|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I will put this here.. Fed’s Fisher: Regulators Should Break Up ‘Behemoth’ Banks Tuesday, 15 Nov 2011 01:39 PM Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas President Richard Fisher said regulators should break up so-called too-big-to-fail financial institutions to curtail the risk they pose to financial stability. “I believe that too-big-to-fail banks are too-dangerous-to-permit,” Fisher said in the text of remarks given in New York today. “Downsizing the behemoths over time into institutions that can be prudently managed and regulated across borders is the appropriate policy response. Then, creative destruction can work its wonders in the financial sector, just as it does elsewhere in our economy.” Regulators in the U.S. and abroad have attempted to address the risks posed by such systemically important financial institutions, and if “properly implemented,” the Dodd-Frank overhaul legislation “might assist in reining in the pernicious threat to financial stability,” Fisher said. Banks deemed too big to fail must hold as much as 2.5 percentage points in additional capital as part of efforts to prevent another financial crisis, global regulators said in June. The additional capital buffers will range from 1 percentage point to 2.5 percentage points, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision said. U.S. regulators are also required under the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul legislation to impose heightened standards on the biggest U.S. banks to curtail systemic risk. Last month, MetLife Inc., the nation’s largest life insurer, said the Fed rejected its plan to increase its dividend and resume share purchases. The insurer said it will try to sell its banking businesses, thus reducing government oversight. More Concentrated Fisher said the banking industry has “become more concentrated,” with five institutions’ assets comprising half the industry’s. The assets of the 10 biggest depository institutions make up 65 percent of the banking industry’s assets and comprise three quarters of our nation’s gross domestic product, he said. “Sustaining too-big-to-fail-ism and maintaining the cocoon of protection of SIFIs is counterproductive, expensive and socially questionable,” Fisher said. “Perhaps the financial equivalent of irreversible lap-band or gastric bypass surgery is the only way to treat the pathology of financial obesity, contain the relentless expansion of these banks and downsize them to manageable proportions.” web page I'm sure this will play well with the OWS crowd who claim to hate the government but still carry signs saying "Obama, where are you?" and so far most of their "fixes" to problems involved extending government regulations...... This raised more questions than answers from me.. first, when do we get to determine that the FED needs to be scaled back in it's power and reach? I agree that it is disturbing how concentrated things have become with fewer big corporations controlling more and more but there is only one entity controlling our entire money supply, and that's the FED... it's not congress, it's not anybody we elected, it's the FED... Talk about too concentrated...  Second, since when does the FED get to decide whether MetLife pays dividends or buys back stock? What the hell are they even doing in that discussion? I swear I consider myself to be a fairly well educated person with a decent understanding of how things work but it just seems like lately I learn something new and disturbing every day about the tangled web of crap between our government, the fed, major corporations, unions, etc.....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
If you are going to title the article about the pregnant woman getting sprayed, don't put the picture of the 84 year old woman first, it's just confusing. 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Kind of surprised that nobody has responded... so I will respond seriously..
The article is very short on facts as to how rowdy and threatening the protestors were, they were blocking a busy intersection at rush hour and were defying the police order to move, that's about all I know... As a side note, I wish they understood how that does not attract people to your cause, like when they layed on the bridges in DC to protest the wars.. people just end up hating you for screwing up their commute. Anyway, I can't really comment on whether or not the force was excessive, I'll just make these comments..
1. The article is sensationalizing he event and trying to garner sympathy. If a group of thousands of protestors are "crossing the line" then you pepper spray the crowd, if an 84 year old woman is in front, then she gets it first... I have no problem with that.
2. If you are 3 months pregnant, wearing a coat, in a crowd, then nobody knows you are pregnant, so the fact that she was pregnant, is completely irrelevant. Even if she was visibly pregnant, see response 1, if you are in the front of a crowd which is getting out of control, then you will get sprayed first, the police cannot be held responsible for which individuals in the crowd get sprayed.
3. If you are 3 months pregnant and you go to a protest where you are going to block traffic and will likely be face to face with the cops then you are an idiot. Angry protestors have a habit of getting out of control, overzealous cops have a habit of getting out of control.... you can do everything right and be perfectly peaceful but if the guys next to you decide to shout down or swing at the cops then you will get tangled up in the mess.. to do that at 3 months pregnant is totally irresponsible.
Again, I'm not justifying the use of force in this case because I don't know if it was warrented or not, I'm just saying that these things happen at protests...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
1. The article is sensationalizing he event and trying to garner sympathy. If a group of thousands of protestors are "crossing the line" then you pepper spray the crowd, if an 84 year old woman is in front, then she gets it first... I have no problem with that.
I agree with sentence one.
I disagree with sentence two.
You're a Seattle cop. I grant you that you have a job to do, and you just want to get home safely. But look at that woman's face. She didn't catch a whiff. She got soaked in pepper spray. I find it hard to believe the cop with a finger on a nozzle didn't see her.
Do you spray that frail little raisin of a lady?
