antitrust, Honest Services (If it still exists), Sarbanes Oxley, etc. Just about the entire country has overlooked the golden maxim of our success: Ones reputation must be paramount to obtain credit or be trusted with the fiduciary duties of others. Capitalism is based on credit and merit. Without merit or the notion that hard work equals big pay, you have nothing and the system falls apart like we are seeing now. Why would someone want to contribute if he or she knows there is no reward?
I contribute, and I expect no reward. I'm not a christian, but I volunteer with my parents's Methodist Church to feed the needy.
I'm also one of those science people who went into finance. What's wrong with that? Would a graduate degree in Physics make me a better person than my degrees in Finance?
You simply don't like seeing people making a lot of money.
That's not true. I don't have a problem with people in finance that are making money. I have a problem with people making money when it is causing systemic problems that are detrimental to society and our merit as a nation.
Then we agree that we are in favor of the same thing. We don't like corruption..
International finance is the bloodstream of the world, and corruption disrupts the flow..
Who's blaming capitalism -- not us? We are a Focused Direct Democracy. As such, many more people will come to your side when you are proactive (for “new” Business & Government solutions), instead of reactive (against “old” Business & Government solutions), which is why what we most immediately need is a comprehensive “new” strategy that implements all our various socioeconomic demands at the same time, regardless of party, 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; that is, using a Focused Direct Democracy organized according to our current Occupations & Generations. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategically Weighted 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/
because we need 100,000 “support clicks” at AmericansElect.org to support a Presidential Candidate -- such as any given political opportunist you'd like to draft -- in support of the above bank-focused platform.
Most importantly, remember, as cited in the first link, that as Bank Owner-Voters in your 1 of 48 "new" Business Investment Groups (or "new" Congressional Committees) you become the "new" Congress replacing the "old" Congress according to your current Occupation & Generation, called a Focused Direct Democracy.
Therefore, any Candidate (or Leader) therein, regardless of party, is a straw man, a puppet; it's the STRATEGY – the sequence of steps – that the people organize themselves under, in Military Internet Formation of their Individual Purchasing & Group Investment Power, that's important. In this, sequence is key.
Why? Because there are Natural Social Laws – in mathematical sequence – that are just like Natural Physical Laws, such as the Law of Gravity. You must follow those Natural Social Laws or the result will be Injustice, War, etc.
The FIRST step in Natural Social Law is to CONTROL the Banks as Bank Owner-Voters. If you do not, you will inevitably be UNJUSTLY EXPLOITED by the Top 10% Management Group of Business & Government who have a Legitimate Profit Motive, just like you, to do so.
Consequently, you have no choice but to become Candidates (or Leaders) yourselves as Bank Owner-Voters according to your current Occupation & Generation.
So please JOIN the 2nd link so we can make our support clicks at AmericansElect.org when called for, at exactly the right time, by an e-mail from that group, in support of the above the bank-focused platform. If so, then you will see and feel how your goals can be accomplished within the above strategy as a “new” Candidate (or Leader) of your current Occupation & Generation.
Please, no more links.
Yeah "improvement". Like sending all the jobs to China, cutting labor costs to near zero, hyper inflating profits and then patting yourselves on the back for being such "good business people". I think "enemies of America" is a better term.
These protests are about SAVING capitalism. Wall Street and the global corporate oligarchy has destroyed the Free Market
Wall street was the engine of the economy at one time. That all changed in the early 1980's with the introduction of the leveraged buyout. Instead of investing in companies wall street was now sucking the life out of them. A company would be bought with borrowed money and then broken up to pay off some of the debt. Hundred's of thousands of workers lost their jobs so a few wealthy investor's could make a killing. Many companies were bought and sold over and over again, each time loading it up with more debt. The LBO is still with us today, it's called private equity. Wall street today has no social purpose, it simply moves money around and each time the money! moves the street makes money. They are nothing but parasites
Wall street was the engine of the economy at one time. That all changed in the early 1980's with the introduction of the leveraged buyout. Instead of investing in companies wall street was now sucking the life out of them. A company would be bought with borrowed money and then broken up to pay off some of the debt. Hundred's of thousands of workers lost their jobs so a few wealthy investor's could make a killing. Many companies were bought and sold over and over again, each time loading it up with more debt. The LBO is still with us today, it's called private equity. Wall street today has no social purpose, it simply moves money around and each time the money! moves the street makes money. They are nothing but parasites
That's an interesting theory, but it isn't based in reality. I don't know what else to say.
