Occupy Wall Street: What’s Really Going On

News & Current Events Public News & Current Events
, ,
141

The difference being that OWS is being organized and directed by these types of groups.  How many world-wide TEA parties have their been?  This is not just a case of these groups using a "grass-roots" group of ordinary fed up people.  The big (and rich) socialist groups are the ones organizing this and the "ordinary" people are just being usful idiots.[quote=Poet]
 
The American Nazi Party supports Occupy Wall Street. The Communist Party in the U.S. supports Occupy Wall Street.
But does that mean Occupy Wall Street supports them or wants their support or is part of them?!? You sure the many non-whites in the OWS want that kind of endorsement?
You still believe that bull? Well, white supremacist David Duke supports the Tea Party. Silly now, aren’t we?
Sheesh.
Poet
[/quote]

142

RMurfsterI believe that your opinion is both cynical and unfounded. I’d love some proof. Not conjecture, not rumours, not Limbaugh-links. Neutral third parties of good repute preferred…
Then again, there are others who claim that the billionaire Koch brothers have had inordinate influence on the Tea Party. Hmm…
Poet.

143

Poet,
First, truth is truth no matter where the souce.  If the facts are valid, then it doesn’t matter the source.  Your bias in trying to dictate where information can come from shows that it doesn’t matter how much proof there is, you probably won’t accept it anyway.
So, FWIW, here is the proof you requested.  Sorry, it doesn’t come from Limbaugh.
Video Exposing How ‘Occupy Wall Street’ Was Organized From Day One by SEIU/ACORN Front – The Working Family Party, and How They All Tie to the Obama Administration, DNC, Democratic Socialists of America, Tides and George Soros

144

[quote=qlak]If not Capitalism, then what? Specifics please![/quote]Therein lies the dilemma…  I can understand the attachment to Capitalism in a country that has known nothing else.  And change is usually scary.  I see this is your third post… have you seen the whole Crash Course yet?  At least twice?  Preferably more?  It’s a lot to take in, I know, been there done that…
Once you come to grips with the CC, then it becomes obvious that Capitalism is finished.  Capitalism cannot survive without infinite growth, and infinite growth on a finite planet is 100% impossible.  Forty years ago, Limits to Growth were predicted, and that within 100 years humanity would have collapsed.  Here we are just 40% into this century, and it’s all bang on target.  So why continue flogging a dead horse?
We have been continually fed BS about how good Capitalism is for us.  It’s even touted as the framework for freedom and democracy.  But I believe we can have freedom and democracy without the big C…
Specifics?  It’s not that simple.  The coming change, and ensuring that it is properly organised so that it works properly without major calamities (like WWIII) is the greatest challenge humanity has EVER faced in 100,000 years.  It’s that simple.  But greed rules, and we have to dismantle the greed mentality, the "I want everything and I want it now" mindset that is killing our very support system.
Technically, we here live below the poverty line, by choice.  And yet we still have more than we need.
What do YOU need?  What is it about Capitalism that makes you think you need it?
Mike

145

[quote=rmurfster]Poet,
First, truth is truth no matter where the souce.[/quote]
I have a serious problem with that statement.  And I looked at your source and all I see is bias… and anyone can be wrong you know.  I’ve been known to be wrong!
Mike

146

[quote=rmurfster]So, FWIW, here is the proof you requested.  Sorry, it doesn’t come from Limbaugh.
Video Exposing How ‘Occupy Wall Street’ Was Organized From Day One by SEIU/ACORN Front – The Working Family Party, and How They All Tie to the Obama Administration, DNC, Democratic Socialists of America, Tides and George Soros

[/quote]
Not sourced from Limbaugh? No, but it is sourced from Glenn Becks’ “The Blaze”- are you kidding?
 

