# Occupy Wall Street!



## midphase (Oct 2, 2011)

I think it's shameful that as many as 700 people got arrested in NYC for peacefully protesting against Wall Street fat cats.

Even more shameful is that none of the major news outlets are reporting on this in any sufficient way.

I have seen more news coverage for a couple of dozen tea partiers at a Sarah Palin event than this.

I hope this keeps gaining momentum, and I hope some news people and even politicians start getting behind this movement, I think it's time we go after the real culprits of the sorry state that this country is in instead of blaming everything on the wrong people.

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/10/01/wall_street_protestors_take_to_brooklyn_bridge_nypd_arrests_larg.html (http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/10/ ... _larg.html)

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/02/business/ ... ?hpt=hp_t2


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 2, 2011)

midphase @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> I think it's time we go after the real culprits of the sorry state that this country is in instead of blaming everything on the wrong people.



Amen. Bring on the revolution...


----------



## José Herring (Oct 3, 2011)

I agree. This is major and significant. A real revolution is happening and most of the news outlets are totally mum. Guess it's obvious now what kind of people own the news.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 3, 2011)

josejherring @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> I agree. This is major and significant. A real revolution is happening and most of the news outlets are totally mum. Guess it's obvious now what kind of people own the news.



Amen again. And go Mark Ruffalo:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... 9-per-cent



> Their message is very clear and simple: get money out of the political process; strive for equality in taxation and equal rights for all regardless of race, gender, social status, sexual preference or age. We must stop poisoning our food, air and water for corporate greed. The people on Wall Street and in the banking industrial complex that destroyed our economy must be investigated and brought to justice under the law for what they have done by stealing people's homes and savings


----------



## P.T. (Oct 3, 2011)

The news media is interested in bringing down Palin.
They have no interest in helping anyone attack the bankers.

I'd say that the same people are behind the media as run the nation from behind the curtain.

It's one big machine dedicated to grinding up the people for the sake of the elites.

The real culprits are the bankers and the gov working together to enrich and empower themselves.

And none of it will change as long as people keep engaging in the sideshow that is partisan politics.


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 3, 2011)

What doesn't seem to get much coverage is Joe Bidens Brother.
It is related to this also. But since his hedge fund account will proove that the GOP and DNC get along just fine and agree on many issues, they can't afford to let those secrets get much attention.
FWIW the island of Antigua was just like Cuba was when Batista was doing business with the Mafia.
On Antigua wealthy politicians can stash cash w/o fear of taxation, and then go and give speeches about how evil Wall Street is.

As usual I find the timing of this to serve the incumbents very well.
The DNC is not getting the 30,000 USD plates of dinner they were accustomed to, so why not send in the troops, and nobody has more shake down experience than Obama.
Harry Reid uses the Bully Pulpit the same way too. The Brothel owners didn't throw their usual campaign contributions to him in 2009, so after the election, he decides to make speeches on making the Government regulated Prostitution business disappear..
This is what these bums do when they need more cash, and since they spent and stole every nickel and dime available, they must go onto other sources.

Anyone ever notice that the usual insurance companies refuse to keep people living in flood areas, by not offereing flood insurance...? That's because they'll go broke, it's just common sense.

So instead the Feds use FEMA as a way to get some of the lucrative profits that the mafia style protection rackets.............oooops........I meant insurance programs offer. They use our money to pay the victims.
This successful racket is what gave them the idea to take over the medical insurance rackets, and force everyone to pay into their program or face penalties.....

This is nothing more than the AFL-CIO...................sorry........I mean Obama team shaking down cash for their elections. Why didn;t this happen when our trillions in stimulus was given to Goldman-Sachs, or when the UAW bought out the shares that were taken from the true owners of GM...?

Truth of the matter is that the Ponzi schemes in Europe aren;t working well, the Government Ponzi schemes over here aren't working well, so the Feds must grow and take in more revenue, and they care not where it comes from.
Without this excessive Government growth and revenue, they can no longer apply bandaids to their failed Ponzi schemes.

So shaking down Wall Street is where the pussies go to dance.
When they grow a set between their legs they should march on the Federal Reserve.

Especially during one of those secret " Commission " meetings where leaders of the various Crime Families are choppered in to decide what to do with the rest of us.


----------



## rgames (Oct 3, 2011)

I don't think it has been ignored by the media - seems like it's popped up on most of the usual outlets.

Maybe it's just given less weight because there's no coherent message. It's a mish-mash people upset by different things. What will the news report say? "Tonight at six - people are angry." Well, yeah, but is that really newsworthy?

Regarding the outcry against the financial sector, it's not appropriate to place all the blame there. Sure, the investment banking sector acted as a facilitator but they didn't act alone. There were a *whole bunch* of _<insert nicer word for stupid>_ people who bought houses they couldn't afford. It didn't take a genius to see it coming - I had many discussions in 2003 - 2005 with people where we wondered how the housing market could possibly sustain the prices we were seeing.

Same thing happened with the tech bubble in the late 90's. Of course, the housing bubble had much larger implications (and yes, more help from the investment banking houses). But, fundamentally, both had everything to do with people being _<insert nicer word for stupid>_.

So if we're going to protest against Wall Street, perhaps we should also protest against ourselves. Let's at least be honest.

rgames


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 3, 2011)

Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5zmzV5IxpQ


----------



## José Herring (Oct 3, 2011)

rgames @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> I don't think it has been ignored by the media - seems like it's popped up on most of the usual outlets.
> 
> Maybe it's just given less weight because there's no coherent message. It's a mish-mash people upset by different things. What will the news report say? "Tonight at six - people are angry." Well, yeah, but is that really newsworthy?
> 
> ...



Message is loud and clear, but maybe you have to be from NY to get it. Living amongst traders and bankers constantly you see the mentality. Criminal minds. Back stabbing individuals that would sell their own mother to make a profit. You know--Republicans. :D 

The message is that these types of people can't be allowed to do what they do, tank world economies, short sell stocks, hedge funds, all the capitalist gimmicks created, they can't be allowed to do these things, basically gamble the economy away on the backs of people that are actually trying to make a living. They do this flagrantly breaking the law with little recourse unless something goes horribly wrong like Bernie Maddoff. The guy who becomes the government fall guy when there's a market crash.

Things like "insider trading" are the norm. It's against the law but only the real flagellant violators like Martha Stewart ever get prosecuted. The everyday insider tips go hardly unnoticed. Heck even I was getting insider information from brokers while working as a personal trainer during my college years. 

If the message is anything is that we can't let these criminal thugs be in power any more. Now whether the protesters succeed is a whole different matter entirely. But, I'd actually like to fly to NY and join in on the fun.


----------



## midphase (Oct 3, 2011)

I agree, one could levy the same comment on the tea party who still doesn't seem to have a particularly clear and focused plan yet get an amazing amount of media coverage for the smallest of events that they organize.

And although many people might have bought homes that were above their pay grade, I think that there were a lot of obfuscations and shenanigans going on behind the scenes on the part of the lenders to convoke those individuals that they absolutely could afford the loan. Plus, I do think that although some of the more extreme cases have been turned into the poster children for the media reporting, the majority of the people who bough homes had a lot more modest and realistic expectations to repay those loans.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 3, 2011)

rgames @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> Regarding the outcry against the financial sector, it's not appropriate to place all the blame there. Sure, the investment banking sector acted as a facilitator but they didn't act alone. There were a *whole bunch* of _<insert nicer word for stupid>_ people who bought houses they couldn't afford. It didn't take a genius to see it coming - I had many discussions in 2003 - 2005 with people where we wondered how the housing market could possibly sustain the prices we were seeing.



Hmm, not much of an argument for me. It's analogous to drug users and drug dealers. And I have less sympathy with the dealers than the users.

Sure, people are stupid and should have seen it coming, but can't help themselves. But the phenomenon of lending ridiculous sums is relatively recent. When I left school and wanted a loan it was still having to put on a suit and tie to convince the bank manager you were of good character. Seems quiant now, but surely more sensible than the free for all it became. And while you say people should have seen it coming, the city didn't see the crash coming. The financial products were deliberately so complex everyone thought there was some science in it, whereas it was all smoke and mirrors.

Yup, they're first in line for me.


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 3, 2011)

The system is as old as a Persian market and since it's in bed with the " leaders " of our society, it's not going anywhere.

If these LUINA coordinated " protests " take place in DC it would have much more merit IMHO.
Just look at the Billions we are sticking into Airport Security, where the former Homeland Security Chief owns the machines we pay for to use against oursleves.......??
That's insider trading.

How about the backers who invest in " Green " energy like Obama bundlers, Pelosi family members, etc.
They are guaranteed their money back while the tax payers are stiffed.

So is NYC the right place to go, or is DC where the laws these traders hide under, are created and sold...?

When a Snake bites you, you remove it's head, not the tail...

Count Me In for the DC protest....... I'll sequnce my parts and take a 75% cut in pay to join in that protest.

IMHO the 150 year Medal Of Honor awards happening today should get more coverage since they alone provided these kids from Connecticutt the priveledge to hang out together.

I sure hope the sururbanites don't take the 3 line north and get lost in lower Harlem by 148th. Those iPhones are quite popular in the neighborhoods where people are actually suffering.


----------



## rgames (Oct 3, 2011)

midphase @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> I think that there were a lot of obfuscations and shenanigans going on behind the scenes on the part of the lenders to convoke those individuals that they absolutely could afford the loan.



It was a perfect storm: in order for loans to happen, there need to be two parties. The first is the person taking the loan; the second is the person giving the loan. On the take side, people were comfortable taking more than risk dictated they should (the mortgages). On the give side, people were comfortable giving more than risk dictated they should (the collateralized debt obligations).

In the middle sat the banks who packaged up the loans and sold them as investments. They were basically the market-maker intermediaries who matched the givers with the takers. So, sure, they should share some of the blame. But, ultimately, it's up to the givers and takers to make smart decisions.

It's not against the law for someone to offer you a risky proposition. When a bunch of people take those risks and lose, well, that sucks. And it hurts all of us. But there's no way that you can argue that the risk-takers aren't complicit.

