Occupy Wall Street

[Sub-Husker]

I find it ironic that I have seen several outlets reporting Bank of America's decision to drop a new fee as a victory for the 'Occupy Wall Street' group. In my opinion, it is nothing short of Capitalism.

 

I actually think it's a great example of how capitalism should work.

 

Pretty much the same thing... I'll go with Bernie Sanders' take on it:

 

http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=A22D4543-33E7-4680-9702-1F0B9F827B71

[Cactusboy]

I find it ironic that I have seen several outlets reporting Bank of America's decision to drop a new fee as a victory for the 'Occupy Wall Street' group. In my opinion, it is nothing short of Capitalism.

 

I actually think it's a great example of how capitalism should work.

 

OWS, generally speaking, isn't against "capitalism". They are just against how capitalism is today. They would be more than happy w/ how things were back when the orange and blue line were relatively close together.

 

[Cactusboy]

Unfortunately this type of post is not uncommon at HuskerMax...

 

Skull busting is underrated.

 

I have a hard time believing he said "Skull busting is underrated". HNC is a cop afterall.

[Calla]

I find it ironic that I have seen several outlets reporting Bank of America's decision to drop a new fee as a victory for the 'Occupy Wall Street' group. In my opinion, it is nothing short of Capitalism.

 

I actually think it's a great example of how capitalism should work.

 

OWS, generally speaking, isn't against "capitalism". They are just against how capitalism is today. They would be more than happy w/ how things were back when the orange and blue line were relatively close together.

 

This is one thing I don't get. Why are people so focused on how much someone else makes? As long as I'm doing well, and perhaps getting some forward momentum going, I'm happy. If someone makes more than me, good for them. I don't begrudge them and they aren't taking money out of my pocket.

[knapplc]

This is one thing I don't get. Why are people so focused on how much someone else makes? As long as I'm doing well, and perhaps getting some forward momentum going, I'm happy. If someone makes more than me, good for them. I don't begrudge them and they aren't taking money out of my pocket.

 

Word.

 

If they are stacking the deck, making it impossible for me to acquire security and comfort, then I would see it as much more of a problem. But the 1% aren't preventing me from gaining wealth. I could conceive of a brilliant idea tomorrow and become wealthy. I could continue to earn a modest but comfortable wage in my current career. If they're not attacking my (and your) ability to live, why do I care how much money they have?

 

This is one of the reasons why I don't understand this movement. What is the goal? What would be a "win?"

[gobiggergoredder]

This is one thing I don't get. Why are people so focused on how much someone else makes? As long as I'm doing well, and perhaps getting some forward momentum going, I'm happy. If someone makes more than me, good for them. I don't begrudge them and they aren't taking money out of my pocket.

 

Word.

 

If they are stacking the deck, making it impossible for me to acquire security and comfort, then I would see it as much more of a problem. But the 1% aren't preventing me from gaining wealth. I could conceive of a brilliant idea tomorrow and become wealthy. I could continue to earn a modest but comfortable wage in my current career. If they're not attacking my (and your) ability to live, why do I care how much money they have?

 

This is one of the reasons why I don't understand this movement. What is the goal? What would be a "win?"

 

Best Knapp post I have ever read.

 

I'm not rich. I do OK and I'm fine with that. I currently work in a role that a lot of people don't want to do and I have really terrible hours. I am compensated well because not many want to do what I do. That is my choice. Don't take away the incentive to become rich or we are in big trouble. I have been around several people that are filthy wealthy in my time. Either I don't have the skills that they have or I don't want to do what they have done. Because of that, I'm not jealous. They don't owe me anything.

 

The graphs mean nothing to me. As I have stated in other posts, I think a big part of the income gap has to do with the loss of manufacturing jobs in a America. No longer can a 18 year old high school graduate get a $40K job right out of school that has good benefits and compensation. Those jobs are gone. What we really need to do at this point is try to understand why that is. The quick response is 'Greedy CEO's'. Yeah, I do believe that is a small part of it, but there is a lot more to it. That is simplifying the problem, but it has a lot to do with it.