147

Sorry darbi, Beck is not the source.
The source is http://www.freespeech.org/ a self described …"cable network dedicated to progressive and alternative media."  These are their own words. And the young lady  being interviewed (Nelini Stamp) is the source as well. Becks repeating this info doesn’t make him "the source" any more than rmurfster’s repetition makes him the source. Actually this touches on a question that I had weeks ago when this interview first appeared: how can a protest movement that claims to be a spontaneous eruption of a grass roots movement be as well organized and funded on day one as OWS has been. In short it can’t. As unpleasant as it seems, it would appear that the OWS supporters are being had, but at least they are also being quite ‘useful’.

148

I keep seeing you and others make this claim.  While I agree with the second part (no infinite growth on a finite planet) please explain why capitalism requires infinite growth. 

 

149

So you card carrying progressives don’t have to worry that a friend might see theblaze.com in your browser history. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jOxERtkwN4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CLfP5u3_JA

150

We haven’t had true Capitalism in America since the founding of the Federal Reserve in 1913, and it’s been systematically dismantled since then. Blaming capitalism for what we have now is a classic example of blaming the victim.

151

[quote=earthwise]We haven’t had true Capitalism in America since the founding of the Federal Reserve in 1913, and it’s been systematically dismantled since then. Blaming capitalism for what we have now is a classic example of blaming the victim.[/quote]It’s ironic that a bunch of major Capitalists got together to create the Fed isn’t it?  Sure they had an excuse, prevent the boom and bust cycle that was plaguing the 19th century.   But you’d think their free market thinking would have over-ruled that idea.  And Government involvement in the free market, didn’t that begin with Teddy Roosevelt busting the trusts and monopolies?  And now so many years later we have Banks bailed out by the Government so they don’t starve, after they made mistakes that were their own doing.  Makes one wonder.
It’s not who organized the OWS movement, it’s how successful they were that should make one think.  Too many kids out of College with huge student loans and unable to find work.  It’s isolating for those of us paying taxes is what it is.

152

[quote=earthwise]We haven’t had true Capitalism in America since the founding of the Federal Reserve in 1913, and it’s been systematically dismantled since then. Blaming capitalism for what we have now is a classic example of blaming the victim.
[/quote]
Dead argument AFAIC…  we have to deal with the Capitalism we have.

153

Capitalism is the system that has built-in mechanisms to create economic growth much more than any other system. And it also has built-in incentives for investment in the creation of, and new uses of, resources, much more than any other system.
IF a Capitalist entrepreneur makes a profit, what does s/he do with it?  They’ll spend some on what’s needed for day to day life, but then will re-invest it in new capital investment, and that is economic growth…  NO?
Remove the profits, and growth ends.
I think it’s simple… :wink:
Mike