Here's the fundamental issue: this country is coming off a 20-year period where it fell in love with _perceived_ value: it was tech stocks in the 90's then homes in the 00's. Each rose and fell on a tide of ridiculous speculation - people bragged about their stock portfolios in the 90's then about the value of their homes in the 00's. Who was bragging about his part in creating true economic value? Not many. People need to stop confusing perceived value with true economic value. If the most recent macroeconomic crisis teaches that lesson, then I'd say it might be worth it.

rgames


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 3, 2011)

rgames @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> It's not against the law for someone to offer you a risky proposition.



It certainly can be if badly sold. In the UK, Endowment Mortgages were heavily promoted and sold in the 80s, it was the only way to get certain types of discounts. And after their value collapsed, they were eventually found to have missold them - they didn't adequately explain the risks to customers. As a result, they've had to pay out many many millions of pounds.

I'd bet the farm that many of the companies who sold outrageous loans in the US did their best to disguise the level of risk. Some people are gullible, some are willfully stupid, but some just don't have the financial understanding to rigourously pick apart a dodgy product and they fall for the slick line that they'll have been told. And like I say, these people didn't just fool hicks in Rednecksville, they fooled the whole financial system.

If someone is selling a complex and / or risky financial product, the onus is on the company to be completely transparent about what the negative consequence could be. It should be them checking up to see if it's appropriate for the customer, they're the ones with the skilled knowledge.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 3, 2011)

What you're oblivious to, Richard, is the progression of middle class wages stagnating while all the wealth has risen to the top. To keep up we started working more hours, then we sent women into the workplace, then we started borrowing. 

Meanwhile, along with the unsustainable share of our wealth and wages that has trickled up has come an undue amount of power. These piggies used that power to create a huge house of cards all over the world. Some of that was irresponsible borrowing, sure, but then a lot of it was because people didn't know the world's financial system was going to collapse and they'd lose their jobs.

Those people protesting on Wall St. are inarticulate and unfocused, but you couldn't be more wrong to believe that they're in the wrong venue and especially that their general malaise is something to be ignored.

At the present rate we are going to end up with riots in the streets, not peaceful protesters blocking the Brooklyn Bridge.

What's idiotic is that the answer is so simple: our federal government should be taking advantage of the current opportunity to borrow at effective negative interest rates and invest it in our country. Bail out the states so they don't have to fire teachers, and write people checks to fix our estimated trillion dollars of needed infrastructure repairs.

Instead we have the party of Satan standing in the way of prosperity.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 3, 2011)

And by the way, "partisan" is the wrong word. Fighting for the American people is not the same thing as intransigence.


----------



## midphase (Oct 3, 2011)

Let's not forget that what ultimately caused the problems were not people defaulting on their loans, but insurance companies who had insured those people against default not being able to pay the premiums.

I can guarantee you that none of those high risk people were issued mortgages without requiring PMI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Mortgage_Insurance

For all intents and purposes, the banks should have been covered in case of default, but they weren't because the insurance companies defaulted themselves.

The situation that we find ourselves in is a direct cause of the financial institutions screwing each other up and not as a result of people getting into mortgages that they shouldn't have been getting into in the first place.

Lastly, let's not forget these golden words spoken by Bush:

"Our Government is supporting homeownership because it is good for America; it is good for our families; it is good for our economy. One of the biggest hurdles to homeownership is getting money for a downpayment. This administration has recognized that, and so today I'm honored to be here to sign a law that will help many low-income buyers to overcome that hurdle and to achieve an important part of the American Dream."

Read more at the American Presidency Project: George W. Bush: Remarks on Signing the American Dream Downpayment Act 
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index ... z1ZkbGgvE4


I will never forget listening to that particular Bush speech and thinking to myself...this is going to be trouble.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 3, 2011)

And yet it doesn't explain the commercial real estate crash, let alone the crash in the rest of the world.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 3, 2011)

noiseboyuk @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> The financial products were deliberately so complex everyone thought there was some science in it, whereas it was all smoke and mirrors.
> 
> Yup, they're first in line for me.



When I got out of school I took a temp job working for a Wallstreet company. I was sitting around the lunch room one day and one of the chief finance dudes walked in. I started chatting with him. I asked him what he did. He said he dealt in "mortgage back securities". I asked him what exactly did that mean. And, he looked at me and said, "I'm still trying to figure that out". I laughed. This company that he was integral to made close to 900 million that year dealing in mortgage backed securities. Nobody knew exactly what it was. Later on in life I figured out that those securities where the insurance given to banks that then allowed them to do subprime mortgages. But, it took years of digging to find that out.

In the end these financial schemes have been in the making since the 80'ies at least. Money, backed by money, backed by money, all on paper, no actual money there but a handshake agreement. I think its what people call now the shadow economy. In the end it's just a bunch of bankers shuffling numbers on paper. Too bad that those funny numbers now make up most of the economy.

Obama said some good things today. Talked about turning back to a production based economy where actual goods and services are traded for real money. What a novel concept, but I'm not sure it will happen. The wallstreet elite along with the republican party are working double time to make sure that he never sees the oval office again. Shame really. They'd rather tank the whole country than be honest people.

Death to them.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 3, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> And yet it doesn't explain the commercial real estate crash, let alone the crash in the rest of the world.



Different forces at work. The commercial rea estate crash is directly linked to wall street. The crash in the rest of the world is directly linked to socialism. Socialism or more aptly named, watered down communism is still communism only more painful because the death is slower.

All in all, all the -isms of man are failing. Capitalism, communism, socialism are imo based on the same economy falsies.. They all violate real economics. They're all specifically designed so that only the few benefit on the backs of the many. But, at least socialism and communism try to give something back to placate the people. Capitalism is the most brutal of all really. It's the economic system that sheds blood for the dollar. Is the economic system most easily subverted and is the one that crashed down the hardest when it inevitably fails.

It's funny you talk to people who think they are capitalist and they say "free enterprise" is capitalism and they'll defend that to death. And, it's always shocked me that they don't know what capitalism is. But, the banker knows. Capitalism is the control of a society by controlling the money supply and all the games that go with that. It has nothing to do with free enterprise. The true capitalist dream is a monopoly. And they figured the best way to do that is to control the money. And, to a large part they are succeeding rather well.


----------



## Dave Connor (Oct 3, 2011)

midphase @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> Let's not forget that what ultimately caused the problems were not people defaulting on their loans, but insurance companies who had insured those people against default not being able to pay the premiums.



Those mortgages were packaged by real estate agents and banks against the most basic established credit-worthiness criteria. Its was a form of greed and insanity by everyday middle class professionals. THEN wall street bundled those mortgages and sold and leveraged them every which way they could.

It was a societal calamity based upon a way of thinking that didn't exist in the early and mid 20th century. Then it was all about hard work, living within your means and borrowing on a true ability to pay.

There are numerous speeches on record by Democrats as well that everyone should own a home. Ironically Bush was sounding the alarm on Fannie and Freddie well before the explosion. The head of congressional over site of those institutions {Barney Frank} famously assured the nation that all was well.

I'm not defending Bush as I'm not defending anyone. I'm glad a bunch of people are raising hell about the irresponsibility of American finance but they need to yell at the government as well.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 3, 2011)

It's government acting at the behest of American finance. That process started with St. Reagan.

And Barney Frank etc. actually had very little to do with it. Fannie and Freddie were out of the picture for much of the run-up in the second half of the 2000s - they were being investigated!

And once again, that doesn't explain the collapse of commercial real estate or the bubbles in the rest of the world.

So I yell at Wall St. piggies, conservatives (including Clinton), five swine on our Supreme Court who passed Citizens United, the entire Republican party....there's a lot of yelling to be done.


----------



## midphase (Oct 3, 2011)

"I'm not defending Bush as I'm not defending anyone. I'm glad a bunch of people are raising hell about the irresponsibility of American finance but they need to yell at the government as well."

Don't you think there's been plenty of yelling at the government? I mean that's all that there has been for the past 3 years.

On the other hand, there's been very little to no yelling at the financial institutions. The few people who have started to do so are getting arrested in mass!


----------



## Dave Connor (Oct 3, 2011)

midphase @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> Don't you think there's been plenty of yelling at the government? I mean that's all that there has been for the past 3 years.On the other hand, there's been very little to no yelling at the financial institutions. The few people who have started to do so are getting arrested in mass!



I'm just pointing out that all the money that went to bail out wall street was collected and funneled by the US government.

I don't know the ultimate goal of the protests and whether that includes the end of Capitalism which I could not agree to. But I do hope these demonstrations have an effect on people who care far more about money than humanity.

People seem to forget that numerous millionaires gave and lost their entire fortunes to win freedom for this country. That spirit has been lost by the modern deal maker who has no nobility or historic vision as did our founders. So I'm glad the spotlight is on this segment of our society so they wake up and get a clue about what's truly of value.


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 3, 2011)

The USA is history gentlemen. 
China is the future. State Capitalism with an endless supply of cheap labor is unstopable.
NAFTA was our first bandaid and a way to keep corporations in our hemisphere. So the next trillion dollar bandaid will give us a few more years, but our Unions have priced our goods too high to export.
The only thing we can export is our military, our agriculture and science, defense and education.
Right now they are flocking to China while those low tax rates are available.
If you need proof, check out Obamas boss..................sorry........I meant Jobs Counsel Chairman, CEO of GE.
He knows a good bet when he sees one.
Why should he hire an uneducated American, when he can have a grateful Chinese peasant do the job w/o a massive Union pension and welfare plan, at a fraction of the cost....

Look we had a great run, and did raise the standard of living across the globe, be proud of your heritage, because that's about all you'll have left.

Oh and BTW, do you think the AFL-CIO leader wants fat lazy Americans, or hungry hard working Mexicans building his Union up.........?

i think you know that answer too..


----------



## José Herring (Oct 3, 2011)

chimuelo @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> The USA is history gentlemen.
> China is the future. State Capitalism with an endless supply of cheap labor is unstopable.



That's what they thought last time and they ended up in communism. It will happen all over again. If you exploit people sooner or later they fight back. Give it a year maybe two and you'll start to see china collapse again. Mao is still fresh in their memory.