Maybe so ... I can understand it happening. Just like I can understand McQuery running from the Penn State shower scene.
But it ain't right.
People who don't like OWS won't up to it being completely indecent and uncivilized, because they don't like they movement. But even if you think the movement itself is an uncivilized joke ... two wrongs don't make a right.
Sensationalized or not ... that picture speaks volumes, and it doesn't say good things.
By logic of your argument - and DC, hear this as logic and not me accusing you of anything, you're a good guy - but by logic of your argument, Rosa Parks had a can of mace to the face coming to her.
Someone will come along and say I'm elevating OWS to be on par with the Civil Rights movement, and I'm not - what I'm saying is an 84 year old woman wanted to protest what she thought was unjust, and she caught a face full of pepper spray.
When is that OK?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
By logic of your argument - and DC, hear this as logic and not me accusing you of anything, you're a good guy - but by logic of your argument, Rosa Parks had a can of mace to the face coming to her.
No, using my logic, Rosa Parks was one little old lady, acting on her own, she could have been controlled quite easily by 1 or 2 police officers if she did anything to get out of control. She was not part of a mob of thousands. She was not a small part of a much larger threat. Unless she pulled a weapon, there would have been no need to do anything like this to her.
We still don't know, at least I don't know, what the people on this front line of protestors in Seattle said, did, threatened to do, etc and we don't know what part in it this woman played...
What we know is that there was a mob of protestors illegally blocking traffic, refusing to move, being "rowdy" as the article says.... the police took some action, I still don't know what the tipping point was to make them take action or whether it was warranted... and this writer decided to skip most of the facts and write about the 84 year old woman and the pregnant lady that got pepper sprayed.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Quote:
By logic of your argument - and DC, hear this as logic and not me accusing you of anything, you're a good guy - but by logic of your argument, Rosa Parks had a can of mace to the face coming to her.
No, using my logic, Rosa Parks was one little old lady, acting on her own, she could have been controlled quite easily by 1 or 2 police officers if she did anything to get out of control. She was not part of a mob of thousands. She was not a small part of a much larger threat. Unless she pulled a weapon, there would have been no need to do anything like this to her.
We still don't know, at least I don't know, what the people on this front line of protestors in Seattle said, did, threatened to do, etc and we don't know what part in it this woman played...
What we know is that there was a mob of protestors illegally blocking traffic, refusing to move, being "rowdy" as the article says.... the police took some action, I still don't know what the tipping point was to make them take action or whether it was warranted... and this writer decided to skip most of the facts and write about the 84 year old woman and the pregnant lady that got pepper sprayed.
I guess police should treat them the way they do in California. Last year a group of illegal immigrants and supporters chained themselves together and laid down in a circle in the middle of a busy intersection. What did the police do? They let them lay down for hours and hours. I hate protesters that think they can disrupt the lives of others for hours to make a point. It does nothing to gain support for your cause, it just wreck havok and hatred towards your cause.
On another California issue, college tuition went up again 9% and people are protesting that. These are the same protesters that would argue for paying teachers more. The next day the professors were striking and protesting because they were not getting a pay raise. 
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](http://i.imgur.com/FUKyw.png) "Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Last year a group of illegal immigrants and supporters chained themselves together and laid down in a circle in the middle of a busy intersection. What did the police do? They let them lay down for hours and hours.
You aren't suggesting that people in this country illegally, who are chained together and blocking traffic illegally, should actually have to face consequences are you? You are obviously a right wing radical nut job...
Quote:
On another California issue, college tuition went up again 9% and people are protesting that. These are the same protesters that would argue for paying teachers more. The next day the professors were striking and protesting because they were not getting a pay raise.
Just keep putting it on the 1%ers tab... they have enough money, they'll never miss it. 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Quote:
Last year a group of illegal immigrants and supporters chained themselves together and laid down in a circle in the middle of a busy intersection. What did the police do? They let them lay down for hours and hours.
You aren't suggesting that people in this country illegally, who are chained together and blocking traffic illegally, should actually have to face consequences are you? You are obviously a right wing radical nut job...
Quote:
On another California issue, college tuition went up again 9% and people are protesting that. These are the same protesters that would argue for paying teachers more. The next day the professors were striking and protesting because they were not getting a pay raise.
Just keep putting it on the 1%ers tab... they have enough money, they'll never miss it.
I don't even understand how they plan to raise revenue by even taxing the 1%. Most of them already have their wealth and wouldn't even need to earn another taxable dime again for the rest of their lives. What do they plan on doing? taxing them based on their current assets?
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Quote:
I don't even understand how they plan to raise revenue by even taxing the 1%. Most of them already have their wealth and wouldn't even need to earn another taxable dime again for the rest of their lives. What do they plan on doing? taxing them based on their current assets?
Based on income? Most rich people earn money?
?
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
If I'm that rich, I can make sure that I pay a minimal amount of taxes by investing overseas, and using those profits when I vacation abroad ....... and finding as many write offs as possible.