154

And that’s exactly right, a study of history reveals that the Federal Reserve System was created by capitalists for capitalists. One of the factors was JP Morgan virtually single handedly bailing out the US Government in the Panic of 1907, a predecessor to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. These were of course the days of the robber baron, with the Industrial Revolution in full swing, which required vast sums of CAPITAL to realize the growth imperative of the day. 
But a better comment to those that perennially claim that “what we have today is not capitalism” and that “capitalism ended in 1913”, (or 1971, or whenever) is that they should stay off the internet and make it to a library post haste. A quick review of the state of capitalism before 1913, stretching backwards to 1776 yields a non stop series of financial train wrecks caused by endless boom/bust cycles and rampant exploitation. And then there is the labor side of this, which is far more egregious, what with 14 year olds working 12 hours days in appalling conditions, mass labor riots with troops regularly shooting and killing strikers , etc, etc.
So when precisely were the halcyon days of capitalism?
Even a 8th grade level of historical introspection yields such a cacophony of travesty surrounding capitalism that this has become a major problem for the free market crowd, with tri-corner hats knocked asunder by the brisk breeze of truth. So much so that it is now common practice to revise said history, to rewrite it to advance opinions that remove the harsh light of indictment from the events of the past.
Any number of Libertarian and Conservative web sites will be happy to regale you with revisionist history as to how the Robber Barons where not really barons and they weren’t really robbing, and that free market capitalism has a gleaming history manifesting in the warm afterglow of American Exceptionalism.  Smoothing the rough edges of a sharp stick in the eye with platitudes and dull, hopeful theory that requires that you’re not curious enough to check in a real textbook. And it works.
But the reality is that what we see on Wall Street today is in fact capitalism, uncut, straight from the bottle. The specific nomenclature of the “Wall Street Effect” is called Centralization of Capital and Consolidation of Capital, the predictable and well understood effects of exactly what happens when too few people get too much money. Not only not rocket science, but a school yard chant- He who has the gold makes the rules, something every child learns. And this what we see. And this is what unregulated capitalism delivers, axiomatically, every time-no exceptions.
But to the free market evangelists, there is but no choice but to deny that our system is something other than That Most Favored. There is no other choice, as to accept that we are witnessing the end stage throes of runaway capitalism is to embark on a long vertiginous climb down from an intellectual dead end that has been around for way too long, at a truly Copernican scale. It is far easier to deny, to accuse those who point out the emperor not only has no clothes but never did, to call out Socialist or Communist as pejorative, than to accept that maybe, just maybe, the intersection of a finite planet has come hard up to the fallacy that we can act in our on best (profit) based interests, while at the same time benefitting society vis a vis Adam Smith’s invisible hand. And of course this is not true, never was true, and advanced only by the occlusion of small scale. Now, at global scale we’re fresh out of resources, fresh out of jobs, fresh out of new junk and trinkets to create to sell to someone else, and worse, the someone else’s don’t have any money left to pay for it anyway. Even Henry Ford, capitalist extraordinaire, had enough sense to pay his workers several times the going rate- so his employees could afford to buy his cars, a piece of common sense that seems to have fallen by the wayside in our pursuit of global growth.
To those who suggest that the Tea Party and the OWS protestors are the same, I disagree. Two men may ask the question “Why am I here”, the first, a prisoner on death row, the second a disenfranchised worker in a dead end minimum wage job. They have different circumstances, different facts, but mostly, very different answers.
We are not defined as common by the questions that we ask, but by the answers we provide, and if answers are not given then by the solutions we imply.
 

155

http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/298135_2245401608680_1057325634_2564721_729961786_n.jpg

156

I’d like to read the information in that video.  I don’t often look at videos online, and if the information is pertinent, it ought to be available for analytical study, which, IMO, is best done with the written word.
Not criticizing any angle of the political universe, just lamenting the passing of the olden days of literacy.

Still, I’m not sure if it has any bearing on the legitimacy of the OWS protests.  In 2003, I attended a couple of demonstrations in SF against the upcoming war in Iraq.  I was aware at the time that they were organized by a group called International ANSWER.  I don’t even remember what that stood for, and don’t care.  I do know that they were a small group of fruit-loops led by the former chairman of the Revolutionary Commmunist Party.  What was important to me and to a lot of others was standing up and being counted in opposition to that stupid war.  They organized a pretty good demonstration, too, but I can tell you for a fact that the vast majority of the million or so that showed up each time couldn’t have cared less about the group’s agenda.

For my part, I helped organize transportation, outreach, coordination, food, communications  and meeting-points for the group I came with, and did so without a lick of direction or input from International ANSWER.  I just got with a group of neighbors and friends in our town and we did it.  I suspect a lot of that sort of thing is going on this time.

As for International ANSWER, I think that was probably the high point of their existence.  I certainly haven’t heard a thing about them since then, and I seriously doubt it propelled their agenda to any degree.

As for OWS, I have thoughts about that, but think I’ll put them down in a seperate post.

157

[quote=DamnTheMatrix]Capitalism is the system that has built-in mechanisms to create economic growth much more than any other system. And it also has built-in incentives for investment in the creation of, and new uses of, resources, much more than any other system.
[/quote]
Perhaps it encourages growth, but that certainly doesn’t answer the question I ask, why do you say capitalism requires growth?  I would actually say captialism when the currency is not being manipulated actually limits growth when resources are not available or it’s not justified in using them.  It’s only when you manipulate the value of money artificially to force growth via central planning do you get uncontrolled growth.