----------



## rgames (Oct 3, 2011)

josejherring @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> Obama said some good things today. Talked about turning back to a production based economy where actual goods and services are traded for real money. What a novel concept, but I'm not sure it will happen. The wallstreet elite along with the republican party are working double time to make sure that he never sees the oval office again. Shame really. They'd rather tank the whole country than be honest people.



Yes, going back to an economy with a basis in reality will be a step in the right direction. As I said above, we've spent the last 20 years living in an economic and financial fantasy world. I dream of the day where people brag about how many jobs they've created vs. the one where people obsess over investment portfolios, home values, and other sources of phantom wealth. It hasn't always been that way - people in this country used to measure wealth in more concrete terms.

Also, the mortgages were not complex. Everyone who gets a mortgage in the US gets the same HUD form that very clearly lays out how much money is being loaned, how much must be repaid, the time period for that repayment, and the timing of the cash flows. It's very simple. People had more than enough information to know that they were agreeing to risky terms. But hey, the value will always go up, right? So if you can't make the payments, then you just sell it, right? Well... no.

What were complex were the CDO's that the investment banks put together and sold to the dumbasses on the other end of the deal. The mortgage market was booming, so getting in on mortgage-backed securities is a great idea, right? Well... no.

So, again, it was a perfect storm fueled by idiocy on both sides.

If, in 2004 - 2005, people on both sides (lender and borrower) had stopped to think about what they were actually buying then the decline would have been much more manageable. But people kept right on buying in to the hype until the bubble burst.

rgames


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 3, 2011)

In other words you didn't read or absorb what I posted above.


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 3, 2011)

I just watched the YouTube videos and I feel sorry for Obama. There's no way he wanted this to happen now. 
I remember saying 2 years ago that as soon as Obamas ratings dipped below 40% that Hillary would run.
I think Gerogy boy Soros already got to her and then re directed the rest of Obamas bosses at the White House to start this phase.

I actually was angry at this and felt it should be in DC where the power resides. But now I understand why after seeing Van Jones giving the rallying speech.
The chances of Firefighters and Police voting Liberal again have just evaporated. Van Jones has a bad name with Law Enforcement from siding with cop killers and Black Panthers scaring voters at polls in Philadelphia. This guy then shows up and spurs on this peaceful protest to the next step.
Now you can expect any damages incurred to be associated with Jones, and of course Soros will have his Butler Eric Holder step in and stop any prosecution, so this " peaceful movement " just showed Americans how little power our President has in keeping his " advisors " and Czars in line.

To make matters worse we can expect the Conservatives to now say Obama wanted high unemployment rates to use as a recruiting tool.

The DNC better hurry and get somebody to run against Obama becasue this game is over.
You don't throw away your in the pocket firefighters and law enforcement agencies in this desperate attempt to overwhelm the media and the cities with such mayhem.

I liken it to the Tet Offensive where the North Vietnamese overestimated their support of the people in the South, the result was the total destruction of the Viet Cong as an effective fighting force, but it did succeed in showing Americans they were being lied to by the DNC and Military.....
So not much has really changed since then, new players and faces.
I think LBJ also wanted a Great Society too..........what a coincidence.

Those who wish to guide our lives into some beautiful utopia, lie their asses off while thousands die...............wait a minute, aren't we killing in Libya and Somalia now in the name of Human Rights....??

God Bless America....... 0oD


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 3, 2011)

Chim-aren't you a longtime union member collecting a union pension and having benefited from union protections all your working career?

I collect three small pensions-AFM, SAG and AFTRA, and am grateful for every dollar. I'm also glad that, at least for a time, someone stood up to the producers and created a standard that got musicians, singer and actors paid a decent wage.

I realize that the unions changed as a result of corruption and Mob infiltration. Still, it took things like the Triangle Shirtwaist company fire to get people angry enough at fat cat capitalists (who treated their workers like disposable slaves) to rally for safety concerns...and the unions did indeed end some horrific practices, including child labor.

The story of unions in America has never been as one-sided as I constantly see you portray it.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 3, 2011)

I wish Hillary would run, frankly. She'd get my vote this time (as she did in the primary - but I only decided that morning).


----------



## stonzthro (Oct 3, 2011)

As it is Nick, you'll just have to settle for Sarah Palin.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 3, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> I wish Hillary would run, frankly. She'd get my vote this time (as she did in the primary - but I only decided that morning).



+1, bigtime. I also voted for her in the primary (my last)


----------



## midphase (Oct 3, 2011)

I wish Howard Dean would run!


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 3, 2011)

NYC I am a proud AFL-CIO retiree. I just believe Unions in a right to work state spur competition and growth.
The showrooms here are all Union, that's because they have a large budget and Cirque du Soleil does every show in sight.
Then the Hotels get the lounges as a right to work Non Union status, which allows the Hotel to offer even more for their customers and everybody has a gig and everybody works.

The same goes for the Trade unions. When a business is just starting out they cant afford Union workers so under so many millions like 15-20, its a non union gig. This allows the business a chance to grow and when they expand they now hire union workers.

In NY or CA the out of work lists in the Union Halls are 20-30% during boom times, and now 40-50% because they can't get work for their members. So like in capitaism theres' always those who fail, in the Unions this percentage is much larger as they care more about corrupting the Liberals and having the tax payers foot the bill for their Ponzi schemes. The problem is the usual DNC raising the taxes of the rich guy dont fly well, so the middle class then become the DNC's next rich guy. Since when in NY is 200K being wealthy...?

At any rate I thought you might understand why during the day I am a Liberal that enjoys being exempted from Obamacare ( I hate long lines and doctors with broken English ) and at night I often quote the founding fathers, and other various elites like Bush, Reagan and even biblical quotes if I feel the room is conservative. 
But usually its broke Liberals hagning out in the lounge thinking because they overspent again they are entitled to more free drinks for even worse decisons. The Conservatives are all in the showroom and rarely gamble since they have to pay for thier kids school and buy their own groceries............ _-)


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 4, 2011)

chimuelo @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> Count Me In for the DC protest....... I'll sequnce my parts and take a 75% cut in pay to join in that protest.



:lol: :lol: :lol: 

couple of things before i go to work. 

the sec.

short selling is a pain but adds a lot of fluidity to the markets.

aig and credit default swaps.

lehman brothers

hank paulson.

leverage against profit for individuals in the housing market.

brics


that should keep you going for a while.

:lol: :lol:


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

chimuelo @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> NYC I am a proud AFL-CIO retiree. I just believe Unions in a right to work state spur competition and growth.
> The showrooms here are all Union, that's because they have a large budget and Cirque du Soleil does every show in sight.
> Then the Hotels get the lounges as a right to work Non Union status, which allows the Hotel to offer even more for their customers and everybody has a gig and everybody works.
> 
> ...



Hmm. I'm socially liberal, putting my kid through school, pay for my own groceries, like to gamble and hate showrooms. Have fun working that out in one of your formulas!


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> It's government acting at the behest of American finance. That process started with St. Reagan.
> 
> And Barney Frank etc. actually had very little to do with it. Fannie and Freddie were out of the picture for much of the run-up in the second half of the 2000s - they were being investigated!
> 
> ...




Ole Barney had more than a little to do with it. His "boyfriend" was an executive for Fannie Mae and Frank blocked any attempt to regulate Fannie and Freddie.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 4, 2011)

midphase @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> I wish Howard Dean would run!



If that happens, I might be forced to vote for a Republican and I have never done that before.

We need someone Hillary; smart, Centrist, and tough as nails.


----------



## TheUnfinished (Oct 4, 2011)

I sometimes wonder whether the war is over. All across the the Western hemisphere governments (and, through a process of repeatedly and systematically being lied to, the people) are becoming more and more right wing. The aim to me seems to be to spend a few last years in power passing legislature that protects them and their assets before the storm comes and Western economies bite the dust.

We'll be begging to China and the South-East Asian economies and praying that the leadership vacuum is not filled by opportunist fundamentalists and criminals.

And you know what? We probably deserve it.


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 4, 2011)

NYComp.

Just havin' a little hypocitical fun my brotha'. I shall strive for more sensativity, but hypocracy and stereotypes drive the comedy clubs here in Vegas, so a little Jon Stewart rubbed off on me.

I also pray the DNC takes back the reigns from Soros and the AFL-CIO and let Hillary take over. She now has the experience of SecState which is a qualification the GOP Baffoons cannot tout.
If Obama doesn't step down like LBJ we will get stuck with someone from the other extreme. 

Politicians are now running as " Former CEO's" etc. which just 10 years ago would be a comment nobody would use as a bragging right.
Congress and the Senate is where change can be made, a President merely Presides over these branches and vetoes, or passes executive orders.

Personally I want an experienced politician, a real Democrat not another one of George Soros Butlers or an indebted, inexperienced gofer for the AFL-CIO.
If you think unemployment is high now, call the local Labor Unions in any large city you live in, pretend your a member and ask for the number on the out of work list. Now ask for the member count. Usually 4-6000, and three different Locals for the same trade in each metroploitan area.
If that kind of high " placement " rate is acceptable, then you're a true go down with the ship Liberal only interested in ideology and not the people. We're talking 50%...........So is it any surprise Obama wants an all Union Stimulus bill to rebuild America....??
I guess people have short memories, maybe they can call this one Shovel Ready II, but maybe some of the money will reach the guys who actually build the forms and pour the Concrete....
If 800 billion was set aside the first time and mysteriously disappearred, does anyone actually believe that 500 more will reach the people it was intended for....?
These lying bastards have had 75% of the stimulus money returned, where is that, who can answer that question.
Well the UAW.................ooops.................I meant GM are the only ones who haven't paid, but who wants to drive some silly little expensive electric car that needs Coal to be burned just so it can be recharged......

Nope these clowns are history and if we dont speak up for Hillary now, blame yourselves if you get stuck with a Gospel Singer Millionaire, or preacher from Texas.
This shit is just out of hand...

And un finished is right, we are at fault as much as the liars................ooops..............I meant leaders we sent there.


----------



## midphase (Oct 4, 2011)

"If Obama doesn't step down like LBJ we will get stuck with someone from the other extreme. "

I doubt it, firstly I think the press is making it seem like Obama is doomed while I do think his base is still strong (although a bit disappointed). Think about it this way....if you voted for Obama in 2008, there's no way in hell that you're voting for Perry in 2012.