 

It is unfortunate that we have a society that so quickly says X=Y. I actually think we have become lazy. We don't make any effort to look at the root cause. The rape and age graph on page 2 is just embarrassing....I hope that was just a poor attempt at humor. Most graphs and stats can be portrayed anyway anyone wants them to be. A new medical study comes out everyday about something that may or may not be associated with breast cancer. Dr Dean O'dell was the best at disecting these so called 'stats'. It's too bad he isn't on the radio anymore. He was my favorite 'Lefty' to listen to.

[gobiggergoredder]

I find it ironic that I have seen several outlets reporting Bank of America's decision to drop a new fee as a victory for the 'Occupy Wall Street' group. In my opinion, it is nothing short of Capitalism.

 

I actually think it's a great example of how capitalism should work.

Really? In what way are they claiming that OWS has anything to do with that decision? I agree - seems like pure capitalism to me. Business decision to do it, wiser business decision not to do it.

 

I didn't know the OWSers were concerned with the BofA fee. Maybe I should read up on that more?

 

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67339.html

In a win for President Barack Obama and Occupy Wall Street, Bank of America will abandon its plans to charge customers $5 per month to use debit cards.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/01/us-bankofamerica-debit-idUSTRE7A04E120111101

"This is what the movement would consider a very, very small first step on rectifying an oppressive dynamic between the financial services industry and the 99 percent," said Ed Needham, a spokesman for the Occupy Wall Street movement.

[redblooded]

This is one thing I don't get. Why are people so focused on how much someone else makes? As long as I'm doing well, and perhaps getting some forward momentum going, I'm happy. If someone makes more than me, good for them. I don't begrudge them and they aren't taking money out of my pocket.

 

Word.

 

If they are stacking the deck, making it impossible for me to acquire security and comfort, then I would see it as much more of a problem. But the 1% aren't preventing me from gaining wealth. I could conceive of a brilliant idea tomorrow and become wealthy. I could continue to earn a modest but comfortable wage in my current career. If they're not attacking my (and your) ability to live, why do I care how much money they have?

 

This is one of the reasons why I don't understand this movement. What is the goal? What would be a "win?"

 

I think the main goal seems to be getting the government to realize they represent the people, not the corporations, frankly government should be there to protect us from them. It doesn't anymore, between PACs, SuperPACs, the supreme court granting them essentially the rights of people (money as free speech). Corporations are already made up of people free to enter the political arena as they want, so it's basically double representation, IMO. Allowing them a seat at the table when their sole agenda is to make money without a care in the world for anyone but investors profits is a HUGE problem. It gets you awesome things like ACTA, The DMCA, software and business method patents... which are innovation stifling. You have cable companies that have regional monopolies for phone/internet/cable TV, which is a serious conflict of interest as far as competition (see netflix, level3, and comcast). You have people running things like the FCC approving NBC/Comcast mergers and then leaving office a month later to take a job as a Consultant/Lobbyist for the new merged company. It's shameless.

 

As far as the wealth disparity... it does matter some, when the cost of things has risen and the middle class income hasn't, yet companies are paying out hundreds of millions of dollars to CEOs and the government is bailing out even those that make bad bets because they are "Too big to fail." That's simply unfair, because one, no company should ever be too big to fail. Frankly if they are it's time for another round of trust busting. Secondly there is almost zero accountability at the top and in wall-street unless you are just running a full blown ponzi scheme or outright cooking the books like enron. Third, you have all kinds of questionable practices going on now like HFT for instance, which is basically microsecond arbitrage, if you have enough money to stick your computers in the exchange data-centers. The quotes from the "Job Creators" last night on the daily show were hilarious... The whole "Well fine, we'll just fire people if they raise our taxes." Or Oreilly's "I might not be doing this anymore." So the opposition argument boils down to they'll take their ball and go home.