"Wall St. and Capitalism Serve A Purpose- Higher Living Standards"
You left out something:
Wall St. and Capitalism Serve A Purpose- Higher Living Standards FOR THE 1%.
Clever
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/
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/
Amen - campaign finance reform should be goal number one of these protests. Without it the rest will never happen.
Sign up and spread the word! We need to get as many people as informed as possible about the issues and the fixes.
i support capitalism, what we have today is government and corporate intervention that has created crony capitalism.
Furthermore, true capitalism would NEVER support the idea that ANY industry is "too big to fail." Real capitalism would have had those bank go under in 2008 without a second thought.
NO ONE IS BLAMING CAPITALISM! They are blaming corporate welfare, and the government for playing heedless vanguard to established industry. THAT IS NOT CAPITALISM, IT IS CORPORATISM!
Yea, but welfare leads to higher living standards without the work!
Higher standards of living for the recipients, lower for the taxpayers.
that may be true, but whose counting..
The problem is crony capitalism, which is a gross perversion of a capitalist system. When Wall Street bankers selfishly inflict economic pain and suffering on honest Americans through excessive greed and their companies fail as a result, true capitalism dictates that they go out of business. It's not up to the government to pick winners and losers. Taxpayer money should not be used to bailout companies that fail in the marketplace. That is what moral hazard is all about. OWS is trying to drive home that message and it is resonating with people on a global scale.
I agree 100%. Unfortunately, that is not the message I am hearing out of OWS. I'm hearing that wealth=evil, not that corruption is the root of problems.
Heck, the unions are now involved. Talk about corruption!
There are a lot opinions swirling around. It is too fluid to make broad generalizations about OWS. As the OWS grows and the politicians, who initially dismissed them, begin to fear the movement, watch how the politicians walk back any derogatory remarks they may have made. In fact, they have already begun to do so.
http://www.cnn.com/video/standard.html?/video/bestoftv/2011/10/13/ac-gop-views-occupy-wall-st.cnn
You might be correct, but this movement has no coherent objectives, from what I have heard. I like the spirit of debate but I hear very little substance. It's one thing to say you are against corruption, its another to have a plan/platform to do something about it.
It appears that the OWS, as a group, needs to distill all of the inputs it is receiving and come up with a consensus platform of demands. That is not a simple task by any means considering the diversity of opinions expressed in this forum. When the demands are made public, assuming the movement endorses the platform, then and only then can something be done about implementing the demands proposed. Having said that, I'm not sure how things will play out and I'm not sure anyone else knows at this point. It's a work in progress.
Yes, but this has now been going on for weeks. The lack of a platform is really hurting the cause, I think.
I'm afraid it may take awhile. The delay can't be hurting the movement that much since the thing has gone global big time, but at some point they need to define what they want in order to get what they want. Right now, there is enormous energy that needs to be harnessed into a firm set of demands. That is the tricky part. The demands may splinter the group or, conversely, could make the group more cohesive depending how popular the demands are and how the demands are structured. It is critical that OWS remain studiously non-partisan whatever they do.
I think it is hurting the movement. Why are all these people joining? They don't know, there isn't a statement of objectives. They are joining because it is the thing to do.
In order to win over the great masses between the coasts, there has to be a coherent strategy. The videos that I see do nothing more than turn people off.
If someone could describe the stock exchange mathematically, couldn't we just program an un-biased computer to do the trading appropriately? Of course, then we would have to appoint an overseer which may be biased and make inappropriate alterations.
Yeah. The system is okay. It does need improving. Unfortunately, the 99% don't have the wealth to make true change which is the reason for this movement. Additionally, I thought it was because our say in politics should have made the change, but that was gravitated to the wealthy as well (we were back-stabbed by our own democracy).