Romney is a more credible challenger, but he's boring and not an extremist, hence he might not be able to carry some of the swing states.

Times are a-changin'!


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 4, 2011)

times have already changed. just keep in mind that if this current crash goes really badly wrong then we will all be introduced to something no one in living memory can really remember.

depression.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

midphase @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> "If Obama doesn't step down like LBJ we will get stuck with someone from the other extreme. "
> 
> I doubt it, firstly I think the press is making it seem like Obama is doomed while I do think his base is still strong (although a bit disappointed). Think about it this way....if you voted for Obama in 2008, there's no way in hell that you're voting for Perry in 2012.
> 
> ...



Obama can't win with just his base. He needs the independents of which he has totally tanked on approval. Obama will lose based on the economy and his inability to handle it and has only made things worse in his tenure and will most likely get even worse before the election. The Democrats only hope is to put up someone new, more "change" .


----------



## José Herring (Oct 4, 2011)

Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> midphase @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > "If Obama doesn't step down like LBJ we will get stuck with someone from the other extreme. "
> ...



Nah, not true. He's hangin' in there with indies and things haven't gotten worse, just not much better. He's still pretty popular right now compared to other politicians.

But, what's funny is that everybody assumes that Romney is going to win. Everybody including conservatives discount Herman Cain. But, I heard him speaking many months ago and determined that he's the guy to watch. He'll convince a lot of people to come to his camp over the next year. He's the only true conservative running. 

Romney will sooner or later slip up. He's slick and smart but not that slick and when he starts getting pressed on foreign policy and stuff not related to finance he totally caves. He has no clue about anything except for money. In the end Romney is just a venture capitalist of the worst kind. He has a total wall street mentality and though pretty intelligent really doesn't believe in hard work or anything related to production and exchange, the stuff the real economy is based on. In the end I think people will see that Romney just doesn't have what it takes to lead. Also, being a venture capitalist he's shady when it comes to business dealings. There's already rumblings of things he's doing that are just on the edge of being unethical. It won't be too long before some stuff turns up that are serious money violations. His type of mentality has a hard time being ethical when it comes to money. There will be more than a few campaign violations and they'll all involve huge sums of cash.

Hermann Cain on the other hand, watch out for him. He's got what it takes to bring down the whole liberal agenda. The only thing holding him back is his race in an otherwise pretty racist party--Rick Perry. :lol:


----------



## midphase (Oct 4, 2011)

Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Obama will lose based on the economy and his inability to handle it and has only made things worse in his tenure and will most likely get even worse before the election. The Democrats only hope is to put up someone new, more "change" .



I'm very glad that you're not a Democratic political strategist!

I don't think things are are bad as the press makes it seem for Obama, and depending who the Republicans will send to the national elections might make an Obama victory that much easier.


----------



## midphase (Oct 4, 2011)

Herman Cain is a nutjob and I hope him and Michelle Bachman end up with the Republican nomination because it will cause Obama to win by a landslide.


----------



## rgames (Oct 4, 2011)

midphase @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> I don't think things are are bad as the press makes it seem for Obama


I tend to agree. I think the press doesn't know what to do with Obama - he's one of very few rational people in DC these days. And the press doesn't like rational - they like people at the extremes who make absurd comments.

The only thing that's really bugged me about Obama lately are his "Fair Share" comments. It's absurd to say that wealthy Americans don't pay their fair share -they certainly do, especially considering the fact that half of Americans don't pay any taxes.

Sure, you can ask them to pay more. But don't deny that they already cover much more than their "fair share". That's rude and obnoxious. Most wealthy people are more than willing to help out (many already do so through philanthroic activities). How about we acknowledge their contirubtions then politely explain to them that we still need some help? Seems that would be a better approach...

rgames


----------



## rgames (Oct 4, 2011)

One thing that's confused me about this whole movement is this: why Wall Street?

Sure, you can use them as an example of corporate greed. But they're just one of many.

Take a look at all the companies in and around Silicon Valley. Those companies generate *massive* amounts of wealth for *very few* people. Most of the companies that do software or make tech gadgets have relatively few folks on their payrolls, yet they generate enormous revenues.

So why not go after Apple, Facebook, Twitter, etc?

Hmmmmm... Oh yeah, because they're using their iPhones to tweet messages and take pictures to post on Facebook.

I think it's safe to say this movement is not without some serious irony...

rgames


----------



## José Herring (Oct 4, 2011)

midphase @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Herman Cain is a nutjob and I hope him and Michelle Bachman end up with the Republican nomination because it will cause Obama to win by a landslide.



He's not. And, that's why he's rising in the polls. People underestimate him and liken him to Michelle Bachman when if you've ever heard him you'll realize that he's one sharp dude and not a nut job at all.

Bachman on the other hand, wellll...... worse than Sarah Palin, which I actually thought would be impossible to achieve, yet she has. I think of Bachman as more of the comic relief.


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 4, 2011)

We're all a bunch of chumps.
Right now we are are giving opinions based on which guys we think or want to win.

Both sides want high unemployment rates.
Obama sees votes and recruitment numbers.'
The GOP guys think the higher rates means more pissed off anti-Obama voters.

And we sit back and cheer on both of these false parties..

Very Sad how most of us still think someone in DC actually is concerned with someone other than themselves....


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 4, 2011)

rgames @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> One thing that's confused me about this whole movement is this: why Wall Street?



Because Facebook didn't screw up the world economy.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 4, 2011)

chimuelo @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> We're all a bunch of chumps.
> Right now we are are giving opinions based on which guys we think or want to win.
> 
> Both sides want high unemployment rates.
> ...



I'm not cheering for anybody other than "hope" and "change". I'm a hold out for the promises of 2008. I'm still hoping that something might change. /\~O


----------



## midphase (Oct 4, 2011)

chimuelo @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> We're all a bunch of chumps.
> Right now we are are giving opinions based on which guys we think or want to win.
> 
> Both sides want high unemployment rates.
> ...




Chim,

I still don't get what point you're trying to drive at? Are you advocating for total anarchy? Because it sure sounds like it. You're essentially saying we're fucked either way, Republican, Democrats, corporations, unions, cats, dogs...doesn't matter, everyone is out to fuck us.

If that's your point (and I believe it is, and I believe you do not need to rephrase it in anymore ways...we get it), would you care to offer your thoughts on how to get out of this fuckfest?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 4, 2011)

Richard, I've answered your question twice in this thread. Wall St. crashed the world. The basic malaise is about corporate greed, unfair inequality, and oligarchy/plutocracy.



> Both sides want high unemployment rates



You're wrong.


----------



## Lex (Oct 4, 2011)

rgames @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Most wealthy people are more than willing to help out (many already do so through philanthroic activities).
> rgames



Ahahahahahahaha! :lol: :lol: :lol: 


alex


----------



## José Herring (Oct 4, 2011)

Lex @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> rgames @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > Most wealthy people are more than willing to help out (many already do so through philanthroic activities).
> ...



I know. Made me chuckle too. But, you gotta love Richard for his optimistic look on life. Has no bearing on reality, but its endearing none the less.

But in reality people like the Koch brothers are more representative of the uber rich than people like Warren Buffet. Of all the uber rich I've met, the uber rich artist is usually more willing to contribute while the uber rich business man is usually a social Darwinist freak. Unfortunately there are more uber rich business people than their are kind loving altruistic artist type people. Shame. No wonder the world is fucked up.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

midphase @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Herman Cain is a nutjob and I hope him and Michelle Bachman end up with the Republican nomination because it will cause Obama to win by a landslide.



Exactly what things about Herman Cain make him a nutjob? Granted I understand liberals probably think all conservative people are nutjobs by default but I digress.. Just curious on the particular things Cain has said or done to bother you.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 4, 2011)

josejherring @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Lex @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > rgames @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> ...



I'm not sure I got the point of that. I thought both Buffett and Koch were pretty well known for giving away pretty huge money. [/flipv]


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

josejherring @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Lex @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > rgames @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> ...



That is funny but unfortunately it is well-known that "conservatives" donate more money and more of their time to charitable causes than liberal people do. In fact the working poor give more money to charity percentage wise than rich people in general do. Interesting to note that before Obama started running for office he only contributed an average of about 1% to charity between 2000 and 2004, which is far below average. In the run up to the presidential election Obama gave 6.1% in 2006 while his opponent Mcain gave 18% (in 2007 he gave 26%). Liberals are more about "donating" other peoples' money. 



> But the idea that liberals give more is a myth. Of the top 25 states where people give an above-average percentage of their income, all but one (Maryland) were red -- conservative -- states in the last presidential election.
> 
> "When you look at the data," says Syracuse University professor Arthur Brooks, "it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more. And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money."
> 
> ...



http://townhall.com/columnists/johnstos ... page/full/


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

Brainwashed African-Americans. If Herman Cain thinks the Rebublican party is pro African-American, he needs a thorough brain laundering himself.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 4, 2011)

Nevermind, I think I caught up. It's because Koch is like the anti-Soros.

Buffett caught hell forever too because he wasn't giving his money out as he went. Hoarding it all until the end. I thought that was totally rational, but it wasn't especially well thought of along the way.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

rgames @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> One thing that's confused me about this whole movement is this: why Wall Street?
> 
> 
> rgames



For widespread fraud, b.s. debt instruments and insurance scams, bailouts that were anti-capitalist (though Wall Street always preach the free market) golden parachute payouts to the CEOs whose companies perpetrated these massive scams and later claimed ignorance of how the various products they sold worked....oh, so many reasons.

Sorry, I must have missed where Facebook, Apple et al have been practicing credit default swaps and over-leveraging themselves in a ridiculous manner. Apple, at least, has a huge cash surplus on its balance sheet. Facebook's valuation is still unknown. Oh, and-when were we forced to do corporate bailouts of these companies lest the financial world collapse?


----------



## midphase (Oct 4, 2011)

Richard,

Please read this:

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/05/27/ ... o-charity/


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> In the run up to the presidential election Obama gave 6.1% in 2006 while his opponent Mcain gave 18% (in 2007 he gave 26%). Liberals are more about "donating" other peoples' money.