A rich person can do as Warren Buffet did and pay a minimal amount of taxes because of his deductions and such. Increased tax rates will never have an effect on him. That's why he champions increased rates. It makes him look good, while never impacting him in the least. We need to treat all income as income .... earnings, capital gains, interest, and so on, and subject it to the same flat tax rate.
That's why I like the idea of a flat tax with generous personal exemptions, but a minimum tax for all. Under my plan, if you get income from earnings, capital gains, stock options, earn it within this country if you are an overseas company, or if you earn it abroad if you are a US citizen, then you pay the flat tax rate after your personal exemptions.
If you earned $20 million from all sources ... then you get your personal exemption of say $25,000 ..... then you pay 15-20% (whatever makes the numbers work, plus pays down debt after a 10% across the board cut in all departments .... to start) on the difference.
You would pay tax on $19.975,000 ....... and it would be an easy calculation.
15% would be $2,996.250, and 20% would be $3,995,000,
A single person making $35,000 would take their exemption and pay tax on $10,000. It would be either $1500 or $2000, depending on the rate.
A single person making $10,000 would pay the $100 minimum. Everyone would pay .... even if your income comes from unemployment, social security, welfare, investments, interest on savings, or any other source.
It would eliminate the dishonesty from the system. Everyone would pay their share, and everyone would pay based on the same rules.
Of course, then vote buying would go out the window ..... so this will never happen.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
j/c
Aaaaackkkk - I missed it! Apparently "they" were occupying Archbold tonight. 2 guys started. Got joined by 2 others - for a total of 4. I guess they got cold and left though.
This is just what I was told - by several people - I didn't see it as I was out "occupying" a wooded area from 3:30 til about .......well, I don't know what time I got home. I didn't get cold though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Another interesting image: http://i.imgur.com/J3AE5.jpgIt's so cold - as my friend said, "I spray starch on clothes with more care than that". The whole video is again worth watching, can be found under "Police Pepper Spray Peaceful UC Davis Students", I actually don't hear any swearing going through it, but with 100 people and 8 minutes of footage, you're bound to hear something. It's a really interesting video since the police back off at the end.
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 11/19/11 02:45 PM.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144 |
It looks like their support is growing with these reputable groups climbing aboard: The Occupy Wall Street movement has received so much media coverage in recent weeks that it’s nearly impossible to keep abreast of all the developments. So many endorsements and criticisms coming from all directions enter the news cycle in such rapid succession that even the most dedicated news junkies may have missed out on many of the pronouncements. Supporters and detractors of OWS both might find it useful to have a handy all-inclusive list of who has endorsed or embraced the protest. To satisfy that demand, we hereby present a list of groups, organizations, individuals and entities that have expressed their support for, sponsorship of, or sympathy for the Occupy Wall Street movement. Note: All entries on this list are real and verified. Below each entry you will find a series of source links documenting the support for OWS. We have striven in almost all cases to reference either first-hand statements by the groups or individuals themselves, hosted on their own Web sites; or videos of the people in question voicing their support for OWS at various Occupations; or news reports from reliable mainstream networks; or articles by publications or organizations sympathetic to the Occupy movement; or indisputable evidence, whatever the source. As a result, it cannot be claimed that these statements of support were made up or distorted by detractors of the Occupy movement. As each new controversial endorsement has appeared over the last month, OWS supporters have dismissed them one by one as “isolated examples” that don’t reflect any overall trend toward extremism. But when viewed in aggregate like this, it becomes much more difficult to dismiss any individual endorsement as an aberration; instead, an undeniable pattern emerges. This list is obviously incomplete; we hope to update it over the upcoming days and weeks. If you think we’ve left out any well-known endorsers for which there is solid evidence, then please post suggestions and evidentiary links in the comments section; but please try to supply links that will stand up to any potential claims of misrepresentation. If you disagree with the inclusion of any of the entries on this list, please post your reasoning and any contravening source links in the comments section, and we will take the evidence into account when updating the list. Members of the media, bloggers, activists, OWS supporters and detractors as well are all free to repost this list, in whole or in part, without any restrictions. Do note, however, that it may be updated over time, so make sure to get the latest version. And without further ado, here is… -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The 99%: Official list of Occupy Wall Street’s supporters, sponsors and sympathizers Communist Party USA Sources: Communist Party USA, OWS speech, The Daily Caller American Nazi Party Sources: Media Matters, American Nazi Party, Sunshine State News Ayatollah Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran Sources: The Guardian, Tehran Times, CBS News Barack Obama Sources: ABC News, CBS News, NBC New York The government of North Korea Sources: Korean Central News Agency (North Korean state-controlled news outlet), The Marxist-Leninist, Wall Street Journal, Times of India Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam Sources: video statement (starting at 