 

The government spending is also entirely based on exponential growth in society and frankly that's bad policy. Especially when you grant the corporations and "job creators" that are supposed to be driving the economy insane tax loopholes like cayman island tax shelters, dutch sandwiches and the double Irish arrangements.

 

p.s. News outlets characterizing Bank of America not going ahead with a $5 fee as a victory for OWS and Obama are just plain idiotic. I'm sure plenty of tea party supporters thought, "Jesus, now they are going to stick me for 5 dollars a month to use my money?" too. They can frame it however they want, but the fact of the matter is BoA was looking at a massive amount of people closing accounts and going to competitors who weren't adding those fees for them to back off. It wasn't pressure by any political movement.

[Sub-Husker]

This is one thing I don't get. Why are people so focused on how much someone else makes? As long as I'm doing well, and perhaps getting some forward momentum going, I'm happy. If someone makes more than me, good for them. I don't begrudge them and they aren't taking money out of my pocket.

 

Good for you, that you haven't been subject to economic injustice.

 

That your job hasn't been outsourced, and that you have not lost your savings, your health care, or your home.

 

However many people have lost those things, and see the control that the wealthy have over our politicians and the laws and regulations they have pushed for.

 

In addition I see our hawkish foreign policy as another outcome of the wealthy owning our government.

[Cactusboy]

I find it ironic that I have seen several outlets reporting Bank of America's decision to drop a new fee as a victory for the 'Occupy Wall Street' group. In my opinion, it is nothing short of Capitalism.

 

I actually think it's a great example of how capitalism should work.

 

OWS, generally speaking, isn't against "capitalism". They are just against how capitalism is today. They would be more than happy w/ how things were back when the orange and blue line were relatively close together.

 

This is one thing I don't get. Why are people so focused on how much someone else makes? As long as I'm doing well, and perhaps getting some forward momentum going, I'm happy. If someone makes more than me, good for them. I don't begrudge them and they aren't taking money out of my pocket.

 

 

Because at the same time that 1% line and CEO salaries/etc went up so high... ...things like 401k plans disappeared...and real wages of the working class stayed stagnant. There are not an unlimited number of pieces of pie available....and as the graph shows the top 1% have been taking way more than they used to.

[knapplc]

I find it ironic that I have seen several outlets reporting Bank of America's decision to drop a new fee as a victory for the 'Occupy Wall Street' group. In my opinion, it is nothing short of Capitalism.

 

I actually think it's a great example of how capitalism should work.

Really? In what way are they claiming that OWS has anything to do with that decision? I agree - seems like pure capitalism to me. Business decision to do it, wiser business decision not to do it.

 

I didn't know the OWSers were concerned with the BofA fee. Maybe I should read up on that more?

 

http://www.politico....1111/67339.html

In a win for President Barack Obama and Occupy Wall Street, Bank of America will abandon its plans to charge customers $5 per month to use debit cards.

 

http://www.reuters.c...E7A04E120111101

"This is what the movement would consider a very, very small first step on rectifying an oppressive dynamic between the financial services industry and the 99 percent," said Ed Needham, a spokesman for the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Weird. I don't see how this is something either Obama or OWS fought.

 

Maybe I'm not seeing the forest for the trees. I don't get why they're claiming victory.

[gobiggergoredder]

This is one thing I don't get. Why are people so focused on how much someone else makes? As long as I'm doing well, and perhaps getting some forward momentum going, I'm happy. If someone makes more than me, good for them. I don't begrudge them and they aren't taking money out of my pocket.

 

Good for you, that you haven't been subject to economic injustice.

 

That your job hasn't been outsourced, and that you have not lost your savings, your health care, or your home.

 

However many people have lost those things, and see the control that the wealthy have over our politicians and the laws and regulations they have pushed for.

 

In addition I see our hawkish foreign policy as another outcome of the wealthy owning our government.