I wonder-was it "his" money or his zillionaire wife's? And even if it was his, ummm...I don't think they suffered much. His money is peanuts compared to hers.

So, 26% of what? His Congressional salary? His book income? Her income?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 4, 2011)

> I understand liberals probably think all conservative people are nutjobs by default



Not all. Many are just stupid, mean, selfish, uninformed, ignorant, and/or just generally misguided.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > In the run up to the presidential election Obama gave 6.1% in 2006 while his opponent Mcain gave 18% (in 2007 he gave 26%). Liberals are more about "donating" other peoples' money.
> ...



26% of his reported income. I beleive they filed separately.

This is funny. Biden gave an average of $369 to charity a year in the past 10 years before the 2008 election. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/e ... cial_N.htm


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> > I understand liberals probably think all conservative people are nutjobs by default
> 
> 
> 
> Not all. Many are just stupid, mean, selfish, uninformed, ignorant, and/or just generally misguided.



You don't say? That shocks me you think that. :D


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 4, 2011)

By the way, Diffusor, the following positions held by Cain qualify him as a nutjob:

- not wanting to raise the federal debt limit;

- wanting to go back to the gold standard;

- wanting to privatize Social Security;

- tax policies (in favor of lowering corporate tax rates, eliminating capital gains tax, no tax on repatriated foreign profits, eliminating estate tax, and above all supports the "Fair" tax - which is exactly what we should not be doing);

- Moslems are trying to implement Sharia law;

- man-made global warming is a hoax;

- repeal Affordable Care;

- no same-sex marriage;

- black people have been brainwashed into voting Democratic;

And there's more.

In short, a nutjob.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> NYC Composer @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> ...



And Warren Buffet will give his billions to charity. He's a Dem. Do you want to go through each person, divide them by political affiliation and work out the amounts they will give to charity?

You know, for what it's worth, I don't believe that being liberal or conservative particularly defines what people give to charity-it's probably close to even. What galls me is the completely illogical and utopian vision that if we remove any sort of governmental safety net, private charity will magically step in and fill the absolutely monumental void that's left.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> By the way, Diffusor, the following positions held by Cain qualify him as a nutjob:
> 
> - not wanting to raise the federal debt limit;
> 
> ...



Good list but more based along partisan lines than any determination of truth or worth.. So is Obama a nutjob? I believe he is against same sex marriage too.


On the corporate tax thing you do realize the US has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world second only to Japan. If you lower the corporate tax rate more companies wouldn't ship jobs overseas. There's was a good 60 Minutes piece on this not too long ago that discussed just this. You should check it out. I would also implement taxes on imports and get rid of all the free trade agreements that are unfair to us, or at least make them more fair.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > NYC Composer @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> ...



I was only citing the research that says conservatives give on average 30 percent more than liberals, and of course the working poor who give most of all per capita. We don't have to get into the details. 

Another hands on example. I am a conservative libertarian. My wife is very liberal, votes Democratic. When we are at stop lights with the usual panhandlers I will give them money depending on how I judge their character. My wife on the otherhand never gives them money, beleiving they are either scamming or that if they were really poor that there are programs for them. lol


----------



## P.T. (Oct 4, 2011)

People thought Obama would be a big change and that things would improve.
Looked at dispassionately, I'd say he is just more of the same old same old.

Now everyone is looking at the usual suspects and trying to decide which one will come through and make things better.

None of them will.
They all work for the same master.
They all have the same policies on all of the things that truly matter.


----------



## midphase (Oct 4, 2011)

" If you lower the corporate tax rate more companies wouldn't ship jobs overseas. "

That is plain bullshit...you know it, I know it.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

P.T. @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> People thought Obama would be a big change and that things would improve.
> Looked at dispassionately, I'd say he is just more of the same old same old.
> 
> Now everyone is looking at the usual suspects and trying to decide which one will come through and make things better.
> ...



Well said. The Republicans and Democrats are just two heads of the same beast.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

midphase @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> " If you lower the corporate tax rate more companies wouldn't ship jobs overseas. "
> 
> That is plain bullshit...you know it, I know it.



Well like I said you have to lower corporate income tax AND tax imports heavily to make it more expensive for those companies to import goods and take advantage of cheap foreign labor. Regardless, if what you say is true then it must be true of those other countries that have lower rates than we do. Are they exporting jobs? Ireland for example have one of the lowest tax rates and they are importing jobs.

The problem is that Americans have grown so accustomed to cheap import electronics and goods I am afraid we will never make the transition back to a manufacturing economy.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 4, 2011)

Of course, we have a monumental void at the moment, and that's why our economy is depressed. Our declining middle class doesn't have the spending power to get us out of this, because all the wealth has risen to the top.

I guess you have to repeat that over and over until it sinks in to conservatives, who either don't know that or throw up a load of bollox in the way - you know, trickle-down, job creators, poor people are lazy, etc


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Another hands on example. I am a conservative libertarian. My wife is very liberal, votes Democratic. When we are at stop lights with the usual panhandlers I will give them money depending on how I judge their character. My wife on the otherhand never gives them money, beleiving they are either scamming or that if they were really poor that there are programs for them. lol



That's a lovely anecdote, and you're quite the raconteur. Did you want me to apply your heartwarming story across the board and draw some determination from it?


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 4, 2011)

Midphase....
I want federally funded elections, just like we have now, only without the corporations, lawyers, APAC from Israel, AFL-CIO and rich philanthrapists turning our leaders into their bitches.
Obama is the AFL-CIO and Soros fall guy. They are handed scripts to read and then when shit goes bad have to take the blame.
I feel sorry for Obama. He never picked the czars, and appointees and advisors, he never evn knew who they were or in what capacity they were operating. Soros and the Unions have brought incredible shame to the White House.
I am angrier now than ever because I fell hook line and sinker for the latest mouthpiece.
The reason I loved Reagan is because at first I hated him. He fired Union employees, put a stop to my IRS write offs for agency lunches ( me and the family ) phone calls to booking agents ( relatives back east ) and mileage for the job. ( visiting my family in SoCal and Tahoe).
But then I saw a real man who wanted to free the people of Europe and crush the Soviet Union and it's entire slave based society.
He succeeded, and I was there in Germany when it happened.
Never saw so many Krauts in Cowboy hats in my life, we were treated like Kings and I was a proud American.
Now I am ashamed except when I go to Mexico but thanks to Eric Holder giving the cartel 1000's of automatic weapons, I haven't been there since Obama took office. Good thing too as Americans disappear so frequently it isn't even considered news anymore.

But this whole global society we tried to create demands we send jobs overseas, and corporations can exploit cheap Labor free from Unions and regulations. Cant blame them really where does it say they must stay here and provide us with anything...?
Besides, GM, GE and all of the Presidents favorites get a free pass creating 40-50,000 jobs abroad while we suffer.
So do you really think these rich pricks we send there care about what you need or think you're entitled to...?

I don't care if we are the economic super power or any power for that matter. Our power is really in the consumer driven middle class which seems as though has shrunk to depression era levels.
Sure we need Union jobs, or corporate jobs, whatever you want to call them. But as long as everyone is fighting over a seat in DC and cash runs the game, the little people like you and me are of no concern, they already get our tax dollars when they arrive, its free and waiting. But it's the payback for getting there, and then the extra power they crave by selling laws that is ruining our nation.

That's something we can fix but we seem to think these wealthy bastards care about us because they throw a few scraps our way....?
They gig is to divide the peasants and have them think there's 2 teams fighting to the death just for them.

The Kings $ Queens of Europe are alive and well here in the USA, centuries old traditions of enslavement through food stamps, and a few bucks for gas will get you re elected....

It's pathetic and disgusting.

The only thing that made me proud today was my son, and seeing Amanda Knox get back home.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > Another hands on example. I am a conservative libertarian. My wife is very liberal, votes Democratic. When we are at stop lights with the usual panhandlers I will give them money depending on how I judge their character. My wife on the otherhand never gives them money, beleiving they are either scamming or that if they were really poor that there are programs for them. lol
> ...



If I recall it was you and your cohorts that started with the stereotyping and generalizations, so am I to draw some determination from that as well?


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

chimuelo @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Midphase....
> I want federally funded elections, just like we have now, only without the corporations, lawyers, APAC from Israel, AFL-CIO and rich philanthrapists turning our leaders into their bitches.
> Obama is the AFL-CIO and Soros fall guy. They are handed scripts to read and then when shit goes bad have to take the blame.
> I feel sorry for Obama. He never picked the czars, and appointees and advisors, he never evn knew who they were or in what capacity they were operating. Soros and the Unions have brought incredible shame to the White House.
> ...



I am starting to like you Chimuelo! (well except for the Amanda Knox part, whom I think is guilty as sin and got off with murder or at least is complicit)


----------



## midphase (Oct 4, 2011)

So Chim, what you're actually hoping for is a massive campaign finance reform and to put an end to lobbying?


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> NYC Composer @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> ...



I have cohorts??

Exactly where did I start stereotyping and generalizing? Please quote me.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 4, 2011)

I'm not the least bit apologetic about stereotyping and generalizing conservatives. It's very simple: they believe or claim to believe a total load of bollox.

Of course you're going to find liberals who are stingy, conservatives who are generous, and people whose private behavior is at odds with their beliefs. I've even met conservatives who are nice people, which is totally incongruous. Some of them are actually intelligent, which makes no sense whatsoever.

The truth is that it's easy to be nice personally and still vote for horrendously destructive public policies, which is what conservatives do and why I despise the Republican party.

These people simply have it wrong - and not just about a few issues but about every single one.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> I'm not the least bit apologetic about stereotyping and generalizing conservatives. It's very simple: they believe or claim to believe a total load of bollox.
> 
> Of course you're going to find liberals who are stingy, conservatives who are generous, and people whose private behavior is at odds with their beliefs. I've even met conservatives who are nice people, which is totally incongruous. Some of them are actually intelligent, which makes no sense whatsoever.
> 
> ...



You and I have always viewed this differently, Nick-even if you are my cohort.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 4, 2011)

> I would also implement taxes on imports and get rid of all the free trade agreements that are unfair to us, or at least make them more fair.



I like the idea in principle, but it's very difficult to pull off in practice. A trade war isn't any use.

