Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: What could go wrong?

Posted 3 years ago on Sept. 22, 2014, 5:12 p.m. EST by agkaiser (1821) from Fredericksburg, TX
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I learned from NBBooks at Daily Kos:

In 1992 [neo] economist Francis Fukuyama of Stanford [since 2010, previously Johns Hopkins and George Mason universities] wrote "The End of History and the Last Man" about how the West had won the cold war was "the end point of mankind's ideological evolution." Two weeks ago he published in "Foriegn Affairs" the quarterly journal and associated website run by the [tinfoil hat time Libertarians] Council on Foreign Relations : "America in Decay," which decided that the culmination of human culture predicted by his earlier work might have some flaws requiring further evolution after all. "Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government." was premature.

NBBooks comments, ". . . they get upset when we the people start showing signs that we're not happy with the new corporatist paradise they've constructed for themselves, and locked us in as their supposedly prosperous and cheerful serfs. . . ."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/09/22/1331455/-US-elites-beginning-to-realize-there-s-a-problem

there's a lot more in NBBooks' blog today.

Who coulda guessed that Milton Friedman's neo-liberal wet dream would turn into a nightmare of anti democractic special interest power and concentration of wealth that's destroying the real economy and threatening the survival of the human race?! The "best and brightest?" Right!

16 Comments

16 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 7 points by agkaiser (1821) from Fredericksburg, TX 3 years ago

Dontcha just love the cons?

They're CONsistent, CONartists who are CONsiderably CONfused!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33167) from Coon Rapids, MN 3 years ago

Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street

[-] 3 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 years ago

Tell us how you really feel

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33167) from Coon Rapids, MN 3 years ago

I don't know if I could survive that. That release of outrage.

[-] 3 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 years ago

It's outrageous that these criminal banksters walk free and have only gotten richer & fatter off of the peoples largess.

I hear you.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33167) from Coon Rapids, MN 3 years ago

The good (?) news is - since it was ( is ) a conspiracy and collusion - aided and abetted by government. If we ever get control of the government into the hands of the population - where it belongs - criminal charges can still be brought and pursued to the full extent of the law.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33167) from Coon Rapids, MN 3 years ago

Liz is good - but she is not perfect - she could use more public input as she is still lacking in areas of support for the public and slapping down some actions of the public's opponents. That being said - it could be a whole lot worse with someone else in her position.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 years ago

Who is perfect? We can pressure ALL pols when they falter. And lift up those who speak out/act on the peoples behalf.

As encouragement to any still sittin on the fence.

My search for recent activity for prosecution of banksters found only her comments.

Any of our efforts were more than a year old. Do you know of any action for this critical goal?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33167) from Coon Rapids, MN 3 years ago

I have not heard of anyone pursuing this.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 years ago

Someone must be. I'm still lookin'

Seen anything on todays attempt to march to the UN?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33167) from Coon Rapids, MN 3 years ago

Not yet.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33167) from Coon Rapids, MN 3 years ago

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28370) from Coon Rapids, MN 39 minutes ago

Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street Prosecute Wall Street

↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply edit delete permalink

hmmmm downvoted from being a 3 - and - surprise - no comment as to why the comment was disliked - would be handy to be able to use jarts suggestion of a hovering vote reveal application to see who it was and then be able to ask em why. https://occupywallst.org/forum/idea-list-names-of-twinklers-and-stinklers/

[-] 3 points by 99nproud (2697) 3 years ago

trickle down, lovin', supplyside pushin', austerity imposing, union busting, anti labor, pro corp, low life, oligarch wannabe tools.

"their time is gonna come"

[-] 2 points by gsw (3024) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 3 years ago

Many great ideas here such as, "....But it gets even more interesting, because at the same time, another article appeared in Foreign Affairs, entitled Print Less but Transfer More. This one was written by Mark Blyth, a professor of international political economy at Brown University and author of Austerity: The History of a Dangerous Idea; and Eric Lonergan, a hedge fund manager living in London and the author of - what else? - Money. The gist of their article is pretty well captured by their subtitle - and no, I am not making this up - "Why Central Banks Should Give Money Directly to the People."

...Rather than trying to spur private-sector spending through asset purchases or interest-rate changes, central banks, such as the Fed, should hand consumers cash directly. In practice, this policy could take the form of giving central banks the ability to hand their countries’ tax-paying households a certain amount of money. The government could distribute cash equally to all households or, even better, aim for the bottom 80 percent of households in terms of income. Targeting those who earn the least would have two primary benefits. For one thing, lower-income households are more prone to consume, so they would provide a greater boost to spending. For another, the policy would offset rising income inequality. Well, it's hard not to like the idea. Trying to stop the financial crash of 2007-2008, the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve gave $12.6 trillion in direct aid to Wall Street and the banks. That's just under $40,000 for every man, woman, and child in the United States. I don't know about you, but if I had $40,000 more in my bank account right now, there would be a lot of life's petty details I could stop worrying about. What would have happened if the Fed had given each of us $40,000 a few years ago, instead of giving $12.6 trillion to the banksters? Hmm, Goldman Sachs and Citi Group and all the other Too Big to Fail or Jail banks would have been flushed down the toilet bowl of financial history, while a few million of us probably would have moved to Canada or Costa Rica."

Good ideas for redistribution

Or ....."To reduce the gap between rich and poor, the French economist Thomas Piketty and others have proposed a global tax on wealth. But such a policy would be impractical. There is another way: instead of trying to drag down the top, governments could boost the bottom. Central banks could issue debt and use the proceeds to invest in a global equity index, a bundle of diverse investments with a value that rises and falls with the market, which they could hold in sovereign wealth funds. The Bank of England, the European Central Bank, and the Federal Reserve already own assets in excess of 20 percent of their countries’ GDPs, so there is no reason why they could not invest those assets in global equities on behalf of their citizens. After around 15 years, the funds could distribute their equity holdings to the lowest-earning 80 percent of taxpayers."

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33167) from Coon Rapids, MN 3 years ago

Who coulda guessed that Milton Friedman's neo-liberal wet dream would turn into a nightmare of anti democractic special interest power and concentration of wealth that's destroying the real economy and threatening the survival of the human race?!

Pretty much everyone looking in from the outside? Being people who are not fed the non-stop 24/7/365 propaganda from inside the system.