 

As a former member of the automotive industry, I got hit pretty hard a few years ago. In October of 2008, I started laying off 2-3 people every month. In December, I was told that my number would likely be coming soon.

 

By January, I was laid off. While I was gone, the company stopped the pension program and the 401K match.

 

Is it ok if my opinion is different than yours?

[HUSKER 37]

Just now curious about this..(sorry)

I usually steer away from real news and/or wait to get most of my info from HB.

My own father was considered by most if not all of my hometown to be a war hero (WW2) but (and?) I knew him to almost never agree with the government he fought to protect. He loved his country and just by reading his letters home to his Mom that he was bothered by all the civilians he had to kill as a bomber pilot, and that had he known as a teenager what he later learned throughout his life, he might not have done the "brave" thing and joined up.

 

I'm including some quotes I found interesting to read later..Feel free to tear them apart if you need.

 

 

 

Wow. This is a Nation that has Freedoms. As my 92 yr. Old grandfather, a WWII vet said, "we fought so you have a right to protest". Declaring the occupiers as whiny, unamerican, lazy, etc... people is shameful. The Tea Party gets out and uses disgusting fear tactics, has rallies, etc... so what is the problem with this movement? Those of you who pass judgment on these people ought to take a good honest look at yourselves. My Grandfather fought so YOU have a right to your opinion and can share it freely. As do those you are bashing have the same rights.

 

 

Remember, just 3% of an angry population in the past took to arms and forced the British empire out of the Colonies.

 

I'd urge folks - Don't judge a movement by its most visible, weakest, and sometimes more eccentric looking or sounding ...members.

 

And I also urge folks - Don't underestimate the potential effects of ignoring, belittling, and even harming and dehumanizing (the latter not in this case, have seen it elsewhere) those who wish to change things for the better, and have come to the conclusion that there is no other recourse left but to occupy public spaces across country and the world, for months on end. I'd also point out that there are folks in those crowds who are Iraq and Afghanistan veterans also.

Let me get this straight. People only get to voice their opposition to something/protest if they have served in a war?

Really? That's not the way this great democracy works. If it did the Tea Party protests would come under this ridiculous assertion as well.

 

There is a growing number of veterans from all wars joining the protests, what do you say to them?

[Calla]

This is one thing I don't get. Why are people so focused on how much someone else makes? As long as I'm doing well, and perhaps getting some forward momentum going, I'm happy. If someone makes more than me, good for them. I don't begrudge them and they aren't taking money out of my pocket.

 

Good for you, that you haven't been subject to economic injustice.

 

That your job hasn't been outsourced, and that you have not lost your savings, your health care, or your home.

 

However many people have lost those things, and see the control that the wealthy have over our politicians and the laws and regulations they have pushed for.

 

In addition I see our hawkish foreign policy as another outcome of the wealthy owning our government.

 

You are making assumptions about me that are incorrect. That's beside the point, though.

 

You seem to be mashing two issues together that are separate issues - income disparity and power.

It isn't a new thing that the rich (and therefore powerful) have a stranglehold on our government. It's just that in previous years we've been placated enough that we ignored it. But when our comforts have been removed, or we fear they may be removed, well then - now we suddenly notice that our system of government is gamed to grant greater advantage to those who have power. If jobs become more available people will once again go back into their TV watching and possession acquisition stupor and forget all about the glimpse behind the curtain.

 

As for income disparity, it isn't that everyone else is getting poorer (we are experiencing a dip, though, because we are in a recession, but statistically its a small dip) that is creating the disparity. It's the the rich are getting MUCH more rich while the rest of us are making more modest increases. Again - this is off due to the recession, but only a slight dip.

[Sub-Husker]

Weird. I don't see how this is something either Obama or OWS fought.

 

Maybe I'm not seeing the forest for the trees. I don't get why they're claiming victory.

 

Obama... definitely not.

 

But OWS is calling for people to take their money out of the larger banks (such as BoA and Citi) and move it elsewhere. While there is no direct correlation that can be proven, it had come after the OWS call.