Occupying Wall Street?

joverby

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 12, 2011
Messages
599
Reaction score
9
It's nice you're thinking about it, Vice. But you're grossly simplifying our economic/ political structure.

The entire system is designed to keep people down and allow a select few to become more and more wealthy by continual redestribution of wealth. Acheived through tax policies(Loops holes) and making public schools locally funded and a lot of other factors.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/26/news/economy/cbo_income/index.htm?iid=Lead&hpt=hp_t2
"From 1979 to 2007, average household income for the nation's top 1% more than tripled, while middle-class incomes grew by less than 40%, according to a new report from a research arm of Congress."

I would be interested in knowing the numbers from 2000-2008 in particular. I bet the largest increases were there and shortly after.

It's not about asking for entitlements it's about leveling the playing field. It's also worth noting that the "news" you hear, world-wide, is controlled by 6 corporations. (All with similar agendas, mind you.)

There's a reason the Supreme Court over-turned a 100+ year old law that prohibited unlimited corporate funding for campaigns. They wanted to make the super-rich that much more influencial in elections. The reason that law was in place was to prevent that, obviously.

Take two attrocious governors like Walker and Minnesota's(not sure who and too lazy to Google). Minnesota's in particular was passing legislation under the pre-text of "budget repair"(redistribution of wealth and union smashing) in which there was something like 1.8 million in higher taxes for elderly and in the same bill gave an equal tax break to the rich. That is redistribution of wealth, plain and simple.

These are the types of things that aren't right and need to be changed, this evil and political / media take over has been running the country into the ground.(Aside from the small group getting more wealthy, there's also a record number of millionares now)

I don't think anyone(sensible) expects free hand outs or to take people's things. But you would have to be extremley uneducated to not realize there are massive problems with our political and economic situation.

Which is why I propose we all vote for Ron Paul. The only man with real and sensible solutions to the problems facing America. A man not in bed with lobbiest and has stuck with the same platforms for 30ish years now. I was extremley surprised to hear that someone legitamate was running when I read about what he was for.

Open your mind and do some research.
 

DanelMadr

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
752
Reaction score
23
joverby said:
Which is why I propose we all vote for Ron Paul. The only man with real and sensible solutions to the problems facing America. A man not in bed with lobbiest and has stuck with the same platforms for 30ish years now. I was extremley surprised to hear that someone legitamate was running when I read about what he was for.

Open your mind and do some research.
One scary thing about RP is his short sight in regard to quit making a world's policeman. I understand it is expensive and ungrateful, however the void will allow "criminals" to grow and challenge everyone even the US eventually.
Both WW wouldn't happen or lasted that long if US was involved from the start. Even Soviet Russia grew thanks to US benevolence.

Arming, training and redeploying the forces might be much more expensive than you would save discarding them now.

My solution....leave the mil bases in strategic places only smaller and don't try to reconstruct Afghanistan and Iraq. For successful 'hearts and mind' you don't have enough $.

Mil technology is only thing that gives us advantage over number of enemies.
 

Vice

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
2,006
Reaction score
186
Today, there are millions of people protesting in parks all over the world. They want to express their pain and frustration to our leaders. While I feel their pain, I don’t share their optimism that our leaders can solve this financial crisis. For me, camping out in a park, ordering pizzas, and singing protest songs would be a waste of time. I would rather take classes, get smarter, seek new answers, and find new friends—friends who are moving on.
Quote from Robert Kiyosaki.

Looks like I'm on the right track.
 

joverby

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 12, 2011
Messages
599
Reaction score
9
Vice said:
Quote from Robert Kiyosaki.

Looks like I'm on the right track.
That's some great logic. /rollseyes

Yes, because protesting has NEVER accomplished anything ever, huh? The people of India should've told Ghandi he was wasting his time and was a lazy bum. "You don't like how Britain is treating you? Get a better job!"

This is saying, despite all of the massive tax loop-holes, education problems, insane spending and useless wars. We all should just never try to persude the government because we can just get better jobs.(And we aren't lobbiest who can just buy their votes, this is how people lobby)

It's not like the President has the power to end these stupid wars, or congress has power to close tax loopholes or anything like that. Yep, there are no problems with our current system and it is perfectly balanced. The Federal Reserve makes perfect sense and Thomas Jefferson was completley wrong in his prediction.(Which is strangely spot on with today's country / economy)

I'm sure you could sense the sarcasm. It's a quote of ignorance.
 

DanelMadr

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
752
Reaction score
23
joverby said:
That's some great logic. /rollseyes

Yes, because protesting has NEVER accomplished anything ever, huh? The people of India should've told Ghandi he was wasting his time and was a lazy bum. "You don't like how Britain is treating you? Get a better job!"
My reservations to OWS are:

It has no clear message but socialistic BS arrogant statement about 99% and Michael Moore's 'Bring the system down'. I have reservations to our current system but I don't want to change it for pure socialism.