No it doesn’t.  A person who works can choose to save for a rainy day.  Forgo consumption now for consumption later.  Perhaps some choose to invest - but that carries risk so some may loose, some may win.  No growth required for investment to occur.

The economy is not homogeneous.  Growth in some areas, decline in others.  And nothing says you have to have growth overall.  It just means that there may be more losers over some time frames than others.  If you have a riskier investment climate, then you have higher interest rates (an indicator of increased risk).  No requirement for growth.
So I ask you, how does capitalism require growth?  Just because you claim something and the declare it simple does not make you right. :slight_smile:

158

Going Apeshit

By James Howard Kunstler on October 17, 2011 8:40 AM
 
     It was amusing to see President Obama try to align himself with the OWS movement. The genial Millard Fillmore update asked them not to "demonize those who work on Wall Street." Of course, demonization proceeds from the failure of this president and his appointed agents in authority to subject those who work on Wall Street to the laws that mere mortals are supposed to follow in money matters. Hence, those who work on Wall Street appear to be something other than mortals. And since their work (on Wall Street) has had a malign influence on the common weal, some might leap to the conclusion that they are malevolent non-mortals, i.e. demons.
     In this early stage of the convulsion rocking the western world, especially here in the USA, a peaceful ambience rules. That is because a game is being played. We played the game in 1968. It goes like this. You get people to turn out in the streets. The idea is to promote the right of public assembly as much as to make any particular point. (In fact, banners advocating all sorts of gripes appear.) Eventually, you get a lot of people in the streets. Feelings of happy anarchy sweep the crowd, a feeling that something special is underway, that the usual rules of everyday conduct have been suspended, in a good way. The crowd basks in the sunny glow of its own mass, happy solidarity. Everybody is behaving splendidly - more to feel good about.
      After a while that gets boring, especially for young males with a lot of testosterone surging from loin to brain. They want to do more than bask in the radiance of their own righteous wonderfulness. They want to engage their large muscles, even if in the service of an idea, for instance the idea that they have been swindled. It is at first a vague idea, but large.  But pretty soon it coheres emergently: swindled out of our future! Yes, it is so. Thousands of demon-like beings upstairs in the curtain-wall towers around Zuccotti Park, people wearing neckties and cultured pearls in warm offices with cappuccino machines down the hall, are at this very moment setting loose trading algorithms that will swindle us out of our future! You can see them up there at their evil, glowing screens!
     That's when the yoga acrobatics and the hat crocheting are put aside and the street people - their ranks swollen into a horde-like meta-organism - start to express things beyond the right of public assembly. Something unseen goes through them, perhaps like the pheromone that transforms a field full of grasshoppers into a ravening swarm of locusts. Being people, they cannot take wing. But they can press forward and up against things, and they can surely break the glass in those sleek curtain-wall buildings (so much for "transparency") beyond which the bankers sit cringing in their expensive clothing. 
     Surely we are heading toward a moment like that. The bank employees upstairs must be getting a little nervous, anyway, just glancing out the windows at the moiling mob below. This is apart from the tensions internally roiling the banks themselves, not to mention the entire networked system of global banking, with all its fissures and cracks, as the merry-go-round of debt flies apart under the centrifugal force of insolvency. Come to think of it, these events could not have correlated more perfectly. Just as a horrific accident in finance is about to happen, a ready-made revolutionary mob is conveniently parked outside the pilot-houses of the world's great money vessels, so as to receive the crews directly into their open arms after the smash up.
     President Obama could have changed the outcome if he had actually believed in change. He could have told his attorney general to enforce the securities law. He could have replaced the zombies at the SEC and told the new ones to apply all existing regulations. Before last year's election, he could have used his legislative majorities to repeal the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and reinstate the Glass-Steagall act. He could have initiated the process of deconstructing the giant banks back into their separate functions - so that banking once again worked as a utility rather than a launching pad for colossal frauds and swindles. Not only did he fail to do any of these things, he didn't even talk about it, or try.
     Obama has a lot of nerve claiming to support the Occupy Wall Street movement. He should be one of the objects of its ire. I'm not even sure Obama will get to finish out his term of office. 2012 looks like a complete horror show in the making. The way world money matters are lining up this fall, some kind of debacle seems unavoidable, much worse than the 2008 fiasco. The normal political channels are clogged and sclerotic. Our institutions are failing us. The cast of "candidate" characters across the political spectrum convinces nobody that they can manage this republic.
     The weather may determine the mood of the OWS crowd. If they don't go apeshit in the next two weeks, my guess is that the nation will hunker down into a dire, melancholy holiday season followed by a desperate winter leading to a raucous spring of political transformation - not necessarily of the best kind.
     For the moment, we seem to be waiting for the proverbial first broken window
159