8:28), Black in America, Philadelphia Weekly Revolutionary Communist Party Sources: Revolutionary Communist Party, Revolution newspaper, in-person appearance David Duke Sources: Talking Points Memo, video statement, davidduke'com Joe Biden Sources: Talking Points Memo, video statement, Mother Jones Hugo Chavez Sources: Mother Jones, Reuters, Examiner.com Revolutionary Guards of Iran Sources: Associated Press, FARS News Agency, UPI Black Panthers (original) Sources: in-person appearance, Occupy Oakland, Oakland Tribune Socialist Party USA Sources: Socialist Party USA, IndyMedia, The Daily Caller US Border Guard Sources: White Reference, www.usborderguard.com, Gateway Pundit, Just Another Day blog Industrial Workers of the World Sources: IWW web site, iww'org, in-person appearances CAIR Sources: in-person appearance, Washington Post, CAIR, CAIR New York Nancy Pelosi Sources: Talking Points Memo, video statement, ABC News, The Weekly Standard Communist Party of China Sources: People’s Daily (Communist Party organ), Reuters, chinataiwan.org, The Telegraph Hezbollah Sources: almoqawama'org, almoqawama'org (2), almoqawama'rg (3), wikipedia 9/11Truth.org Sources: 911truth'rg (1), 911truth'rg (2), 911truth'rg (3) International Bolshevik Tendency Sources: bolshevik'rg, Wire Magazine Anonymous Sources: Adbusters, The Guardian, video statement White Revolution Source: whiterevolution'om International Socialist Organization Sources: Socialist Worker, socialistworker'rg, in-person appearance PressTV (Iranian government outlet) Sources: PressTV, wikipedia Marxist Student Union Sources: Marxist Student Union, Big Government, marxiststudentunion'logspot'om Freedom Road Socialist Organization Sources: FightBack News, fightbacknews'rg ANSWER Sources: ANSWER press release, ANSWER web site, Xinhua Party for Socialism and Liberation Sources: Liberation News (1), pslweb'rg, The Daily Free Press, Liberation News (2)
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
They are what we thought they were.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144 |
Yep. This is the liberal answer to the tea party. There are quite a few disturbing videos out there that would get someone banned here for posting them. You didn't see any of that crap (literally speaking  ) during the tea party rallies.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Yep. This is the liberal answer to the tea party. There are quite a few disturbing videos out there that would get someone banned here for posting them. You didn't see any of that crap (literally speaking ) during the tea party rallies.
OWS is becoming a farce on its own accord. They try to include everyone, even if they don't agree with them (The 99%), and scream at you saying that "Yes you are" if you say that you are not part of their protest. They say that they are inclusive to all parties and political leanings, yet only push the liberal agenda, ie. Down with corporations, Tax the rich, etc. They say corporations have too much control on government, yet they refuse to do anything about the Union control over government as well. In fact, they welcome them. In California, the Seiu union has been participating as well, which controls a lot of the Californian gov't along with the other Unions in California. They simply want it their way, which is a liberal way, which is only a liberal version of the Tea Party movement.
I really wanted to believe in the OWS, but the more and more it goes on, the more and more it's true colors are showing. It's not an all inclusive movement as it wants to portray itself as, but a one-sided liberal movement that will probably help Obama win re-election, whom will still pay attention to the Corporation and Union overlords that they are fighting against and still ignore them as he creates even more bad policy based of what the overlords are wanting. And of course, they'd just say they needed to vote in Obama because the GOP candidate was worse. But voting for a slightly less smellier garbage pile, is still voting for a smelly garbage pile.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5 |
Right now, what we need to talk about is the recession. Economic recessions have paradoxical effects on the mortality trends of populations in rich countries. I've read an article about this issue, please allow me to share it here. Two recently published studies examine the influence of the economy on the unborn. The study implies even they are affected by the economic down-turn. One draws a parallel between the recession and declining birthrates. Another, more disturbingly, shows a fall in the wellness of those that are born. Here is the proof: Studies say that the poor economy affects birthrates and newborn health. Today’s recession could also represent a global stimulus to redirect societal goals through wealth redistribution, in the same way the Great Depression did almost 80 years ago. Global health disparities are at unparalleled extremes, and we would all benefit from decreasing economic inequalities, not least through lessening the health gap.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Quote:
Yep. This is the liberal answer to the tea party. There are quite a few disturbing videos out there that would get someone banned here for posting them. You didn't see any of that crap (literally speaking ) during the tea party rallies.
Is it any better or worse than the racist and idiotic signs that have been seen at Tea Party events? Or the vandalism at Congressmens' offices during the health care vote? Do you think those few idiots at Tea Party rallies are indicative of all Tea Partiers? I don't think its fair to paint entire movements of thousands of people with broad brushes based on the actions of a relative few.
Besides, isolated actions don't necessarily invalidate the larger point. They indicate that the individual perpetrators are morons.
Ignoring policy for a moment (b/c neither movement really has viable policies), do you really think that OWS is wrong about excessive corporate power? Do you think its a good thing that corporations have achieved all the benefits and rights of "personhood" but rarely have to face consequences for their failings?