Nothing about Jefferson's ideals is heard from OWS, mainly bc they are demonstrating in the wrong place. They attack corrupted business and neglect gov., which is the savior in their book.

Also Indian and Eastern European revolutions had

1. Very wide support and attendance ....ordinary men not just professional revolutionists.

2. Clear demand for system change -parliament democracy instead of dictatorship - and it stated demands list - clear and simple, so everyone can decide if he wants to support it.

In democracies people rather vote than demonstrate. It is more efficient.

No libertarian will win majority :eek: bc majority of people prefer social security to personal responsibility. They prefer bad government to rule their lives than to risk failure in free society, where you can blame only yourself.
Ron Paul won't make it. I would still vote for him but not holding my breath.
 

Just because a woman listens to you and acts interested in what you say doesn't mean she really is. She might just be acting polite, while silently wishing that the date would hurry up and end, or that you would go away... and never come back.

Quote taken from The SoSuave Guide to Women and Dating, which you can read for FREE.

Alle_Gory

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 25, 2008
Messages
4,200
Reaction score
79
Location
T-Dot
DanelMadr said:
It has no clear message but socialistic BS arrogant statement about 99% and Michael Moore's 'Bring the system down'. I have reservations to our current system but I don't want to change it for pure socialism.
The Tea Party rallies, did they have a clear concise message? Yes or no answer and supporting evidence please. I would like a clear and concise answer.

Also Indian and Eastern European revolutions had

1. Very wide support and attendance ....ordinary men not just professional revolutionists.

2. Clear demand for system change -parliament democracy instead of dictatorship - and it stated demands list - clear and simple, so everyone can decide if he wants to support it.
it has to start somewhere. For the rest of us on the sidelines we see this as the frustration manifesting. If this **** continues, everyone will be up in arms and those undeserving self-enriched corrupt pigs better be afraid.

In democracies people rather vote than demonstrate. It is more efficient.
True, but have you spoken to the average voter? Imagine how dumb they are. Now imagine how dumb the people who would vote for Bachmann and Palin are. That's not a solution. An idiocracy benefits nobody, not even the idiots.

Ron Paul won't make it. I would still vote for him but not holding my breath.
I don't much care for Ron Paul but he does have a chance. It really depends on the conditions in 2012 when he's running. If people like what he's about and what his track record is, he might stand a viable chance. It will be a difficult battle against the pieces of sh*t that can sell themselves well and have funding for marketing (like Obama and Bush).
 

DanelMadr

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
752
Reaction score
23
Alle_Gory said:
The Tea Party rallies, did they have a clear concise message? Yes or no answer and supporting evidence please. I would like a clear and concise answer.
I don't have profound answer. I don't follow TP that much. From the little I read about it, I got sense that:
Cut spending
Against bailouts
Christian values

But certainly no socialist hippies against socialism.

it has to start somewhere. For the rest of us on the sidelines we see this as the frustration manifesting. If this **** continues, everyone will be up in arms and those undeserving self-enriched corrupt pigs better be afraid.
What has to start exactly? You see. Very poor start.

True, but have you spoken to the average voter? Imagine how dumb they are. Now imagine how dumb the people who would vote for Bachmann and Palin are. That's not a solution. An idiocracy benefits nobody, not even the idiots.
At least we have those Illuminati to lead their hands....oh cr@p, now I'm dead:eek:

Dangers of democracy...would you prefer Heinlein's version? Only those who served in military having right to vote. Interesting thought.

I don't much care for Ron Paul but he does have a chance. It really depends on the conditions in 2012 when he's running. If people like what he's about and what his track record is, he might stand a viable chance. It will be a difficult battle against the pieces of sh*t that can sell themselves well and have funding for marketing (like Obama and Bush).
I liked Bush. I think he was way smarter than people thought. And that invading Iraq was a necessary and smart move in strategic sense. If nothing commies went berserk....it is always a good sign.
I also believe in spreading democracy, not being selfish ahole, and it seems it's working in middle east, n. africa....a start at least.
 

Alle_Gory

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 25, 2008
Messages
4,200
Reaction score
79
Location
T-Dot
DanelMadr said:
I don't have profound answer. I don't follow TP that much. From the little I read about it, I got sense that:
Cut spending
Against bailouts
Christian values

But certainly no socialist hippies against socialism.
Christian values is not a clear and concise message. Against the bailouts the wall street protesters are against that also. Mostly from what I have seen they are pissed at the state of the financial system and what destruction the corruption has created and they want it fixed.

What has to start exactly? You see. Very poor start.
A real recovery and stopping this globalization and global banking nonsense. It benefits nobody but the rich.