WOW! You have lived 3,000 years? Speaking of capitalism, if you sell that secret, you'll be a billionaire!
That is a brilliant rebuttal.
Thanks. I consider it on par with your original post. :)
What am I supposed to be "rebutting", anyways?
You really need to have an education before you attempt to debate these issues.
Go and see John Perkins, Michael Parenti, Noam Chomsky, Chris Hedges, Naomi Klien, William Blum et al on you tube or read some of their articles and you will find the truth about capitalism.
I'm not sure that "reading some articles", or watching Noam Chomsky on Youtube, is going to change my mind. I went to a University and received a Masters degree in Finance.
with a minor in bragging to strangers over the internet
Almost the whole world is capitalist. And the vast majority of people on this earth are poor. Capitalism did not bring higher living standards to the American people or any other developed country. Up until the mid 1970's it was the democratic struggle of the workers that better living standards were gained in the US of A. Now we are on a regression path since Reagan, including the Clinton and Obama so called democratic regimes, that the corporations/banksters/police/military complex has been cutting back on those gains. Do you think that we in the developed world are such self respecting people that we would not work for 15 cents an hour in the sweat shop beaten down regions of the world?(by our elites and thier elites by the perpetration of the complex). No, its because those countries that are rich in resources whose power structures are aided by our complex, their workers have not been able to develop a democratic struggle to get from their hard work what they deserve. And as mentioned we the people are being driven back to the 1900's. Our "complex" wants to get us back to the 19th century, and our children and the rest of us will be working seven days a week for piss-ant wages, and misery, no health care, and shortened life span as they do in sweat shop regions of the world.
dahszil male usa
Please, get your facts straight. Prior to the Industrial Revolution 99.9999% of people were poor. Your "free time" (and mine) is the result of these gains.
Curious to hear why any wall street protestor would be pro capitalism?
Because it takes a small amount of political education and courage to say you are opposed to capitalism in the US. They have to fall back on the "it's not capitalism, it's something else...("corporatism", the Fed, etc...) garbage. They can't even define capitalism. The concept gets conflated with the mythical free market as though capital accumulation in private hands isn't capitalism because it doesn't conform to something that has never and can never exist. They do not get that crony capitalism has always been the rule and that it is capitalism nonetheless. Also, the word "free market" suggests personal freedom to the politically naive. Basically, they can't break out of their MSM dog training.
You hit the nail on the head. Just like liberals who call themselves "progressives" because they are afraid of using a term slimed by decades of corporate media propaganda.
"Capitalism" as it exists in the minds of economists (and libertarians!) is a religious belief that things always work out if people just leave things alone. They even use mystical terms like "the invisible hand of the market". Meanwhile, here in the real world, the only "hands" we're seeing are the ones in our pockets and around our necks that belong to the monied vampire class.
Understood. But the majority of the political malfeasance, and financial misfeasance, that is un-obfuscated and in the open is the basis of the the vocal debate as your have currently observed it.
A system existed that worked at some point. It was undermined. This is possibly that 'market correction' that may lead back to some level of prosperity.
Not if we don't identify the factors that allowed bankers to run wild and create the need for this "correction" and do something about them. I've heard a lot of smart people suggest that the repeal of Glass-Stiegall was key to this.
Just my humble estimation.... It isn't so much the factor, but the lack of factors (and possibly traditional business ethics for that matter) that have let an otherwise entropic system become inherently destructive. Reinstatement of Glass-Stiegall would be beneficial. Even if only esthetically, it would at least open a political dialogue publicly, to current socioeconomic dysfunction.
We need a transaction tax immediately. We also need controls on the ultra-fast trading devices. The present regs. are not near keeping up with the pace of change.