The Tea Party is screaming that the government is ineffective lately. They are right, but not b/c government is inherently ineffective. They are right b/c of what the OWS is protesting; our government has been bought and bent to the will of large monied interests. While the government has always responded to big money, it hasn't been as bad as it is now since the Gilded Age or the 1920's, which both ended in deep economic depressions.
We also have a history of beneficial public-private partnerships that were instrumental in explosive economic growth. We need to get back to that.
I don't understand why one movement has to counterbalance the other, or has to be a counterpoint. Is it so wild to think that reality is some mixture of the two?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Don't recall a single rape or murder at a Tea Party event.
No mass arrests or group violations of the law, no denying of public parks to private citizens.
The Tea Party wants YOU to keep more of what you have earned.
The OWS wants to TAKE more of what YOU have earned.
They want MORE freebies, MORE "wealth redistribution", they will NEVER be satisfied, they will NOT stop at taxing the "rich", or corporations, they want what YOU have, as well.
A yearly family income of $65,000 was defined as "rich", very recently, in Hillary's health care attempt. Be careful where you are willing to paint the bulls-eye.
You got $20.00? I don't, GIVE ME YOURS. Don't want to? Are you Taxed Enough Already? It is really that simple.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
We also have a history of beneficial public-private partnerships that were instrumental in explosive economic growth. We need to get back to that.
Like Solyndra?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144 |
Quote:
Is it any better or worse than the racist and idiotic signs that have been seen at Tea Party events?
Did they finally find one that wasn't photoshopped?
Quote:
I don't think its fair to paint entire movements of thousands of people with broad brushes based on the actions of a relative few.
The difference is, when referring to the Tea Party rallies.....it actually was a "relative few" (or less). With the occupiers, it's multiple major crimes in every city they're in.
Quote:
Besides, isolated actions don't necessarily invalidate the larger point.
How many more incidents will it take before these aren't referred to as "isolated actions"? With the Tea Party, you had the MSM and all the libs scouring every second of every rally trying to find a tidbit of racism or wrongdoing, and then fabricating stories when they drew blanks. With the occupiers, you have the MSM trying to cover up or minimizing the rampant crime and it's still showing up all over Youtube and the more conservative outlets.
Quote:
Ignoring policy for a moment (b/c neither movement really has viable policies), do you really think that OWS is wrong about excessive corporate power?
I think they're wrong in the fact that they think corporations owe them something.
Quote:
Do you think its a good thing that corporations have achieved all the benefits and rights of "personhood" but rarely have to face consequences for their failings?
Absolutely not. I think they should be held accountable for every last one of their failings. I was absolutely against bailing them out for poor performance.
Quote:
We also have a history of beneficial public-private partnerships that were instrumental in explosive economic growth. We need to get back to that.
I don't understand why one movement has to counterbalance the other, or has to be a counterpoint. Is it so wild to think that reality is some mixture of the two?
I would take them more seriously if they obeyed laws, had a clear message and didn't sound like a bunch of freeloaders looking for a handout. Most of the occupiers I've seen interviewed can't even explain why they're really there, other than to say banks and corporations are evil and have all the money.
All that said, I think the big banks have behaved in a criminal fashion and should be held accountable.....not bailed out.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Say whatever you want about violence at OWS protests - the restraint protestors showed at UC Davis was amazing. It was one of the most peaceful protests I've ever seen (especially after getting pepper sprayed) - the walk of shame was also an incredible display of peaceful protest.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I would take them more seriously if they obeyed laws,
If you are going to break laws as a matter of civil disobedience to prove your point.. I can see that..
Raping other protestors, sprawling grafitti on the buildings of people who are NOT the focus of your protest, defacating in public, defacating on the floor of a church that invited you to use their property... these are not the actions of a civilized group and they are far from isolated.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Quote:
Don't recall a single rape or murder at a Tea Party event.
No mass arrests or group violations of the law, no denying of public parks to private citizens.
Fine, Tea Partiers are more well behaved in terms of number of arrests. It really is a silly argument to have, b/c it has nothing to do with the issues that each movement takes up. It wasn't really my point, other than to say that it is foolish to point to a few thousand arrests across the whole country (when over 10,000 have been present at various times in NYC alone) over the course of two months and paint an entire group of people as criminal, lazy freeloaders. It is the same kind of logic that leads to bigotry and exclusion of entire ethnic groups; taking a small, non-representative sample of the whole and painting the entire group in those terms.
By that logic, there were several murders in Cleveland over the past few months, so all of Cleveland must be full of criminals.
Quote:
The Tea Party wants YOU to keep more of what you have earned.
The OWS wants to TAKE more of what YOU have earned.
This is the easy way out. Distilling each movement down to one sentence doesn't do either group or the issues they have taken up any justice and in the case of OWS, is manufactured from what you want to believe the group stands for, b/c OWS itself doesn't have a cohesive, unified theme.
My entire point (which has clearly been missed) was that many on here are seizing on arrests of OWS protestors and the activity of some fringe elements in OWS as a pretext for discrediting everything about OWS. That happened (unfairly) to the Tea Party earlier on when people seized on some racist elements of the Tea Party and there was highly publicized violence around the time of the health care vote.
