Occupy Wall Street Baloney

[Winchester]

[size=3][quote][/size]

[b] [size=3]That 9% rate, by the way, equates to 14 million Americans—people who want to work but can't find a job."[/size][/b]
[size=3][/quote][/size]


[size=3]Really, it equates to 14 million Americans who are unemployed. It does not show desire, willingness to take a lesser job, move, accept lower wages, longer hours, a lifestyle reduction, or any of the other possibilities.[/size]

[size=3][quote]After adjusting for inflation, average hourly earnings haven't increased in 50 years.[/quote][/size]
[size=3]But let's not discuss what causes inflation. Let's use the word "capital", later, confusing it with "money" and also leaving off that inflation explanation. Then we will discuss income inequality. That's always good for some outrage directed at the corporations.[/size]


[size=3][quote][/size]
[b] [size=3]And remember that huge debt problem we have—with hundreds of millions of Americans indebted up to their eyeballs? Well, the top 1% doesn't have that problem. They only own 5% of the country's debt.[/size][/b]
[size=3][/quote][/size]
[size=3]Let's not mention easy credit, though.[/size]

[size=3]Segue into tax talk, then. Because higher taxes without increasing output will result in even more enrichment of the upper classes as prices rise and we resort to using credit even more.[/size]

[size=3]Then let's get upset at the banks not lending the money. Of course, the increased money supply will lead to inflation, and that amounts to a tax. [/size]

[size=3]Basically, this article will inspire people to demand an increase in the money supply through easy credit and loans, thus increasing inflation, thus increasing the use of that credit. Note not a single mention of the mechanics of inflation or what "capital" really means. Just the song and dance about corporations while government, who protects and enables these business practices through special privileges to banks totally escapes mention.[/size]

[size=3]Yeah. Great flooping article.[/size]

[kamiller42]

[quote name='Adrestia' timestamp='1318595611' post='2321126']
[url="http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10"]http://www.businessi...y-about-2011-10[/url]

Here's some truth. Might want a glass of water to help it go down.
[/quote]
That's a lot of fancy slides. I won't be able to dissect all of them because of time limits. I know some will enjoy them because it confirms their biases rather than get to the truth.

Here's a sample of the bias in the slides....
"And then there are taxes... It's a great time to make a boatload of money in America, because taxes on the nation's highest-earners are close to the lowest they've ever been." Slide #24

What they fail to mention, on purpose I am sure, is everyone's taxes are lower. The lower and middle brackets have not seen tax rates this low since 1930-32. The upper income brackets are still paying more than twice the rate the lower bracket pays.

This is just income taxes. The next slide considers aggregate taxes, but I highly question those numbers. The highest rate displayed is 31.6% aggregate, but the previous slide shows upper income tax rate is 35%. How can the aggregate be LOWER than federal income taxes alone? I don't know the source, "Citizens for Tax Justice," but I am always leery of political organizations with the word "justice" in its title.

Edited October 14, 2011 by kamiller42

[KnightofChrist]

[url="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203499704576625171943997128.html"][b]Wall Street Job Losses Are Seen Hitting 10,000[/b][/url]

New York City's securities industry faces the loss of nearly 10,000 jobs by the end of 2012, New York state's comptroller predicted, a blow to the area's economy and government budgets.

In a report released Tuesday, Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli also said bonuses are likely to shrink this year, reflecting lower profits on Wall Street.

Since January 2008, the securities industry in New York has seen 22,000 jobs evaporate.

[url="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203499704576625171943997128.html"]Read more...[/url]

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote name='Ed Normile' timestamp='1318535299' post='2320736']

Must be one of those evil conservatives working his way towards a future that others will envy, and want to take away with confiscatory taxes.

ed
[/quote]

i mean, for the most part, i agree totally with the general sentiment of that picture, as i generally dislike the wall street protests. but there's something to be said about the contra points.

the problem with this is that it's no secret that someone who pulls in 3.8 GPAs an gets ninety percent of their tuition paid for will succeed. i know one person who is wealthy who gives to students who are around the eighty ith percentile, just for that reason. we know the top ten percent will make it, with flying colors. we know that the top twenty percent of our population has eighty percent of the wealth. an the top two like, most of that. what about that twenty five to seventy five percentile that necessarily must exist? they want to go to school and make it, but not all will be in that top tier, not all will be able to get those scholarships. the 'average' joe can't make these claims, necessarily.
yes, we must give credit where it's due, and reward those who can do that. but what about everyone else?