I disagree with you about lowering corporate taxes - Kays and I agree - but the other things Cain says are positively nutty. The Fair tax totally sucks; we need a more progressive tax system, not an even more regressive one!

And you have a point about Obama being against same sex marriage. He's wrong. But Cain goes much farther.

Really it's the totality of what he says that makes him a nut job more than one single issue - although wanting to privatize Social Security, being worried about Sharia law, denying man-made global warming, wanting to go back onto the gold standard, being opposed to raising the debt ceiling...any of those issues qualifies a candidate as at least a nutjob as far as I'm concerned.



> Good list but more based along partisan lines than any determination of truth or worth..



No, it's 100% based on an objective determination of untruth and worthlessness. It only seems "partisan" to people whose beliefs are so detached from reality that they think all beliefs are.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 4, 2011)

> You and I have always viewed this differently, Nick-even if you are my cohort.



Have we? Or is it just that you're more mature than I am and you realize that my calling a spade a f-ing shovel doesn't cause people to admit that they're wrong.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 4, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> It only seems "partisan" to people whose beliefs are so detached from reality that they think all beliefs are.



All beliefs are or they wouldn't be beliefs they'd be facts. Man people need to go back to their basic college logic courses. 

Problem with both sides is they cling to beliefs that have no basis in reality and I wish both sides would just agree that they are beliefs. I don't have any problem doing that. When I voted no on prop 8 I had a bunch of conservos telling me that I was wrong and that gay marriage was basically a sin and why did I vote "no". I just flat out told them that I don't believe that it's the Governments job to dictate sexuality between consenting adults. But, I never once claimed that my belief was the truth. It's just my belief. Beliefs are just that. Something that you cling on to in spite of any evidence to the contrary.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> > You and I have always viewed this differently, Nick-even if you are my cohort.
> 
> 
> 
> Have we? Or is it just that you're more mature than I am and you realize that my calling a spade a f-ing shovel doesn't cause people to admit that they're wrong.



I'm a whole two years older than you, so there's all that accumulated wisdom.
Maturity, however, is so, so subjective. So is "wrong". I know, I know-you think I'm wrong about that.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> I'm not the least bit apologetic about stereotyping and generalizing conservatives. It's very simple: they believe or claim to believe a total load of bollox.
> 
> Of course you're going to find liberals who are stingy, conservatives who are generous, and people whose private behavior is at odds with their beliefs. I've even met conservatives who are nice people, which is totally incongruous. Some of them are actually intelligent, which makes no sense whatsoever.
> 
> ...



You can call it the truth to yourself if you want but at the end of the day it's just your opinion, just as everyone else has one. But I can see arguing with you will be like arguing with a Creationist. Pretty futile endeavor. 

cheers


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 4, 2011)

No Larry, you're wrong - I think you're right about what's wrong and wrong about what's not right or wrong. And yet curiously right at the same time. What's wrong with that?

Jose, it's also possible to believe facts. 

Social issues are something different. I don't say people are wrong to believe in capital punishment, for example, I just disagree. Same with abortion rights: if you view it as murder (and if if isn't then it's something like that!) then you're going to be opposed to legalized abortion. That's a belief.

Same sex marriage seems a little easier - to me being opposed to other peoples' civil rights is an indefensible position even if you don't like it. 

But there are many issues with objective reality. It is an objective fact that the following Republican policies will not bring back our economy, in fact they will do damage: cutting taxes at the margins; getting rid of regulations; providing the certainty of lower taxes across the board; cutting government spending; castrating unions; and firing public employees.

Yes that's a belief, but it happens to have the special virtue of being true.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> > I would also implement taxes on imports and get rid of all the free trade agreements that are unfair to us, or at least make them more fair.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am not advocating trade war per se. Just a little bit more fairness. We've opened ourselves wide open to other countries whereas they get to be more protective.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 4, 2011)

You know facts. Because facts are facts whether you believe them or not. It's what separates facts from belief. Knowledge from faith.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 4, 2011)

Diffusor, I'm not a creationist. The reason there's no point in your arguing with me is that I happen to be right, not because I have blind faith in my own opinions.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > NYC Composer @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> ...



Weren't you wanna of the people saying conservatives were stingy and greedy while liberal artist types are more generous. Forgive me if I got the wrong person. I believe a few of you were agreeing on the point.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 4, 2011)

> We've opened ourselves wide open to other countries whereas they get to be more protective



For example China, ja?

I agree with you. My point is that other countries are going to respond to whatever we do - and next thing you know you're in a trade war.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> No Larry, you're wrong - I think you're right about what's wrong and wrong about what's not right or wrong. And yet curiously right at the same time. What's wrong with that?
> 
> Jose, it's also possible to believe facts.
> 
> ...



On the same sex marriage thing.... First of all I have no problem with it. I could care less.
But.... if you are all for the civil rights for all then you of course would support polygamy between consenting adults right?


And as far as objective reality....what is objectively observable....THe Democrats had 2 years of majority rule in the congress and White House and the economy did not recover and got worse even. THat wonderful Stimulus bill that they claimed would not let unemployment rise above 8 percent was grossly wrong. lol Now there are talks of another Stimulus. First one didn't work. Let's try it again! Brilliant. I don't quite get the mentality of trying to fix a debt problem with more debt. Would that work in our personal finances? No, we would be bankrupt and on the streets before we knew it.


----------



## Diffusor (Oct 4, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> Diffusor, I'm not a creationist. The reason there's no point in your arguing with me is that I happen to be right, not because I have blind faith in my own opinions.



I gathered that.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

Diffusor @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> NYC Composer @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> ...



You have the wrong person. You're forgiven.


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 4, 2011)

Yes Midphase.
When you can buy laws and have access to any politician, you can control them. It's nothing new but now who's to know if Iran, Israel or China are buying the latest legislation. The latest law from the Suprem Court allows any campaign money to remian anonymous.

Before we had campaign finance laws with at least a way to know where the money came from, but now APAC can disassemble and just create their own politician, the same way Soros and the AFL-CIO groomed Obamas Senate race, then immediately set up a Presidential run. He had no record, which meant he could be incredibly flexible with his positions depending on what crowd he spoke to and where. 

Our latest 360 on the Taiwanese Defense Contracts are all the news in Asia right now. Chinese media is bragging about how the Americans are weak and divided. They wasted no time using it to motivate their people.
We will hear about this maybe in 2 weeks. But owing them money is one thing, having them dictate our foreign policy on a promise of future loans is a dangerous concept.

We cant even borrow anymore, but they'll knock off 6 months of payments to allow Boeing to build there, or maybe raytheon so we can have the Chinese shoot at us with our own missiles.
And when they invade Taiwan, we'll have to have them lend us the money just to fight them....

It's insane. Our " leaders " have sold us out.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 4, 2011)

chimuelo @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> Yes Midphase.
> When you can buy laws and have access to any politician, you can control them. It's nothing new but now who's to know if Iran, Israel or China are buying the latest legislation. The latest law from the Suprem Court allows any campaign money to remian anonymous.
> 
> Before we had campaign finance laws with at least a way to know where the money came from, but now APAC can disassemble and just create their own politician, the same way Soros and the AFL-CIO groomed Obamas Senate race, then immediately set up a Presidential run. He had no record, which meant he could be incredibly flexible with his positions depending on what crowd he spoke to and where.
> ...



Chim, you're right. It's all over. Corruption is everywhere,there's no hope, we're going down hard. That's why you need to join *NYCC's Compound*™. Here's the way i figure it:

1. I'll buy some defensible land at a high elevation.
2. I'll get guns. lots of guns. big guns.
3. Barbed wire fences with machine gun turrets, a bunch of hungry , vicious dogs.
4. Sustainable on site generator, internal water supply.
5. A few people with the right skills-electrician, hydroponic farmers, a medical person, etc etc.- lots of essential med supplies.
6. 300 cases of Hormel chili, 300 cases of Dinty Moore beef stew, 300 cases of Jack Daniels.
7. Some working wimmens.

Feel free to add to the list, but be sure to join up, as *NYCC'S COMPOUND*™ slots are going fast! (and you might want to squeeze out a few more years when the apocalyypse hits).


----------



## midphase (Oct 5, 2011)

Diffusor @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> THe Democrats had 2 years of majority rule in the congress and White House and the economy did not recover and got worse even. THat wonderful Stimulus bill that they claimed would not let unemployment rise above 8 percent was grossly wrong. lol Now there are talks of another Stimulus. First one didn't work. Let's try it again! Brilliant. I don't quite get the mentality of trying to fix a debt problem with more debt. Would that work in our personal finances? No, we would be bankrupt and on the streets before we knew it.



Sigh...

Democrats had a symbolic 2 years of control, but we all know that Republicans (acting as 1 hive mind) dug their heels in and stopped just about every resolution that was proposed with the threat of filibuster (I wish they would outlaw that one). Obama's fault was in believing that they actually wanted to compromise...so he squandered that advantage.

The 8% unemployment figure was an estimate, and the truth is that it could have been much worse, but Republicans love to throw it in the face of Democrats nonetheless.

Trying to fix debt with more debt is not quite accurate the way you portray it. First of all, the Government is not your family, it's not a corporation, and you can't apply the same mindset that you would apply to your personal finances. But try to think of it this way...let's say that you had a crappy year business-wise. You could try and tighten up ship, spend less...but that won't necessarily help you get more work. Or...you could try spending on advertising, making your product more polished and more appealing, perhaps better promotional materials, maybe even going back to school. It might seem counter-intuitive to spend more on your business during tough times, but that strategy is the only one which will have a shot at getting you back on your feet.

The economy needs to be kickstarted, and that will absolutely not happen by hoarding cash and cutting more government spending. Don't forget that the government is in debt due mostly to the crappy economic crisis and not because all of a sudden it started spending like mad (although military spending needs to be severely cut back and the USA needs to get the fuck out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and while we're at it Japan and Germany as well).


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 5, 2011)

rgames @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> One thing that's confused me about this whole movement is this: why Wall Street?
> 
> 
> rgames



because of ignorance. they don't get it. italy just got downgraded to a2. what they should be protesting about is the europeans seemingly lack of ability to come to any decision. as i said before these people are completely stultified. they need to act fast. how much longer will germany put up with their leader?