Both groups make some good points, and both groups miss the mark in certain areas IMO. Blindly subscribing to one or the other and making this into a sporting event is a major reason our system has been dysfunctional lately.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Quote:
Did they finally find one that wasn't photoshopped?
You missed my point. First off, the idea that every single stupid sign that is out there is one giant conspiracy against the Tea Party, and all of them are photoshopped is ludicrous. My point was that the relatively few stupid signs are not representative of the whole.
Quote:
The difference is, when referring to the Tea Party rallies.....it actually was a "relative few" (or less). With the occupiers, it's multiple major crimes in every city they're in.
As I said to Nelson, you got me. More OWS protestors have been arrested. So what? It does not have any bearing on the discussion of ideas and messages.
As an aside, it has been a few thousand OWS protestors over the course of two months across the entire nation. To get a perspective of the scope, on a given day in NYC, there can be more than 10,000 protestors in one location. To me, that qualifies as a relative few.
Quote:
I think they're wrong in the fact that they think corporations owe them something.
Is redistribution really their whole message? Maybe its just my personal take, but I took the message to be that corporations have undue influence, and as such, unfair advantages in our system that the little guy doesn't get. I don't want to destroy corporations; I want them to have to follow rules. If they are going get the benefits of "personhood," I simply want them to have the drawbacks and regulations associated with being an individual too. The government should work as hard for the regular guy as it does for corporations.
Quote:
All that said, I think the big banks have behaved in a criminal fashion and should be held accountable.....not bailed out.
Fair enough. I happen to think banks should be held accountable too. I also want the return of common sense regulation of the financial sector that was in place for our most prosperous decades.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Quote:
Like Solyndra?
No, like public-private partnerships at Bell Labs, DIA, NIH, NSF, any and all military research departments, and NASA. At these government-funded places, the backbone of our current economy was formed (computers, microwaves, networking, wireless techs, materials, various medical devices/techniques/drugs etc.).
The government also provided the most advanced infrastructure systems of the day in the form of intercontinental rail and interstate highways.
Our education system used to be the envy of the world, in no small part b/c the government wanted smart people in case of war with Russia. Consequently, we had the most highly trained, efficient workforce in the world.
These are things that are not handled efficiently by the private sector, b/c they aren't profitable. They are also things that ultimately benefit the whole of society and affect our national defense.
Talking specifically about Solyndra, if it turns out to be proven that it was solely a political handout, and the company didn't have a business plan, then I will be upset. Otherwise, I don't have a problem with this kind of subsidy to foster energy innovation. With these kinds of markets that you can see coming, you cannot afford to sit back and wait for the price of oil to dictate your ability to research alternative energies. Basic research is trial and error, and doesn't work in that way. If we take that approach, we will be decades behind China and India, who are pouring money into R&D and offering the types of loans Solyndra received left and right. This really is just like "Sputnik." The federal money we poured into NASA ended up laying the foundation for entirely new, innovative economic sectors. The same could happen in the energy and biotech sectors.
(If you were saying that tongue-in-cheek, sorry for the long-winding reply.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
So a few rapes and murders are nothing to worry about, and are evenly comparable to a very few objectionable signs? Really?
Tell you what, we'll park one hundred protesters on your front lawn for the next 30 days. You get to pick which group, which one would you like? If you don't have a wife and children, pretend you do.
The TEA party does have a single, prominent message. Taxed Enough Already, how hard is this to understand? You have noticed the debate in Congress about passing new taxes, and how NONE have been passed?
The Solyndra affair certainly has definite indications of being politically influenced, and they DID have a business plan, it just wasn't a very good one. Several Government individuals and entities knew it BEFORE the money was handed out. Nor was this in an effort to produce new research, this was a simple commercial enterprise intended to make a profit. It was a bad investment.
While I do not agree with the bailouts, much of the bailout loans have been repaid, with interest. WE, the taxpayer, have PROFITED to some extent on this transaction, and while there is still much to repay, this may very well turn out to be a good investment.
The OWS people are clearly leftist for the most part, they whine about wanting stuff gifted to them, no loan to repay, in fact one of their most common demands is that their student loans be forgiven. They want the four or five years they spent studying advanced basket weaving to be paid for, by someone else. They don't care who, just as long as they don't have to take responsibility for it.
There is no magic boot from which this money will flow. This will come from taxpayer pockets. It would mean LESS money for schools, LESS money for roads, LESS money for basic research, traded for the tremendous gain of a whole bunch of people who can weave really nice baskets and try to charge a ridiculous price for them. They would most likely demand that the Government buy up their surplus.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
There are relatively few protesters at any given location as well.