Perhaps it’s true that OWS was organized by socialists or labor or whoever and that these organizations still play a significant role in the ongoing protest.  Now that it’s grown so big  and has spread to so many cities, how can they possibly maintain control? There are millions of frustrated and angry people out there.  The opportunity to protest and participate in a general assembly where somehow a group of hundreds can reach consensus is probably the most refreshing thing they could experience.  I was part of the general assembly meeting of 300 people last night that agreed to begin an occupation of Albany, NY this Friday afternoon at a park across the street from both the State Capitol and City Hall.  It was an empowering experience.  It certainly felt like the will of the 300 people in the room, not some socialist agenda orchestrated from behind the scenes.  About 125 people indicated their intention to begin sleeping out at the occupation site the first night.With that said, it is certainly possible that this movement could get hijacked by some sort of lefty agenda, be it socialist, democratic or whatever.  For the most part, the people involved in OWS either don’t get the main 3E message of this site, or they haven’t internalized the message so that it gets swept aside by an agenda that feels good (jobs for all, education for all, high minimum wage, single payer health care, …), but will run head on into resource limitations right out of the gate.
So yes, this movement can be scary in that we don’t know where it is going and it has the potential to go to some dark places.  But there is also lots of anger that is directed surprisingly close to the root of the problem.  There is lots of energy.  There is a commitment to work together nonviolently, and to listen to each other and build consensus.  These 3 strengths are significant and hold lots of potential.
And what are our alternatives?  I for one can’t sit with myself if I hope that the people remain silent while the powers that be kick the can until they run out of road so that I have more time to prepare and build my local community.  If folks are finally waking up, let’s engage them in the important conversations we carry on here!  I don’t consider conversations that involve the left/right, capitalism/socialism (or some other -ism or non-ism) dichotomy to be among the important conversations.

160

[quote=rhare][quote=DamnTheMatrix]
Capitalism is the system that has built-in mechanisms to create economic growth much more than any other system. And it also has built-in incentives for investment in the creation of, and new uses of, resources, much more than any other system.
[/quote]
Perhaps it encourages growth, but that certainly doesn’t answer the question I ask, why do you say capitalism requires growth?  I would actually say capitalism when the currency is not being manipulated actually limits growth when resources are not available or it’s not justified in using them.  It’s only when you manipulate the value of money artificially to force growth via central planning do you get uncontrolled growth.[/quote]
What else can you do with your CAPITAL than INVEST ?  After all, the root word of Capitalism is CAPITAL, and there’s only one thing you can do with capital, and that’s to invest it to make more.  You could call that manipulation…

But if an entrepreneur SAVES his profits… where will they go?  In a savings account?  Accruing INTEREST maybe…? Or in the stock market?

Are you kidding?  You couldn’t get a riskier investment climate than right now, and interest rates are near zero…

It requires growth because entrepreneurs borrow money at interest to iNVEST that capital into stuff to make profits.  Is that not what Capitalism is all about?  Investing capital for profit?  And as we should all know after doing the CC, without growth it’s impossible to repay debts, so I’ll stick to my notion that Capitalism cannot exist without growth.
[/quote]