I do not agree. Such a tax is just another added cost that will do nothing other than to drive business to London, Hong Kong, etc.
it does of course need some improvements and the people are trying, which is more thank what can be said for what you're doing. here's the problem, it's our money they're spending improperly (as in I pay taxes and the bail out large corps that are too big to fail, meanwhile others get tax breaks that I don't get and while they lay off and furlough the workers we the execs get paid bonuses). we are also pay high salaries (and $16 pastries) to elected officials who cannot agree on anything enough to make those improvements. if I did that in my current high paying job, I would get fired (and my company wouldn't have to wait till my term was up). If my company didn't make money (they didn't in 08) I certainly wouldn't be getting a bonus. What's simplistic is saying that nobody is to blame, when clearly we should pick apart what's fair and needed and what isn't. And that is what I hope this movement does.
Great stuff! I am so happy to hear that people are thinking about this.
go Ohio :)
I O
I am trying to raise legitimate issues; I'm not trying to disparage anyone. Unfortunately I believe you have a very poor understanding of the issues at hand.
I support capitalism, but Wall Street is a giant casino, it's not capitalism
Higher living standards for whom is the ?
I mean a better average standard of living. We are all much worse off before the industrial revolution
If you start with an overblown demands like these then all they do is get watered down anyway. So.. You need to start off extreme. It's the laws of physics.
Excellent point. I must agree.
What I like about everyone on here is that they are talking about a true and just democracy. I know that greed lies in us all but we need to act civilized- humans need boundaries and rules.
Great point!! That's why I like talking about it.
Thanks Mike
yes
Umm, has it ever occurred to you that Wall St is not 'our system'? Wall St was not part of the American System of credit. The house of Morgan was established in the United States for the specific purpose of undermining the American credit system! Wall St, which is the American arm of the British imperialist system, IS THE PROBLEM. Reinstate Glass-Steagall now & bring back the American System.
Excellent points, but capitalism can be traced back to the Egyptians and before. It's human nature, I believe.
Who teaches you this nonsense?
And my +200 year old perspective leads me to believe that the industrial revolution was the devil in disguise.
you cant remove greed from human nature...
There will always be gluttons: money or food.
I think you can, but it certainly doesn't work with everyone. Good point
Greed...is not in human nature. It is a byproduct of a society that fosters it.
When talking about the nature of people your talking about their most basic drives and intuitions. One of our most basic drives is to find ways to sustain ourselves. This is a powerful drive and self preservation ranks near the top on human nature, and needless to say, it is a necessity. This innate drive for survival was made for the hunters and gatherers of generations past, and those that did well survived. When making a kill, you wouldn't just give the meat away, only taking what you absolutely need. You would gorge because you don't know when your next meal would be. This is human nature, and this innate necessity of self preservation will never go away. With culture and modernity the neccessity for such a strong drive is diminishing, but obviously there are some individuals who translate this drive into modern terms, money=sustainance, money = status, money = power. Sustainance, power, and status are all inherently a factor in human nature, we are social beings power and status drives people. We are things that strive to live therefore money in our society is a pretty useful tool. As for being a byproduct of society I do not agree, however I would say that the allowance of such greedy wall street money mongers to sway the system that is our country- government, citizens, and the resources within it- is a reflection of a faulty system that needs to be re-analyzed
You confuse human nature with human behavior. Our only nature is in our basic needs to survive, eating, drinking, sleeping. Culture influences us in a way that our genetic predisposition will be triggered, society being the catalyst, to make us act in certain ways, but it definitely is not nature. When you're talking about needs to survive, you're talking about actions taken to ensure survival. Greed is a word, in our culture, one acts out of greed because that is how they were taught to act, not because they were born naturally greedy organisms. Wanting what is needed to survive is not considered greed.
You are a true philosopher, silletti. We may have some problems on Wall St, but I don't think it comes down to a culture of greed. Greed is as old as humankind, and as old as Wall St. I personally don't blame Wall St for our current problems; rather I would place the blame on Govt itself. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac hold the bag at the end of the day with help from Wall St, of course.
"You are a true philosopher, silletti. We may have some problems on Wall St, but I don't think it comes down to a culture of greed." No, no culture of greed there. They have robbed your future in the past 4 years and you still do not get the most obvious facts.
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
but you can have laws in place to make sure that people are not harmed by it.