There are 8 million people+ who reside in New York city. NYC averages about 50,000 arrests per year total. (in a normal year) 1000 arrests is still a sizable number of arrests given the sample size, compared to the overall average arrests per year compared to the overall population of the city. I believe that the number for OWS is well above 1000 already .... and climbing daily. This is with a Mayor who ignored and encouraged the protesters for weeks and weeks before even taking action to remove them from their illegal assemblies. Rapes, assaults, drug use, robberies, and more are common occurrences at OWS. Their numbers outstrip the averages for the city by a fairly large number.
To compare, if there are 100,000 protesters every day, and 1000 of them are arrested in a year, that would be like there being 80,000 arrests in NYC every 1 or 2 months. The numbers are way, way out of whack with the norm in NYC.
OWS really does not have a coherent message. They are all over the map on message, with tons of different "issues" being advanced by damn near everyone interviewed. The one idea in common seems to be that "we should get to take stuff from them because it's not fair that they have more than us". That's not what this country was founded on.
One other major difference between the OWS people and the Tea Party people.
The Tea Party people did everything by the book. They got the right permits, they had their security in place, They weren't a burden on the cities they gathered in, and often even left the areas they assembled in cleaner than they found them.
The OWS movement, by contrast, is like a plague of locusts ...... destroying everything in site ..... taking ..... devouring ...... and befouling every area they visit. Has one group anywhere cleaned up after themselves? There are none that I know of.
So ... in short .... we have one group who had a clearly defined message, a strong political movement to back up that message, who obeyed the laws of cities they held their events in, who had no real incidents of violence, assault, robbery, or any other real problems, who provided their own security, and who cleaned up after themselves ........ and we have another group now who does none of these things. There is zero comparison between the groups except that they are both .... groups of people. That's it.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
There is zero comparison between the groups except that they are both .... groups of people. That's it.
Both are populist movements.
They were both formed around the collusion of government and business.
They're both fairly naive movements, politically speaking.
They're both ineffectual movements that will produce no tangible change in the grand scheme.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Quote:
So a few rapes and murders are nothing to worry about, and are evenly comparable to a very few objectionable signs? Really?
Did I say that? Why don't you go back and read what I said. I never said "don't worry about rapes and murders" nor did I condone those actions. I said that it isn't fair to tie those activities of the few bad apples to an entire body of people.
Quote:
The TEA party does have a single, prominent message. Taxed Enough Already, how hard is this to understand? You have noticed the debate in Congress about passing new taxes, and how NONE have been passed?
Again, what makes you think I don't get that part of the message? Most Tea Party organizations I'm familiar with don't only stand for that though. My only point is that I agree with some of the premises but not all of them, and not necessarily the execution of how to get there. Same goes for OWS.
http://www.teapartyexpress.org/
Quote:
The Solyndra affair certainly has definite indications of being politically influenced, and they DID have a business plan, it just wasn't a very good one. Several Government individuals and entities knew it BEFORE the money was handed out. Nor was this in an effort to produce new research, this was a simple commercial enterprise intended to make a profit. It was a bad investment.
Indication is not evidence. I'll reserve judgement until that comes forth. And yes, in hindsight, it was a bad investment, but that could be said about any bad investment ever made. People making those investments rarely know they are bad up front. One exception: the banks over the last 10 years. Maybe this is another. We'll see.
Quote:
While I do not agree with the bailouts, much of the bailout loans have been repaid, with interest. WE, the taxpayer, have PROFITED to some extent on this transaction, and while there is still much to repay, this may very well turn out to be a good investment.
Don't disagree there. My goal would be to make it less likely that bailouts are necessary in the future. We had good safeguards in the financial system for decades that prevented concentration of assets and flameout. Why not re-introduce those?
Quote:
The OWS people are clearly leftist for the most part, they whine about wanting stuff gifted to them, no loan to repay, in fact one of their most common demands is that their student loans be forgiven. They want the four or five years they spent studying advanced basket weaving to be paid for, by someone else. They don't care who, just as long as they don't have to take responsibility for it.
And I said I don't agree with that aspect of it. I'm not willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Basically OWS comps have become a place to gather in masses, party, act stupid, and possibly get your face on TV and become the next Snookie. 90% of the "supporters" really have no idea or interest in why they are there, if they are asked, they just parrot what they have been told/heard.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
I'm not going to get into a lengthy debate on the crime stats. As I've said before, I don't condone the rapes and murders, but I'm also not willing to throw out any and every idea from OWS based on the actions of a relative few. We're not talking about even close to 10% of total protestors being arrested here; this isn't a completely criminal movement. None of this is relevant to the discussion of ideas I was trying to have. Quote:
OWS really does not have a coherent message. They are all over the map on message, with tons of different "issues" being advanced by damn near everyone interviewed. The one idea in common seems to be that "we should get to take stuff from them because it's not fair that they have more than us". That's not what this country was founded on.
I agree they don't have a coherent message. My only point (which somehow seems impossible to make) is that I like the issue they take with undue corporate influence on our political system. That's it. I'm not for pure communist redistribution.
I also don't understand how if they don't have a coherent message, somehow you know exactly what it is, and it is redistribution.
