Occupy Wall Street: The Movement Grows

[Si modo]

Have you noticed any over-capacity or under-consumption lately?
How about a destructive financial crisis?
Credit bubbles?
Asset price booms and busts?

Roubini had this to say the failure of unregulated markets and Europe's deficit driven welfare states:

"Some of the lessons about the need for prudential regulation of the financial system were lost in the Reagan-Thatcher era, when the appetite for massive deregulation was created in part by the flaws in Europe’s social-welfare model.

"Those flaws were reflected in yawning fiscal deficits, regulatory overkill, and a lack of economic dynamism that led to sclerotic growth then and the eurozone’s sovereign-debt crisis now.

"But the laissez-faire Anglo-Saxon model has also now failed miserably.

"To stabilize market-oriented economies requires a return to the right balance between markets and provision of public goods. That means moving away from both the Anglo-Saxon model of unregulated markets and the continental European model of deficit-driven welfare states..."

After the Storm: The Instability of Inequality | Truthout

First of all, linking to a blog/op-ed from a far left site really isn't proof of much of anything except the opinion of the far left site.

Their predictions fail, except for the unthinking. We do not have unregulated or unfettered markets.

See if you can find something from Nostradumus; at least he seems to get some predictions right.

Roubini has nailed a few predictions:

"Roubini's critical economic views have earned him the nicknames 'Dr. Doom' and 'permabear' in the media.[1] In 2008, Fortune magazine wrote, 'In 2005 Roubini said home prices were riding a speculative wave that would soon sink the economy...

"The New York Times notes that he foresaw 'homeowners defaulting on mortgages, trillions of dollars of mortgage-backed securities unraveling worldwide and the global financial system shuddering to a halt'.[1]

"In September 2006, he warned a skeptical IMF that 'the United States was likely to face a once-in-a-lifetime housing bust, an oil shock, sharply declining consumer confidence, and, ultimately, a deep recession'.

"Nobel laureate Paul Krugman adds that his once 'seemingly outlandish' predictions have been matched 'or even exceeded by reality.'"

Nouriel Roubini - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well, he's not going to nail this one. The condition that markets be unfettered and unregulated is not met. And, even IF the USA fails (which no doubt you would like), he would not have predicted it because he was flat-wrong on his condition.

Third time explaining the obvious to you.

Good grief.

 

[The Gadfly]

There are many ideas being thrown around by just ordinary people in the 99% Occupy movement. The leaders are intentionally staying away from specific issues. This country was founded on extreme violence such as burning the homes of British tax collectors, and perhaps even murder.

The subject of this thread is "Occupy Wall Street: The Movement Grows"

Your point #2 about entering the stock exchange and killing everyone would be a sad thing for the families of those who might die. On the other hand, we are a violent people hiding behind a lot of great concepts. Many see themselves out of work and losing their homes while Wall Streeters continue to make millions. I would understand if violence occurred. It would be a pity for the 1%.

I can see where the level of anger might be along the lines of patriots during the American revolution. What if you had lost your home or your job through no fault of your own and your unemployment was running out. Desperation can become violence easily. Within our highly moral concepts of government are Second Amendment solutions. If it were to happen I would be sad, and not helpful to the political end of things. On the other hand, what goes around comes around. Unfortunately, an eye for an eye is a consistently realistic concept for human beings.

Let me put it this way, if a few hedge fund manager, or CEOs experienced a fatal incident around the New York Stock Exchange, I would not lose any sleep. For the record as a social liberal, and a fiscal conservative, I would condemn any use of violence on Wall Street, at least publicly. I believe this was also John Hancock's attitude during the Boston Tea Party.

There you go Preius.. I suspected you'd endorse a KristalNacht like "message" to the scapegoats you've selected as an enemy.. Don't bother responding to RATIONAL debate -- like you dodged my response to you yesterday.. http://www.usmessageboard.com/4267291-post1040.html

Just go for the punchline. Good Job.. Nancy Pelosi is REAL PROUD of your conviction..

Please, for the sake of those of us who actually read you, write for CLARITY first. I have no idea who KristaNacht is, so now I have to Google. Kristallnacht - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Apparently, you think I hate Hebrew People, I will tell you this as a WASP, if it were not for my close Hebrew ties, my career would not be as advanced as it is at my age. I have had clients, (Jewish and others) request me specifically on their accounts because of my reputation.