Not in a capitalist system. The capitalists buy the lawmakers. Are you guys blind?
even glass steagall was removed...
Yes, I agree. That is the tough part, though. Everyone has a different ideal.
No you can't, but you can control it. Protestants seem to do this well.
Capitalism is great if you are unable to visualize the damage it causes. The damage I am suggesting is exploitation. Exploitation of resources. Exploitation of people and exploitation of the earth. It's the tried and true way to riches.
This is not to say I begrudge someone who is rich. Just someone who is rich and oblivious. And I also feel its important to note that industry is one of the main ingredients to a fullfilling life, a purposeful life. But an economy based on exploitation - an exploitative model - cannot, and will not, work except on a temporary basis. Were past temporary.
Wall Street is the mechanism by which Predatory Capitalism redistributes the wealth of the 99% People to the 1% Plutocratic Kings for the exclusive benefit of their Higher Living Standards and the iron-fisted perpetuation of it!! Hear that...? That irritating cacophony of scratching and scraping? That's the peasants sharpening their pitchforks!!
LOL - pitchforks..scraping - nice picture - not too far from the truth as things keep getting worse and there is no proper response to the criminal activity that caused it.
Thanx, again. Supposed to be working on a book, but this national forum is so cathartic. Is your local Occupy forum really lame like PDX's is?? And CL is inundated with trolls. What's Coon Rapids like?? Supposed to be in the high 70s here this weekend.
Coon Rapids is a nice area in the northern burbs of the Twin Cities. Right now we are experiencing unsettled weather - lots of clouds some wind out of the north a bit of rain which we need but cooler temps right now then a couple weeks ago. We really did not have a winter then on the 1st day of spring we were already having summer temperatures for a couple of weeks prior - sunny and hot - and now this cool down - weird.
Nice, thanx again. Gotta love this country.
I do too that is why I am here. I want this country to be great again in all of the right ways.
No, that's the sound of rational, educated people getting ready to kick King Obama out of office.
I'd stick to the dope-smoking if I were you. You don't have much of a future in political debate.
What this?
Wall Street is the mechanism by which Predatory Capitalism redistributes the wealth of the 99% People to the 1% Plutocratic Kings for the exclusive benefit of their Higher Living Standards and the iron-fisted perpetuation of it!! Hear that...? That irritating cacophony of scratching and scraping? That's the peasants sharpening their pitchforks!!
Ask the peasants in Russia how well how well their revolution worked out.
The irritating cacophony is the sound of liberals crying about their lot in life.
Another TROLL!!
Indeed! And I'm not going anywhere.
I'm still waiting for an articulate thought to come out of your head.
TROLL!!
I asked if Libs slime on RW sites, but it dawned on me that on RW sites they just give you zombies orders (RW talking points) and don't allow replies. Fascinating.
Portland nutcase! Wow, that accomplished a lot.
You haven't had one articulate post that I have seen. Since you aren't well-suited for intellectual debate I would suggest burning some buildings.
A little too much meth today Mike?
You're a bit touchy.
Still no articulate posts. Six thousand six hundred and counting.
Is that jealousy???
Poor little Mike. Perhaps if you made an articulate post for me to respond to, I would.
So far? Nothing but the same old repetitive propaganda that became boring sometime in the 80s, from you.
So I respond in kind.
If you like, we can trade trade invective barbs, as that's pretty much the limit of your linguistic abilities. I'll bet you thought you were fun in grade school.
6,601 and counting.
Good, stick to your numbers. Be a good little boy.
Do you do Vegas odds too?
easier than wall street I hear
Yeah, CDOs are a bitch. Nobody knows who owns what "slice" of what.
I wonder if he knows part two is on the PBS site now?
http://video.pbs.org/video/2226666506
They do take threads off topic, so I'll bring it back a little.
7,160 and counting! I've been gone for a week.
I thought you were involved in the Cleveland bridge-bombing plot?
I'm not concerned that some people make a lot of money. People that are able to get ahead in life should be able to continue to do so. The concern is the spread between the Have's and the Have Not's.