This country was not founded on strict redistributive principles. And this country wasn't founded on "by the corporations, for the corporations" either. Redistribution and common sense checks of corporate power don't have to be the same thing. You can hold one ideal without the other.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
But that's one message out of hundreds. It's also been submerged under others, and is thrown against the wall as one of many, many others in hope that they find something that resonates.
They are a "movement" that tried to find their message as time went on, rather than a message that became a movement.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144 |
Quote:
I'm not going to get into a lengthy debate on the crime stats.
That's like Jerry Sandusky's attorney saying, "I'm not going to get into a lengthy debate on pedophelia, let's discuss the positive aspects of his coaching career". The fact of the matter is that crime is rampant in every place the occupiers convene.....it's not isolated, it's not a select few, and it is significant. It in no way akin to the tea party gatherings, despite the attempted comparisons....which I believe you initiated.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
My only point (which somehow seems impossible to make) is that I like the issue they take with undue corporate influence on our political system.
And they also fail to mention any of the undue Union influence in our government as well, which is just as bad. Government should be for the people and not Unions and Corporations to begin with. The problem is that OWS is becoming more than the anti-corporation government corruption that you want to believe it is.
it is about redistribution of wealth(tax the rich), about student debt and even other debt forgiveness, it's about fighting "man-made" climate change, and other liberal ideals. Yet, they try to claim they are inclusive to all people, though with liberal ideals dominating it, it is a liberal movement ala the Tea Party that they claim to be distancing themselves from being.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Quote:
And they also fail to mention any of the undue Union influence in our government as well, which is just as bad. Government should be for the people and not Unions and Corporations to begin with. The problem is that OWS is becoming more than the anti-corporation government corruption that you want to believe it is.
I don't want to believe it to be anything. Do I really come off as a cheerleader for OWS to you? I simply picked out one of their major messages as I see it and said I agree with it. That doesn't mean I agree with all of their messages, follow OWS blindly, or even need any group to tell me how to think.
I also said I don't agree with the more extreme redistributive policies that are emanating from within certain OWS camps. Am I not able to pick and choose what I agree with, or do I put a target on my back by agreeing with anything they say? Good lord, these issues aren't binary. Its not either I agree with their whole platform or none of it.
I think there has to be a certain level of lobbying and campaign finance that goes on. It should have strict limits though. That goes for corporations, non-profits, unions, and any other large monied interest you can think of. The primary focus has been on corporations, particularly large financial corporations b/c their lobbying and campaign finance (not to mention doing the trading for Congress that 60 Minutes reported on) played a very large part in the 2008 financial crisis. Unions' and non-profits' influence didn't come remotely close to this, although I do think they should all play by the same limited rules.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622 |
I'll be a cheerleader for the OWS if it upsets the Tea Party crowd.
Really, I thought the OWS protesters were going to accomplish something but they are slowly becoming irrelevant. They have been all but hog-tied by local governments, they have been ignored by Big Media and the might of the Tea Party's propaganda mill is the OWS movement undoing.
If I were a Tea Party member I would be proud that I have been a part of squashing the rebellion of the hippies! Now we can get back to obeying our rich masters and destroying the country.
I can't stand either movement or the government, but I really can't stand watching big business sell us all out. Any American that can't see that Big Business, Wall Street, The Banks and their Government Minions have raped this country and the middle class is JUST BLIND.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
I'll be a cheerleader for the OWS if it upsets the Tea Party crowd.
Really, I thought the OWS protesters were going to accomplish something but they are slowly becoming irrelevant. They have been all but hog-tied by local governments, they have been ignored by Big Media and the might of the Tea Party's propaganda mill is the OWS movement undoing.
If I were a Tea Party member I would be proud that I have been a part of squashing the rebellion of the hippies! Now we can get back to obeying our rich masters and destroying the country.
I can't stand either movement or the government, but I really can't stand watching big business sell us all out. Any American that can't see that Big Business, Wall Street, The Banks and their Government Minions have raped this country and the middle class is JUST BLIND.
Wait a minute. You mean to say the OWS thing was actually legit, and only failed because of the TEA party? The same TEA party that everyone said had no power, ability, or opportunity? LOL.
The OWS was "hog tied" by local gov'ts? You mean the local gov'ts that allowed them to camp out, to protest - right up until the OWS idiots started raping and vandalizing? Yeah, that's "hog tied" i guess....
You mean the OWS protest - the ones that "big media" adored - somehow they are being now ignored by their buddies in big media? What a laugh. Thanks man - I needed a laugh. All I've heard in the last weeks was about these protestors.
When I've tried to find out what these protesters wanted - all I ever found was "they have, we don't - they screwed us."
Meanwhile, they illegally occupy space, accept donations, and actually pursue donations - in order to continue their romper room quest for equality.
Here's a little clue for you, and them: equality starts with getting a job. It continues with actually DOING that job, in a satisfactory manner. It gets even better when you excel at that job.
Sitting on the street, or in a park? Who's paying you for that?
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... People Should Occupy Wall Street
2
|
|