Only those who served in military having right to vote. Interesting thought.
Yup. I would like this very much. Military members have seen far more **** and are more educated, maybe not book smart but experiences. Their opinions are more valuable.

And that invading Iraq was a necessary and smart move in strategic sense. If nothing commies went berserk....it is always a good sign.
I also believe in spreading democracy, not being selfish ahole, and it seems it's working in middle east, n. africa....a start at least.
Yes but has it worked? Was it worth bringing the country to it's knees with the war effort?
 

DanelMadr

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
752
Reaction score
23
Alle_Gory said:
Christian values is not a clear and concise message. Against the bailouts the wall street protesters are against that also. Mostly from what I have seen they are pissed at the state of the financial system and what destruction the corruption has created and they want it fixed.
I repeat I dont follow TP much...it was just impression I got.

A real recovery and stopping this globalization and global banking nonsense. It benefits nobody but the rich.
Globalization limits local monopoly. Global banking, yeah sure but actually this banking system came to being to fight unemployment and insure depositors and it provides poor with credit. Don't think that state owned CB is any better. The system is bad but better variant won't be too keen on welfare spending etc.

Yup. I would like this very much. Military members have seen far more **** and are more educated, maybe not book smart but experiences. Their opinions are more valuable.
They were willing to risk for republic therefore the privilege.

Yes but has it worked? Was it worth bringing the country to it's knees with the war effort?
Saddam's gone. All bad guys go there to fight soldiers...not our civilians. And we are closer to Iran. Not bad. We should cut on reconstruction spending though.
 

DanelMadr

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
752
Reaction score
23
Social_Leper said:
That's the point. Democracy is no longer an efficient outlet. Politicians owe their positions to lobbyists and large businesses who contribute heavily towards their campaign war chests. Many are governed by corporate interests that have been proven to be opposed to the best interests of the people.

If the system is rigged it can't be changed from within. And it's an egregious misconception, perpetuated by elements of the media, that the majority of the protesters are demanding socialism. They just realise the futility in expecting change through America's 'democratic' process.
It can be changed from within. However despite all the problems, people are not that worse to support better candidate. They just don't care that much, bc the system feeds them pretty good.

Democracy as observed by Plato leads to mob rule, simply bc majority let's themselves be bribed, listening to populism etc. Therefore we have Republic with Constitution protecting 49% of citizens.

If you come up with better system for all and I mean just pure genius like....you will get enough votes.

Separation of state and business is a must. Ayn Rand talked about it 50years ago. Problem is that some voters see problems as not enough gov. Compromise is in place now. The US is still better off btw than EU is.

Central Banking is pure socialist idea. FIAT money also empowers gov. to print $ on whatever voters demand. When you go on debt bc of war....at least there is chance you invest in securing future, market roads, investments. Going in to debt for bribing voters with freebies is bad, bc you take out incentives.
 

Burroughs

Master Don Juan
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
2,179
Reaction score
100
"The “machine” in America is about as far from free-market capitalism as one can get. Instead, it is a corporatist system of crony-capitalism where welfare for the masses is a dirty phrase, and corporate welfare, in the form of subsidies for business and financial bail-outs, is the norm."

This is something that must be understood before we can move forward.
 

Vice

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
2,006
Reaction score
186
This whole thing is yet beyond my grasp; I'm looking out for number one here. Those are some good quotes.

I agree that bailing out a company that has proven itself to be incompetent of operating in the black is not right.

I also think that people's greed, unfounded speculation as well as lack of experience in real estate has led to this entire ordeal.

You know what? F*ck this. I don't want to argue on the internet, or even read about this sh*t anymore. I need to focus on ME. That means getting out there, getting my sh*t together, and focusing on how I can adapt to the current situation.

I need to take a break from the internet for a while. It's no longer a tool I use for education. It's become a cesspool of wasted hours on Reddit, Digg, and SoSuave. Everyone's trying to prove some point, and I find myself creating arguments in my head and thinking of possible retorts to them all freakin' day. It's even seeped into my social life; I'm talking more and more about "death topics" like politics. It's all debate debate debate, and very little positivity.

The only use I have for the internet should be for managing my finances and researching possible real estate deals. My time would be better spent reading books and applying what I learn from them, exercising, and socializing. Oh, and ENJOYING LIFE. Maybe I'll buy a BMX bike and start riding again. Or order a wetsuit and surf in the freezing Atlantic ocean (yay ). I don't really need SoSuave anymore; I don't really need advice anymore, and most of my time is spent on the Everything Else forum. It's been past time for me to just be going out and getting experience. My journal never gets updated because I'm going out less and less because I'm too busy wasting my f*cking time on the computer. What a joke. My life is passing me by.

F*ck the internet.
 
Last edited:

wait_out

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 2, 2008
Messages
590
Reaction score
41
Location
Too many places at once
The best posters usually leave.... this place was really forward thinking about a year ago. I took a long break and it seems to have gotten a little less about life, and more about theory and angst. It's a cycle IMO.