Edited October 14, 2011 by dairygirl4u2c

[Winchester]

I was just thinking this thread was too coherent.

[KnightofChrist]

FYI if it hasn't been brought up yet. But one of the major and first organizers of the Occupy crowd was Adbusters an anti American group out of Canada.

Here's what one of the founders of Adbusters has to say about the Jews...

[quote]"alot of ink has been spilled chronicling the pro-Israel leanings of American neocons and fact that a the disproportionate percentage of them are Jewish. Some commentators are worried that these individuals – labeled ‘Likudniks’ for their links to Israel’s right wing Likud party – do not distinguish enough between American and Israeli interests. For example, whose interests were they protecting in pushing for war in Iraq?


Drawing attention to the Jewishness of the neocons is a tricky game. Anyone who does so can count on automatically being smeared as an anti-Semite. But the point is not that Jews (who make up less than 2 percent of the American population) have a monolithic perspective. Indeed, American Jews overwhelmingly vote Democrat and many of them disagree strongly with Ariel Sharon’s policies and Bush’s aggression in Iraq. The point is simply that the neocons seem to have a special affinity for Israel that influences their political thinking and consequently American foreign policy in the Middle East.
Here at Adbusters, we decided to tackle the issue head on and came up with a carefully researched list of who appear to be the 50 most influential neocons in the US (see above). Deciding exactly who is a neocon is difficult since some neocons reject the term while others embrace it. Some shape policy from within the White House, while others are more peripheral, exacting influence indirectly as journalists, academics and think tank policy wonks. What they all share is the view that the US is a benevolent hyper power that must protect itself by reshaping the rest of the world into its morally superior image. And half of the them are Jewish."

Kalle Lasn, co-founder of Adbusters[/quote]

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_anti-globalization_movement
source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1084537/posts

[Jesus_lol]

[quote]KnightofChrist, on 14 October 2011 - 04:38 PM, said:

FYI if it hasn't been brought up yet. But one of the major and first organizers of the Occupy crowd was Adbusters an anti American group out of Canada.

Here's what one of the founders of Adbusters has to say about the Jews...
[/quote]


that doesnt sound very anti american to me, or even anti semetic. one can easily declaim Israel as a country that has many human rights abuses without hating them for being Jewish. In fact, there is a large number of Jewish people that speak out against the actions of Israel. And neocon politicians do pander very heavily towards Israel in general, which gets them the support of alot of evangelical america.




Fox news had an interesting piece on OWS as well. partially because of the article, but mostly because of where it came from.
[url="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/10/14/understanding-occupy-wall-street/"]http://www.foxnews.c...py-wall-street/[/url]

[quote name='Sally Kohn @ Fox News']Critics of the growing Occupy Wall Street movement complain that the protesters don’t have a policy agenda and, therefore, don’t stand for anything. They're wrong. The key isn’t what protesters are [b][i]for[/i][/b] but rather what they’re [b][i]against[/i][/b] -- the gaping inequality that has poisoned our economy, our politics and our nation.

In America today, 400 people have more wealth than the bottom 150 million combined. That’s not because 150 million Americans are pathetically lazy or even unlucky. In fact, Americans have been working harder than ever -- productivity has risen in the last several decades. Big business profits and CEO bonuses have also gone up. Worker salaries, however, have declined.

Most of the Occupy Wall Street protesters aren’t opposed to free market capitalism. In fact, what they want is an end to the crony capitalist system now in place, that makes it easier for the rich and powerful to get even more rich and powerful while making it increasingly hard for the rest of us to get by. The protesters are not anti-American radicals. They are the defenders of the American Dream, the decision from the birth of our nation that success should be determined by hard work not royal bloodlines.

Sure, bank executives may work alot harder than you and me or a mother of three doing checkout at a grocery store. Maybe the bankers work ten times harder. Maybe even a hundred times harder. But they’re compensated a thousand times more.

The question is not how Occupy Wall Street protesters can find that gross discrepancy immoral. The question is why every one of us isn’t protesting with them.

According to polls, most Americans support the 99% movement, even if they’re not taking to the streets. In fact, support for the Occupy Wall Street protests is not only [url="http://bit.ly/oEhwPw"]higher than for either political party[/url] in Washington but [url="http://nyti.ms/ozgxoB"]greater than support for the Tea Party[/url]. And unlike the [url="http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/tea-party.htm#r_src=ramp"]Tea Party[/url] which was fueled by national left-wing donors and institutions, the Occupy Wall Street Movement is spreading organically from Idaho to Indiana. Institutions on the left, including unions, have been relatively late to the game.