I like Pelosi and Reid, but I do not get down on a rug and bow every morning like Repubs do to Austin, Texas for Rick Perry. I am a disgruntled Dem who is unhappy that President Barry Obama would consider cutting Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security. This is totally unacceptable. Pelosi and Reid have stuck to their guns. While I respect that, it is REQUIRED OF DEMS as far as I am concerned.

I have not dodged a single post of yours. In fact I went back for a post you complained about because I missed it. It would appear that the entire purpose of this post has to do with Jewish people, which I have responded to - even though it is off-topic. Do you actually think about what you post, or do you just dump whatever pops into your mind at the moment?

The subject of this thread is "Occupy Wall Street: The Movement Grows"​

Yes, Preius, you wouldn't mind violence, not if it serves your desired end. Of course, you'll denounce it publicly, while you relish it in private. So what if some "Wall Street types" are killed; better them than you, and they "deserve it" anyway, right? What happens when it goes to the next level? What happens if one of these loons bombs a CEO's house, and kills their family members-do they "deserve it" too? What happens, if violence breaks out in the streets? You think no innocents might be killed by stray bullets? Oh, but it can be "contained", right?

What happens, if you're wrong? What happens, if after the mob turns on the desired scapegoats, they start taking out their frustration on everyone else who happens to have more than they do? You see, there are some differences between this and Krystallnacht that go beyond scapegoating "the Jews" vs. scapegoating "the 1%". The Nazis were organized; this is a rabble. What happens, when they turn on whoever is handy? What happens, if they turn on YOU (I'm sure they'll be very moved to hear you're a "social liberal"-mobs are very amenable to reasoning, that way)?

You had better be careful what you wish for, because this is a very divided country, along a number of fronts, there are plenty of guns, and they are not all on the same side. Violence is an easy thing to start; stopping it can be another matter entirely. At best, you'll have one hell of a lot of bloodshed; at worst, you'll have neighbor against neighbor, with a lot of factions and shifting alliances. Think you can just hunker down and sit it out? Don't bet on it. Think you can buy safety for yourself and your family? Think again. If and when it all hits the fan, it will be a bloody, atrocity-filled mess. The best case scenario is that the active military can regain control, eventually, in which case the survivors will end up with a police state (and be grateful for that). If not, your only friend will be a weapon, and your only allies a defensible position, and enough combat experience to know what to do with both. Eventually, you will kill or be killed for a box of ammunition, a can of food, or a jug of water. I have been in combat, and I can tell you that you had better hope to whatever God you pray to that it never comes to that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Citibank Not Alone in Turning Away Account-Closing Customers

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7sV8EPpX4w&feature=feedu]Citibank Customers Arrested For Closing Their Accounts - YouTube[/ame]

Holy shit have we just entered into the twilight zone?

 

[newpolitics]

Great. Perhaps you could answer the question I keep asking of the protest supporters. What would be the economic impact of the 11 demands. If that's too hard.... just answer this one... what would be the economic impact of a $20 ph min wage?

The answer you keep getting from the protest supporters, and will go on getting until you stop using this fraud, is that there are no eleven demands. That's bogus, a hoax, fake, bullshit, nonsense, not affiliated with OWS, garbage, nonsense -- at very best, one person's individual opinion and not representative of the movement as a whole.

You want to know what the protesters want, ask them, and please note that "them" is a plural pronoun not a singular one.

But there is a list - from the protesters - or are you saying that that list is so fucking ridiculous that you're trying to disassociate yourselves from it now?

Its just what he said it is, not an official expression of the movement, only a few who are part of the movement. I would think this would be easy to understand, but apparently not.

 

[newpolitics]

Citibank Not Alone in Turning Away Account-Closing Customers

Citibank Customers Arrested For Closing Their Accounts - YouTube

Holy shit have we just entered into the twilight zone?

I've been trying to post this on my facebook and even created a thread here. This is bananas!!!! Everyone needs to know about this. Our democracy is being eaten alive from the inside, and finally the greedy monster shows its ugly face on the outside... the collusion between state and business is now blatantly visible. A threat to the bottom line of citibank is now seen as a threat to the state, evidence that they are one in the same, or getting extraordinarily close.

 

[Synthaholic]

I do believe a few of us have said this whole thing was carefully planned by the left.........

You remain a fucking idiot.

 

[chanel]

OCCUPY PHILLY shows no sign of leaving the tented encampment outside City Hall, so look for taxpayer costs to mount as the demonstration continues its second week.

For the first week of protests, the city shelled out $230,000, mostly in police overtime to man the protests that sprung up next to City Hall on Oct. 6, said Budget Director Rebecca Rhynhart. The other costs include setting up a police command center, as well as public-property and sanitation expenses. Those numbers don't include the use of straight police time, redeploying officers on regularly scheduled duty.