I'm noticing it affect me too lately.... so how about you and I take a month and a bit off. No reading, no posting, until Dec 31st, when we all come back with our new year resolutions. Basically rather than wasting away like we're slumming in a dive bar together -- we treat this place like somewhere to debrief our victories and setbacks, to encourage positive peer pressure and an dispassionate outside perspective. Everything in moderation.

See you in 2012
 

samuelsss

New Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2011
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Wall street

I agree that both sides ought to take more responsibility for the current economic state. If they do not, nothing would change.
 

Julius_Seizeher

Master Don Juan
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Messages
1,233
Reaction score
75
Location
Midwest
Consider the legitimacy of any person or movement that claimed the right to assert their rights--by violating the rights of others. You do not have the right to forcibly occupy someone else's property; such a claim is a hideous abrogation of rights.

Furthermore, rational and intelligent people do not stand to gain anything from blocking traffic with their bodies. Any man of self-esteem could never blame an unseen, undefined individual or conspiracy as the source for what he perceived as affronts against him; men of self-esteem do not sit around whining about how they've been victimized, held down, exploited, whatever.

A man of self-esteem knows that in order for him to be a victim, he would have to choose it; he would have to sanction his own victimhood. As you can guess, men of self-esteem are nobody's "victim".

This OWS bowel movement is nothing more than a bunch of worthless moochers who want to loot from the productive, and who must first villianize the producers so they can pretend to be justified in robbing them. Folks, we already have the highest tax rates in the world, and that "top 1%" you love to whine about are paying 40% of the TOTAL tax revenues taken into the Treasury. That's right--1% of Americans pay 40% of the taxes. Those CEOs, investors, entrepreneurs, you know: those people who exploited you (as if you had anything they could not get for themselves), it is they who are exploited by a society that demands them to produce, then damns them for succeeding in doing so.

And now we are beset by the mindless snarling of worthless degenerate rotters in the streets who hate capitalism, yet claim the right to steal its product: money. It is productive human action that makes wealth possible, but they hate capitalism, they produce nothing, and then demand to be paid for their nothingness.

Away from the ethical issues, they blame Wall Street for the problems in the economy. Really? Talk about the tail wagging the dog-- Wall Street is only a barometer of the economy, not the prime mover (which is productive human action). We hear about how Wall Street caused a crash with financial derivatives of subprime mortgage debt (CDOs and CMOs); this is another instance of leftists trying to reverse the law of cause and effect. I'm no fan of derivative instruments, but the crash was caused by the sh!t mortgages inside the derivatives, not the derivatives themselves. A derivative is by definition an effect, not a cause.

And then there's all the whining about the bailouts. Hey, I'm Tea Party, I'm as against the bailouts as you can be--but once again we've got a screwy understanding of cause and effect here. Obumma bails out the banks and the automakers (and the worthless green energy companies) and instead of blaming him, they are blaming the people he wrote checks to? This is ground control to OWS...

Of course, since it is a bastardized hodgepodge of communists, socialists, anarchists, feminists, and every rotten corner of humanity that you can imagine, you won't be able to fish out anything close to rationality from these people.

So who is the bad guy in all this? I say it is Keynesian economics. Keynesian philosophy gave us the Fed, fiat money, and all this big government bureaucratic social planning bullsh!t that a free economy has no use for. The message is: GET OUT OF OUR WAY. I hope you OWS moochers are ready for what's coming next fall, this country is going back to the right (in order to save itself) and there won't be a demonrat left in the federal government come Jan 1, 2013.

But don't worry, the neoconservatism of the Bush years is nearly as unpopular on the right as it was on the left; American conservatism is in the beginning of a renaissance where Libertarian philosophy is coming into the mainstream (via the Tea Party and Ron Paul) and we are seeing a huge surge of popularity in the ideas of Murray Rothbard, Hayek and von Mises (Austrian School), Milt Friedman, Ayn Rand, etc.
 

Vice

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
2,006
Reaction score
186
Again with the Guy Fawkes mask. Why do these people insist on ripping off that symbol (for lack of a better term) that was portrayed and popularized in a CORPORATELY SPONSORED Hollywood film played by actors who OFFER LITTLE TO SOCIETY?

And another thing: while the rich may pay less than their fair share of taxes, wasn't the tax system designed to be an incentive to start business that ultimately drive the country forward?

There's a few wealthy out there that DON'T pay their fair share of taxes using "creative accounting"; case and point: Howard Hughes. And my real estate attorney, whom I will be asking to refer to me his accountant for this year's taxes.

I'm not really into politics, but I'm starting to become self aware of my republican tendencies and my occasional appeal of liberal ideas. But I know better than to subscribe to either side; they're both equally bad.
 
Top