Ironically, the original Boston Tea Party activists would likely support Occupy Wall Street more as well. Note that the original Tea Party didn’t protest taxes, merely the idea of taxation without representation -- and they were actually protesting the crown-backed monopoly of the East [url="http://www.foxnews.com/topics/india.htm#r_src=ramp"]India[/url] Company, the main big business of the day.

Americans today also support taxes. In fact, two-thirds of voters -- including a majority of Republicans -- [url="http://on.msnbc.com/n7qbW4"]support increasing taxes on the rich[/url], something the Occupy Wall Street protests implicitly support. That’s not just anarchist lefty kids. Soccer moms and construction workers and, yes, even some bankers want to see our economy work for the 99%, not just the 1%, and are flocking to Occupy protests in droves.

I’ve even met a number of Libertarians and Tea Party conservatives at these protests. So the critics are right, the Occupy Wall Street movement isn’t the Tea Party. Occupy Wall Street is much, much broader.

Maybe it’s hard to see your best interests reflected in a sometimes rag-tag, inarticulate, imperfect group of protesters. But make no mistake about it: While horrendous inequality is not an American tradition, protest is.And if you’re part of the 99% of underpaid or unemployed Americans crushed in the current economy, the Occupy Wall Street protests are your best chance at fixing the broken economy that is breaking your back.

Read more: [url="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/10/14/understanding-occupy-wall-street/#ixzz1aobsxrx1"]http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz1aobsxrx1[/url]

[/quote]

Edited October 15, 2011 by Jesus_lol

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1318647288' post='2321439']


that doesnt sound very anti american to me, or even anti semetic. one can easily declaim Israel as a country that has many human rights abuses without hating them for being Jewish. In fact, there is a large number of Jewish people that speak out against the actions of Israel. And neocon politicians do pander very heavily towards Israel in general, which gets them the support of alot of evangelical america.
[/quote]

Sounded Anti-American to me because they criticize the "jewishness" of certain American citizens. It also sounded Anti-American and anti-semtic because apparently we have just too many influential Jews here in America. If it isn't anti-Semitic why then is it important to ask “Why Won’t Anyone Say They Are Jewish?” Why is it important to ask that question? Why is it important to make a list? And why is it also important to point out "half" of the "50 most influential neocons in the US" are [i]suspected[/i] of being Jewish? Why is "Drawing attention to [u]the Jewishness[/u] of the neocons" important?

Edited October 15, 2011 by KnightofChrist

[Jesus_lol]

Why is anything about Adbusters relevant? seriously.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1318652167' post='2321473']
Why is anything about Adbusters relevant? seriously.
[/quote]

Because it is a major organizer of the movement. Seriously though... Why is "Drawing attention to [u]the [u]Jewishness[/u][/u] of the neocons" important? Why is it important to make a list?

[Jesus_lol]

it is also alot of an ad hominem attack. i doubt you know much about Adbusters as a magazine, but the personal views of its owner have very little to do with occupy wall street, especially as those views are not related to the protest. I bet i can find prolife people making extremely racist remarks, how much should that affect my opinion of a unrelated issue they support?

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1318661046' post='2321495']
it is also alot of an ad hominem attack. i doubt you know much about Adbusters as a magazine, but the personal views of its owner have very little to do with occupy wall street, especially as those views are not related to the protest. [/quote]

Nice dodge, that's twice now. It is not a ad hominem. His focus on the [u][i]Jewishness[/i] of certain Americans, a concern that too many Jews are in positions of power, and writing a list of those persons is at least unintentionally racist. [/u]Also he speaks for Adbusters in his article. He states "[i]we decided to tackle the issue head on and came up with a carefully researched list"[/i]. OWS is Kalle Lasn/Adbusters brain child. The main website for OWS was first registered to Lasn.

Lasn tries to hide the racism of his statements but there have been numerous and clear anti-Semitic comments made by protesters at the Occupy events.