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 5, 2011)

midphase @ Tue Oct 04 said:


> " If you lower the corporate tax rate more companies wouldn't ship jobs overseas. "
> 
> That is plain bullshit...you know it, I know it.




uhhh no its not. the uk have a decreasing corporation tax rate over the next 4 years. why do you suppose that is? the us will do the same. ireland did it and attracted a lot of companies but their problem was they set everything too low and paid the price.


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 5, 2011)

NYC your compound needs some improvements.

Solar Generators with a hitch and 6 extra panels to store power are crucial. 3400 for a trailer hitched, 2 deep cycle 265 aH battery generator was a steal. Each additional panel is around 1600 USD, but in Nevada there's 300+ days of sun a year, that's why the huge Solar arrays are based here and have been built by the military long before the Obama Green projects became policy. Harry Reid is a POS but al least he did give us a secondary bridge ( on his land ) and the Solar fields.

I'm assumming you have given up on composition since there's no list of crucial gear.
You can't hunt everyday, just when the game trails are at their height of activity.
Then bury the dressed quarry and live off of Pheasant, Quail and Chucker bird, only rotating to Venicin as you wait for the German Brown spawining season.

Chili and Stew..........?? That's dog food.

There's a long way to go before the trucks stop rolling, but I remember the grocery stores being emptied more than once when the last group of elites miscalculated their adversaries. Carters Oil Emargo days were a great reminder of why a motorcycle is also a crucial investment. Kawasaki 100's with the Bio Fuel conversion kits are under 500 bucks and can drag a 600lb Elk or Moose for miles.

Chance favors the prepared mind.

Im quite sure since this site is on the east side of the Sierras I will be seeing hordes of Federal worshippers travelling east in search of their absentee landlords. They can stay for a bite, but chances are my neighbors to the East will be better stocked. Certain wealthy grand daughters have inherited entire Northern Nevada cities with rather posh accomodations.
The reason I have a 5th wheel on my land is because I didn't do my home work and let the BLM screw me. For water I needed 7,000 for water rights, for power I had to tap into the Hiltons power and that was was another 8,000 so I bought a nice 5th wheel for 4,000 and we rough it twice a year there.

I thank my grandfathers for teaching me these skills as a child, and also my mother. They left LA and went Big Bear and Arrowhead, actually my mom showed me where she washed clothes at Deep Creek and where they camped. It was hillarious as I was 14 years old or so, and we hiked up Deep Creek and she was showing trout holes, etc. and suddenly we walked into a large pool where all of the women were naked and she freaked............. 0oD 
Yes mom, times have changed.
Anyways LA folks have a great spot to wait out the storm, you Larry, depending on your age, could make it to the Catskills, and keep practicing that redneck lingo, you might need it.
Some here believe Nanny will provide for them and take care of them as it's their sworn duty, personally I see these elites running at the first shot for cover, and maybe a week or so later the militarty might get control, but I lived through the MLKing riots in St,Louis, and 2 days of unfettered assualts burnt entire neighborhoods down, so you can pray or prepare.
Besides, I saved enough for LASS 2, I need music to coax my quarry closer to the camp, Elk love strings....

Peace Out.

Ya'll Come...... :mrgreen:


----------



## José Herring (Oct 5, 2011)

George Caplan @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> rgames @ Tue Oct 04 said:
> 
> 
> > One thing that's confused me about this whole movement is this: why Wall Street?
> ...



They get it quite well. Wall Street, if you've ever hung around there, routinely engages in activities that are harmful to the majority for the sake of a small minority of wealthy brokers. Many things that go on routinely should be banned or outlawed. Your beloved short selling of stocks should be one of them. Wall Street has for so long ceased to work in an ethical manner that most people working there turn their nose up at being ethical or have lost all concept of what that even means in business. Financial gimmicks have become the bread and butter of Wall Street and actually making sound good investments is considered a quaint idea. That's why The Street crashes so easily. It's a house of cards made up of one financial shell game after another.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 5, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> chimuelo @ Wed Oct 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes Midphase.
> ...



There's no defensible land against a man-made earthquake machine, Man. Get your head out of the sand.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 5, 2011)

> And as far as objective reality....what is objectively observable....THe Democrats had 2 years of majority rule in the congress and White House and the economy did not recover and got worse even. THat wonderful Stimulus bill that they claimed would not let unemployment rise above 8 percent was grossly wrong. lol Now there are talks of another Stimulus. First one didn't work. Let's try it again! Brilliant. I don't quite get the mentality of trying to fix a debt problem with more debt. Would that work in our personal finances? No, we would be bankrupt and on the streets before we knew it.



Kays did a good job of dispensing with the rest of this shallow, faulty logic - sorry, but it really is at a kindergarten level - but the "can't borrow to get out of debt" line is worth pursuing, because I really want to humiliate you with it.

So let me start the process of embarrassing you with two rhetorical questions:

1. Who is in debt?

2. Is the world richer or poorer as a result?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 5, 2011)

> On the same sex marriage thing.... First of all I have no problem with it. I could care less.
> But.... if you are all for the civil rights for all then you of course would support polygamy between consenting adults right?



Right. Well, I don't particularly support it, but I don't see why it should be illegal.

Just out of interest, do you honestly think you're bringing up something I've never thought about?


----------



## midphase (Oct 5, 2011)

Nick, but it gets really interesting (i.e. dumb) when people compare gay marriage to being able to legally marry your pet (or marrying multiple pets!!!).


But yeah, I agree...I don't see why polygamy between consenting adults should be illegal.


----------



## germancomponist (Oct 5, 2011)

Maybe I am wrong, but I think in only some years the world will never be the same as is now...... . The most people arn`t as stupid as some others are always hoping or thinking..... . 

I wish we all will have a good change.... .


----------



## madbulk (Oct 5, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> > On the same sex marriage thing.... First of all I have no problem with it. I could care less.
> > But.... if you are all for the civil rights for all then you of course would support polygamy between consenting adults right?
> 
> 
> ...



Do you have any idea, ANY F'N IDEA, how old Nick is? He's thought everything, Punk.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 5, 2011)

germancomponist @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> Maybe I am wrong, but I think in only some years the world will never be the same as is now...... . The most people arn`t as stupid as some others are always hoping or thinking..... .
> 
> I wish we all will have a good change.... .



I only hope people are merely as stupid as I think.

(Y'know, you have the same conversation enough times and you begin to get all Choco about everything. Nothing but snide unproductive trolling.)


----------



## José Herring (Oct 5, 2011)

madbulk @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> germancomponist @ Wed Oct 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe I am wrong, but I think in only some years the world will never be the same as is now...... . The most people arn`t as stupid as some others are always hoping or thinking..... .
> ...



If you go out and meet tons of people from all walks of life you'll find that people are pretty decent. Some of them even really brilliant.

The biggest problem facing the world right now is that good people are continually hammered everyday by people that are acting really evil. And these people doing evil are completely free to do whatever they want. It's a nightmare scenario. The only thing that will change it is people standing up and saying enough is enough. That's why I was encouraged by the Wall Street protest. Finally people are standing up.


----------



## germancomponist (Oct 5, 2011)

josejherring @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> If you go out and meet tons of people from all walks of life you'll find that people are pretty decent. Some of them even really brilliant.
> 
> The biggest problem facing the world right now is that good people are continually hammered everyday by people that are acting really evil. And these people doing evil are completely free to do whatever they want. It's a nightmare scenario. The only thing that will change it is people standing up and saying enough is enough. That's why I was encouraged by the Wall Street protest. Finally people are standing up.



+1!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 5, 2011)

> Do you have any idea, ANY F'N IDEA, how old Nick is? He's thought everything, Punk.



That's right!

(But the polygamy argument is always the second line after the marrying horses one, which of course only points out how there aren't any rational arguments against gay marriage. Polygamy and equine marriage aren't being debated - gay marriage is.)


----------



## rgames (Oct 5, 2011)

josejherring @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> Wall Street, if you've ever hung around there, routinely engages in activities that are harmful to the majority for the sake of a small minority of wealthy brokers.



Silicon Valley, if you've ever hung around there, is exactly the same. Don't kid yourself that the financial industry is alone in this type of behavior.

In fact, let's look at some data. The "Occupy Wall Street" movement is about corporate greed, right? It's about focusing huge amounts of wealth in the hands of relatively few people, right? OK. Let's take a look.

Let's look first at the much-maligned Bank of America. In 2010, BoA generated revenues of about $111.4 billion. There are about 288,000 employees at BoA, so the concentration of wealth averages out to about $387k per person.

Now let's look at Apple. In 2010, Apple generated $65.2 billion in revenues. There are about 40,000 people who work at Apple. That averages out to $1,630k per person. *That's right folks, Apple focuses wealth at a rate of more than FOUR TIMES that of the big, bad financial institution.*

How about Facebook - we don't have all the details because they're not public, but we do know they generated about $2 billion in sales revenues in 2010 and have a workforce of about 2000 people. So that averages out to about $930k per person, and since we don't know all the details, that's a lower bound, so odds are it's actually higher. That's about three times the rate of the big, bad financial institution.

So let's be honest, folks. Sure, the banks are big and bad and they want your money. But don't kid yourself that this behavior is limited to Wall Street.

rgames


----------



## germancomponist (Oct 5, 2011)

rgames @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> So let's be honest, folks. Sure, the banks are big and bad and they want your money. But don't kid yourself that this behavior is limited to Wall Street.
> 
> rgames



I agree, it is not only Wall Street, but wherever it is, it is not o.k.!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 5, 2011)

My jaw just dropped.

"There are about 288,000 employees at BoA, so the concentration of wealth averages out to about $387k per person"

Seriously?! You're really totally oblivious to the fact that the whole reason our economy is depressed is that CEOs are taking home 300-odd times what their workers make?


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 5, 2011)

chimuelo @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> NYC your compound needs some improvements.
> 
> Solar Generators with a hitch and 6 extra panels to store power are crucial. 3400 for a trailer hitched, 2 deep cycle 265 aH battery generator was a steal. Each additional panel is around 1600 USD, but in Nevada there's 300+ days of sun a year, that's why the huge Solar arrays are based here and have been built by the military long before the Obama Green projects became policy. Harry Reid is a POS but al least he did give us a secondary bridge ( on his land ) and the Solar fields.
> 
> ...