Rhynhart said that some of those expenses were one-time deals and that the overtime costs have been dropping, so the projected weekly expense going forward is $112,000. Rhynhart said it wasn't yet clear if the costs would force the city to make further cuts to balance the budget.

Occupy Philly continues, at a cost of 112G a week | Philadelphia Daily News | 10/17/2011

 

[mudwhistle]

What OWS doesn't understand is that social freedom and economic freedom are 2 sides of the same coin. That money comes from serving others. Having free speech is meaningless if the GOVT has a claim on your wallet and your ability to pursue new ideas and creations. The thousands of custom crafters who make kids toys (my banner below) are a great example of how MORE INTRUSIVE GOVT is as big a threat to freedom as censorship. Good luck designing a HALF free country. Where wealth and income can be stripped by a mob at will..

And when corporations are constantly threatened by the

 

[editec]

The movement grows because the people can plainly see that our leaders are berift of ideas.

The scam is over, boys.

Supply Side economic policies gave us this mess and more supply side solutions will only make things worse.

 

[Stephanie]

People died to come to this country to be FREE to make any life they chose.

Now we these who are fighting to BECOME SLAVES to a Federal Government.

And we not only have a political party (Democrats) backing it we have our very own President as their leader.

Hows that you people who voted for them.?

 

[mudwhistle]

People died to come to this country to be FREE to make any life they chose.

Now we these who are fighting to BECOME SLAVES to a Federal Government.

And we not only have a political party (Democrats) backing it we have our very own President as their leader.

Hows that you people who voted for them.?

Obama wants America to become like Europe.

Millionaires in Europe have to inherit their riches. This is one of the reasons our forefathers left and came here.

At least here you have a chance to become wealthy without being born into it.

Recently, PNC Wealth Management conducted a survey of people with more than $500,000 free to invest as they like, a fair definition of “wealthy,” and possibly “millionaire” once you begin including home equity and other assets. Only 6% of those surveyed earned their money from inheritance alone. 69% earned their wealth mostly by trading time and effort for money, or by “working.”

Here are some interesting statistics I pulled from an article discussing the survey results.

36% of earners and 27% of heirs are concerned about an economic recession.
77% of earners and 67% of heirs believe they have a lot of control of their financial future.
39% of earners and 21% of heirs are moderate or risky investors.
75% of earners and 50% of heirs have less stress thanks to their wealth.
51% of earners and 33% of heirs believe their wealth has led to increases of happiness.
Heirs are twice as likely to believe that their wealth causes more problems that it solves.
37% of earners and 25% of heirs believe that luck played a major role in their financial success.

For me, the choice is clear. There is only one option if I want to find myself with $500,000 of investible assets: earn rather than inherit.

Notice the highlighted sentence; Heirs are twice as likely to believe that their wealth causes more problems that it solves.

Those who inherited their wealth often consider it a curse rather then a blessing perhaps because they don't appreciate their good fortune as much as one who has lived in poverty and made good, something that is next to impossible to do anywhere else.

 

[Katzndogz]

The movement grows for the same reasons that uncollected trash attracts rats. They are getting free food, thanks to leftist organizations, it's quite good food. They have constructed a community where drug use is encouraged and the police will do nothing. They plead for donated condoms so they can lay in their own filth and have anonymous indescriminate sex. They are freed and unfettered by civilization to enjoy defecation and urination where they sit. The protest camps are convenient places for criminals to hide. They can enjoy all of these things and still feel noble about their actions.

It should be natural that the movement will grow.

 

[Dot Com]

What is it w/ the Randites (Republicans) who condone this corporatism/plutocracy? Rand's books were fiction!!!

Storming the Capitalist Castle - Yahoo! Finance

"We Are the 99 Percent" effectively publicizes a message consistent with research on the distribution of income and wealth: the top 1 percent of households in the United States represents an economic aristocracy.

Over the last 30 years, it has consolidated and amplified its privileged position, making strategic political investments in policies ranging from financial deregulation to cuts in top marginal tax rates.

It took home 21 percent of the nation's pretax income in 2008, up from 9 percent in 1976. It controlled 36 percent of the nation's private wealth in 2009.

Some economists argue that inequality has no downside -- a view critically dissected by Timothy Noah in a terrific essay, "The United States of Inequality."

As a poster I admired at the park last Wednesday succinctly put it: "We want democracy, not plutocracy."

 

[editec]

The natives are getting restless.