DEAR INDIVIDUAL READING THIS, What must we as people do to fight this grave injustice inflicted upon us, by the ones who lust for power? How can we end the reign of the wicked and immoral and mete JUSTICE upon the oppressors as we have suffered from their hands-their blood stained hands... An idea of REVOLUTION-no, the act of revolution enacted by the proletarians! Must we as individuals ,as is always done, remain pawns to these people, these monoliths that we alone as individuals cannot surmounted...I surmise that we are not ignorant to the woes inflicted upon us by their enormities? We must UNIFY! Unity will be the way in which we assert ourselves!...While I realize all are not are not without income or funds and many cannot unify with this growing movement do to reasons of possible opposition and they being the people I'm question who we oppose (Wall Street), and many have responsibility they must tend to that take precedence. We must rise and vanquish this behemothto restore the equilibrium, for when disturbed it causes much chaos and strife in the hearts of man( man being neutral to represent all genders) in his mind and when mans mind and soul are in chaos as many are they rise to vanquish the pestiferous wealthy. However we should not just target these individuals, each of us individually must confront the corruption in our hearts, how can we judge the corrupt and deem them so when we cannot be amenable for ourselves we will surely be deemed hypocrites as we will be.....I am not meaning to say that this protest is in any way unjust, for far too long have we suffered, I mean that we are expected to expiate our sins -assume our parts in the problems we face and how we may have caused it. Yes, the Bankers on Wall Street are corrupt in ways we don't have evidence of without an investigation. But as we suffer soshall they, for we will make it so. But what of our government I say, my fellow citizens do not neglect to Confront the complicit in this affair for the roots of corruption are deeply seated, we have silent enemies amongst us-be warned that although succession in our goals will happen we may face a greater threat to our rights granted unto us from birth be prudent and circumspect. Another issue I wish to address is the idea of mans continual corruption as all things will be permeated with this darkness Inside our hearts.......when a system is created it always deviates from the righteous path, for nations we have learnt of in our education are littered with tales of nations that became corrupt and faded Into the ruin of collapse, we know that a society without corruption is utterly inconceivable, impossible in ways each and everyone of us know...for as long as men exist so shall our inner evil....but I digress from my original Intent of this passage and I ask forgiveness as we must forgive all in all eventual....the rising potentiality of this movement is quite an astonishment, I thought we were not capable of such things and thus I admit I had less faith in my fellow man. I see that we have all come to the realization of the need to bring the greedy to justice, although the reasons for your protesting may be unique to you, you share many goal, I had prognostications, inklings seems more appropriate of a term, that one day man would wake to realize the greater truth outside of his/her reality, and break the cycles of obsession with superficial base needs and trite motives, a dull and predictable lot we were but we've surpassed that I hope....for if not we will founder and fall Into the patterns we had grown so accustomed to, living such prosaic pedestrian lives stultified by the elite and of our own ignorance we always have the means to educate ourselves in this age, we have no limits to what we may learn based on our status in society, the powerful can no longer succeed in keeping us stupefied we have freewill to reason and learn and form our own ideas, ideas that would otherwise have died by the hands of the bigots! Our endeavours shall be crowned with fruition of our goals for our will allows it, we have broken free from the will of the oppressors.... part...now it is your turn...as Desmond Tutu stated "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor." YOURS TRULY- Aaron Thomas Bridge
Those are wonderful words, but where are the solutions?
The solutions lie at the beginning of our woes, its start not the present...many don't think to look in the past for the cause of issues, when we first exhibited signs of our woes at present none thought to solve while it was manageable.
I agree, history tells us much. But it doesn't tell us to abandon a system that has evolved over 2,000 years.
yes, 2,000
of course
Thanks Abri
[Deleted]
I think it can be repaired. That is the great thing about this movement- it generates the discussion that will ultimately decide on a cure.
Exactly there maybe a solution that arises out of this chaos for there must be.
We'll see. I can tell you that I am trying!
Reinstate Glass Steagal. And remember Marx, capitalism is doomed to fail and is only a step towards true equality, socialism.
Yeah. It worked great in eastern Europe. Try to educate yourself before making ridiculous statements.