Source: [url="http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/10/13/more-anti-semitism-at-occupy-los-angeles/?singlepage=true"]http://pajamasmedia....singlepage=true[/url]


[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1318661046' post='2321495']I bet i can find prolife people making extremely racist remarks, how much should that affect my opinion of a unrelated issue they support?
[/quote]

I have no doubt it would matter a great deal to you, liberals and to the media if the pro-lifer was the leader of a organization that started a right-wing movement and he made extremely racist remarks, and numerous individuals at the events also made similar remarks.

Edited October 15, 2011 by KnightofChrist

[Adrestia]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1318614185' post='2321226']
[size=3]Really, it equates to 14 million Americans who are unemployed. It does not show desire, willingness to take a lesser job, move, accept lower wages, longer hours, a lifestyle reduction, or any of the other possibilities.[/size]


[size=3]But let's not discuss what causes inflation. Let's use the word "capital", later, confusing it with "money" and also leaving off that inflation explanation. Then we will discuss income inequality. That's always good for some outrage directed at the corporations.[/size]



[size=3]Let's not mention easy credit, though.[/size]

[size=3]Segue into tax talk, then. Because higher taxes without increasing output will result in even more enrichment of the upper classes as prices rise and we resort to using credit even more.[/size]

[size=3]Then let's get upset at the banks not lending the money. Of course, the increased money supply will lead to inflation, and that amounts to a tax. [/size]

[size=3]Basically, this article will inspire people to demand an increase in the money supply through easy credit and loans, thus increasing inflation, thus increasing the use of that credit. Note not a single mention of the mechanics of inflation or what "capital" really means. Just the song and dance about corporations while government, who protects and enables these business practices through special privileges to banks totally escapes mention.[/size]

[size=3]Yeah. Great flooping article.[/size]
[/quote]

The article is not comprehensive. It never says that the government bears no fault. Are you just making this up for kicks and giggles?

[Mercy me]

Is it me or are these protests really unfocused? To me their anger seems to be misdirected.

Some of the signs talk to the mortgage disaster. Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac dictated the rules for which mortgages had to be qualified or they would fail to back them. Virtually all mortgages are sold and so those guidelines are essential. Those entities and the Federal government dictated that mortgages had to be given to people who normally would not qualify. When I was offered an mortgage for more than I could not afford, I bought what I could afford. As a result, I am not underwater. For me it was about personal responsibility. But the fact is that it was federal law that mandated lax lending policies and nothing has been done about it. That angers me, too. But I am made at the government not the banks.

[Socrates]

[quote name='arfink' timestamp='1318433523' post='2320148']
I suspect that the people going out to Occupy Wallstreet won't want to be universally united on any front except in their demand to reduce the power of corporations. This whole thing was explicitly meant to be chaotic and shocking. It's very easy to ignore people walking in circles with signs. (See every Pro-Life march ever, which are always far bigger than these OW things) It's much harder to ignore people who are on the verge of riot, rankling police, harassing the wealthy, and parking their carcasses on every doorstep, sidewalk, and curbstone on main street.

I think that's actually a primary goal here: this isn't about having a peaceful, ignorable protest, but a somewhat less peaceful, obnoxious, in-your-face, HEY YOU STUPID JACK*** LISTEN TO ME! kind of protest.
[/quote]
So, do you think it would help pro-life protesters or right-leaning groups like the Tea Party movement if they took to taking dumps on police cruisers, public urination, nudity ,drug use and sex, deliberately provoking policemen into violence, wanton littering of public property, and the rest of the lovely actions of the Wall Street "Occupiers"?

(As one who's attended many of the March for Life protests at Washington D.C. over the past 20 or so years, I can say you see absolutely nothing of that kind of behavior from the pro-lifers. The contrast is day and night. And from all I've heard, you don't see that kind of behavior either from the Tea Party protesters so strongly loathed and scorned by the same phatmass crowd that has such respect and love for the "Occupier" mob.)

Of course, such vulgarity and barbarism is fully to be expected from those on the Left, for whom contempt for any minimal standards of human decency and civilized behavior has long been a hallmark.

But, I think we all know that if pro-lifers or conservatives engaged in such behaviors, the media would be all over it, unequivocally denouncing it along with movements sponsoring the protests - as I'm sure would most of the trendy Phatmass crowd.

You certainly would not have the President or a major political party voicing support for movement as with the "Occupy Wall Street" movement.

But, oh well, I suppose childish tantrums and vulgar "shock tactics" trump coherently reasoned positions peacefully voiced in today's "progressive, enlightened" world. At least the protesters aren't those awful right-wingers.