Ignore that at your peril, Masters.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What is it w/ the Randites (Republicans) who condone this corporatism/plutocracy? Rand's books were fiction!!!

Storming the Capitalist Castle - Yahoo! Finance

"We Are the 99 Percent" effectively publicizes a message consistent with research on the distribution of income and wealth: the top 1 percent of households in the United States represents an economic aristocracy.

Over the last 30 years, it has consolidated and amplified its privileged position, making strategic political investments in policies ranging from financial deregulation to cuts in top marginal tax rates.

It took home 21 percent of the nation's pretax income in 2008, up from 9 percent in 1976. It controlled 36 percent of the nation's private wealth in 2009.

Some economists argue that inequality has no downside -- a view critically dissected by Timothy Noah in a terrific essay, "The United States of Inequality."

As a poster I admired at the park last Wednesday succinctly put it: "We want democracy, not plutocracy."

What is it w/ the Randites (Republicans) who condone this corporatism/plutocracy? Rand's books were fiction!!!

What is it the marxist who think they should control a persons life? No one knows be better than me or knows what I want. Marxist like dumb commmunist aka dotcom needs to shut the fuck up with their marxist agenda.

 

[Dot Com]

What is it w/ the Randites (Republicans) who condone this corporatism/plutocracy? Rand's books were fiction!!!

Storming the Capitalist Castle - Yahoo! Finance

"We Are the 99 Percent" effectively publicizes a message consistent with research on the distribution of income and wealth: the top 1 percent of households in the United States represents an economic aristocracy.

Over the last 30 years, it has consolidated and amplified its privileged position, making strategic political investments in policies ranging from financial deregulation to cuts in top marginal tax rates.

It took home 21 percent of the nation's pretax income in 2008, up from 9 percent in 1976. It controlled 36 percent of the nation's private wealth in 2009.

Some economists argue that inequality has no downside -- a view critically dissected by Timothy Noah in a terrific essay, "The United States of Inequality."

As a poster I admired at the park last Wednesday succinctly put it: "We want democracy, not plutocracy."

What is it w/ the Randites (Republicans) who condone this corporatism/plutocracy? Rand's books were fiction!!!

What is it the marxist who think they should control a persons life? No one knows be better than me or knows what I want. Marxist like dumb commmunist aka dotcom needs to shut the fuck up with their marxist agenda.

lil'rebnc1775 never fails to underwhelm me w/ his melt-downs. Keep it up boy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What is it w/ the Randites (Republicans) who condone this corporatism/plutocracy? Rand's books were fiction!!!

Storming the Capitalist Castle - Yahoo! Finance

What is it w/ the Randites (Republicans) who condone this corporatism/plutocracy? Rand's books were fiction!!!

What is it the marxist who think they should control a persons life? No one knows be better than me or knows what I want. Marxist like dumb commmunist aka dotcom needs to shut the fuck up with their marxist agenda.

lil'rebnc1775 never fails to underwhelm me w/ his melt-downs. Keep it up boy.

You're a marxist and didn't know it? Now that's just stupid on your part.

 

[Dragon]

It's a whether simple question no need to back it down word for word.

Let me illustrate something for you with that sentence:

"It's a RATHER simple question . . ."

"WHETHER it's a simple question . . . "

I'm sure your question was simple when you thought of it. The problem is that, upon transcribing it into written words on line, it suffered from the same mangling that your sentence above does. What you actually wrote above makes no sense at all. I think probably you meant the first correction I posted, but that isn't what you SAID.

I asked for a clarification because you screwed up with your typing or something, and what you posted made no sense. You have provided a clarification now. Thank you.

Are you doing better now than you were in the mid to late 80's
Better or worse.

For most people, the answer is "worse."

 

[Dragon]

Just exactly how fucking stupid is President Obama?

Not stupid at all. He can see that this is a very popular movement (something you apparently can't see, so who's the stupid one here?) that he may be able to ride for political success. He's being very smart here. The stupid thing would be to continue alienating the very people who got him elected in 2008.

 

[Dragon]

What OWS doesn't understand is that social freedom and economic freedom are 2 sides of the same coin.

No, it's not true that they don't understand that. The problem is that you don't understand that the economic freedom of the very wealthy is antithetical to the economic freedom of the ordinary person. We are not all in this together. Those at the top of the tree are deliberately restraining the economy's growth in order to have a bigger piece of a smaller pie, and their freedom to do this (abetted by the government) results in a loss of economic freedom (which is dependent, after all, on economic means) for everyone else.