Well. that's why I was including you in, Chim-I figured you'd been thinking this out for longer than I have and could make some valuable additions.

FYI, Dinty Moore beef stew and Hormel chili have stood the test of time. 50 million bachelors can't be wrong.

But the big question ...are ya in, before it all comes crashing down?? Wouldn't it be more productive to prepare now than to spin more doomsday scenarios?


----------



## rgames (Oct 5, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> My jaw just dropped.
> 
> "There are about 288,000 employees at BoA, so the concentration of wealth averages out to about $387k per person"
> 
> Seriously?! You're really totally oblivious to the fact that the whole reason our economy is depressed is that CEOs are taking home 300-odd times what their workers make?



Go ahead and account for that fact - the numbers I gave above won't change because you're affecting digits way to the right of the decimal place.

Who cares if a 50 or 100 people get *really* ridiculously wealthy. What hurts the economy is when 40,000 people get just plain old ridiculously wealthy.

Whether they're the top 1% or top 0.001% doesn't make a difference: they're all the top 1%.

When we stop worrying about the top 0.001% and focus on the 1% we'll start to make a difference.

rgames


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 5, 2011)

madbulk @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> NYC Composer @ Wed Oct 05 said:
> 
> 
> > chimuelo @ Wed Oct 05 said:
> ...



There's no defensible land against a nucular attack, either, but I'm trying to stay positive. My head's never been in the sand, and my eyes always focus on the same direction-forward!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 5, 2011)

Okay, but I don't follow your point.

Power and wealth are concentrated at the very top, a situation that's unsustainable and dangerous. The one coherent message from Occupy Wall St. seems to be exactly that.


----------



## rgames (Oct 5, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> My jaw just dropped.
> 
> "There are about 288,000 employees at BoA, so the concentration of wealth averages out to about $387k per person"
> 
> Seriously?! You're really totally oblivious to the fact that the whole reason our economy is depressed is that CEOs are taking home 300-odd times what their workers make?



Here's another way to think about it:

Do you care more if one guy gets paid $25M or if 1,000 people get paid $1M each?

Where do you think the real problem is?

rgames


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 5, 2011)

Actually, scratch that: NOT okay.

If the top 25 hedge fund managers - average pay $1 billion - were taxed at the standard rate instead of 15% capital gains, that would be enough to rehire every teacher that's been fired.

So if we're too concerned about deficits to bail out the states, that right there would be a good first step.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 5, 2011)

See above for my answer to where the real problem is, and I don't think you get it.

There's nothing wrong with people getting rich. The problem is when they get too rich at the expense of the middle class, leaving a population without the spending power to sustain our economy.


----------



## rgames (Oct 5, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> The problem is when they get too rich at the expense of the middle class, leaving a population without the spending power to sustain our economy.


Correct, but the point you're missing is that the folks at the extreme top aren't the ones taking the majority of that wealth that should be spread around.

Going after the billionaires isn't going to fix anything. You can take everything they have and there's not enough there to make a difference in the lives of those middle class folks. A few hundred thousand multi-millionaires, however, now there's some real money that would have an impact on the middle class.

Like I said, you're focusing on the top 0.001%. Sure, it's symbolic and makes for great campaign rhetoric, but in reality, it won't help anything.

If you look just a bit further down the wealth chain, that's where you really start to see huge pools of wealth because there are a lot more people at that level. And it's companies like Facebook and Apple that generate those sorts of pools of wealth (as evidenced by the numbers I gave above). And, yes, the financial sector does the same, though to a much lesser extent.

rgames


----------



## Gusfmm (Oct 5, 2011)

rgames @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> Let's look first at the much-maligned Bank of America. In 2010, BoA generated revenues of about $111.4 billion. There are about 288,000 employees at BoA, so the concentration of wealth averages out to about $387k per person.
> rgames



I don't quite know why you're trying to draw some relationship between revenue and # of employees, absolutely pointless. BoA *lost* over $2B in 2010...

Now-
If 100 CEO's make $120M/ea a year and 120,000 employees make $100,000 each, same equivalent money right? ...are you saying you'd not bother the CEO's but go after the employees???


----------



## midphase (Oct 5, 2011)

I wanted to post a reply that I've been meaning to address but didn't get a chance to regarding the USA having the next to highest corporate tax rates in the world. While on paper that might be true, in reality corporations in the USA pay far less than in other countries thanks to exemptions and loopholes. Hence I don't see how lowering the corporate tax rates would have any effect on employment since compared to other countries, corporations have already a very low tax overhead in the USA.

If what you are suggesting is lowering corporate tax rates and closing all the exemptions and loopholes, then there is a very good chance that that would have the opposite effect since without the loop holes even a lower tax rate wouldn't be as competitive as with other countries.

And if you're suggesting lowering the corporate tax rates AND keep all the exemptions and loopholes in the current tax code would increase employment...you really need to educate yourself more about the facts and realize that you're living in a fantasy.

Source:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/busin ... rates.html


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 5, 2011)

and Microsoft! and Intel! and Boeing!

I mean, what's this obsession with Facebook and Apple?


----------



## midphase (Oct 5, 2011)

That's because they're liberal left leaning companies!


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 5, 2011)

midphase @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> That's because they're liberal left leaning companies!



Oh.

I thought Apple uses horrible overseas labor practices and is hoarding cash and not compensating its work force sufficiently. For shame, pinko gadget makers, for shame!


----------



## midphase (Oct 5, 2011)

I agree....in recent years I have become more and more disillusioned with Apple as a company. I haven't bought a new computer from them in several years and I'm a proud non-smart phone user. 

I do think that they make great products, but I'm not thrown money at them with as much eagerness as I did in the past.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 5, 2011)

> Going after the billionaires isn't going to fix anything



It's not going to fix *everything* but just closing the loophole for those 25 people would be enough to rehire every teacher who's been fired.

And of course it's symbolic and makes for good election hype. I've posted before that I'm deeply disappointed in how Obama has turned into another corporatist Republican. He should be aiming 50x as high.

However, Salman Rushdie put it pithily on Bill Maher last week: "Imagine if this had been the third year of a McCain/Palin presidency."


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 5, 2011)

midphase @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> I agree....in recent years I have become more and more disillusioned with Apple as a company. I haven't bought a new computer from them in several years and I'm a proud non-smart phone user.
> 
> I do think that they make great products, but I'm not thrown money at them with as much eagerness as I did in the past.



In recent years, I've come to realize that Apple is a company like any other company, out to take market share from others or keep its own, and to make tremendous profits. I think they make great products. I have a bunch. I don't buy the newest, latest or greatest as i rarely need the new functionality enough to invest in it. Once every few years I do a refresh if necessary.

I find the politicization and icon-ization of Apple highly amusing. Apple vs PC, dog vs cat, spy vs spy. It's hilarious. And btw, my advice? Buy a smartphone. They're awesome, and really helpful in everyday life. If you dislike Apple, buy a Droid or any of the others that you fancy. They're extraordinarily useful little mobile computers with really cool productivity apps. Really.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 5, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> > Going after the billionaires isn't going to fix anything
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Why would it be so different? Liberals would be howling exactly as loudly as conservatives are now.


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 5, 2011)

:mrgreen: 
A McCain / Palin win would have us in dire straits as they would have cut any program the DNC started. It's that very tit-4-tat that is ruining our political process.

This thread is a great way to blow off steam and release a little stress.
Best thread I've seen in a while, and a great day to bash the elites on Wasll Street, DC and the Fed...


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 5, 2011)

palin wont run. there is a god after all. have i ever "hung" round wall street?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Udo (Oct 5, 2011)

George Caplan @ Thu Oct 06 said:


> palin wont run. there is a god after all.


Pity, would have been interesting, just for entertainment value :lol:


----------



## midphase (Oct 5, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> And btw, my advice? Buy a smartphone. They're awesome, and really helpful in everyday life. If you dislike Apple, buy a Droid or any of the others that you fancy. They're extraordinarily useful little mobile computers with really cool productivity apps. Really.



Not to sidetrack this thread, but I work in my studio all day long, I'm on a Mac Pro as my DAW, and I have a handy (and aging) MacBook on the desk as my iChat/web surfing window to the world. Most of my friends love their iPhones and iPads, but many of them travel a lot and are out of the house. I dunno...I think my wife's going to get an iPhone soon, but I can't really justify spending $!50/month for a smartphone for myself when I'm in front of a computer hooked to the internet all day anyway.

Rather, I'm really starting to eye those iPod Nanos as a replacement for my wristwatch!!!


----------



## rgames (Oct 5, 2011)

midphase @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> That's because they're liberal left leaning companies!



I don't know about Facebook but Apple definitely is *not* a liberal company. They're among the most worst offenders in terms of corporate greed - there's no liberal agenda in the halls of Apple. Take a look at the numbers I gave above then add in the fact that their CEO won't spare a dime for anyone and I think you'll reach the same conclusion. You can also add the fact that they're screwing musicians by being totally dishonest about the iTunes business model. Musicians are getting screwed and Apple employees are laughing all the way to the bank.

For some reason, though, they have a huge fan base in the community of liberals. So, as part of my self-directed obligation to lay out the facts, I feel it's my duty to explain that irony. Plus, the fact that it's such hypocrisy makes it fun 

By the way, why is it that these facts never comes up in the media? Why is it that I have to wonder about it then go find my own facts? Hmmm.....

If only others would do the same...

rgames


----------



## rgames (Oct 5, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Oct 05 said:


> > Going after the billionaires isn't going to fix anything
> 
> 
> 
> It's not going to fix *everything* but just closing the loophole for those 25 people would be enough to rehire every teacher who's been fired.



I'm not saying don't do that. Sure, I support that effort. And when you get it done you'll have solved about 0.01% of this country's problems. So, if you want to focus your time and energy for such a small gain, go for it. If, however, you want to do some significant good, I suggest you look elsewhere.

The most logical place to look are the companies that collect massive amounts of wealth for relatively few employees. That's where the real gains are to be had. The total pool of money available there dwarfs what those CEO's have by several orders of magnitude.

rgames


----------

