Occupy Wall Street Sept 17 2011

[bush_cheney2004]

... The monetary system is designed for banks and big corporations.

...and governments. Why do you think they are called "poor people"?

[cybercoma]

What's insulting is the absolutely ludricrous amounts of money they are making. Yeah, I get it. You're CEO. There's not many people who can do your job. You're special. However, your company fails miserably and you still bring home millions upon millions of dollars? If economics is the study of scarcity, for every dollar in excess a corporate executive gets, that's a dollar someone else goes without.

[bush_cheney2004]

... If economics is the study of scarcity, for every dollar in excess a corporate executive gets, that's a dollar someone else goes without.

Even if that were true (it isn't), so what? That someone else can compete to become CEO if they wish.

[Guest Derek L]

What's insulting is the absolutely ludricrous amounts of money they are making. Yeah, I get it. You're CEO. There's not many people who can do your job. You're special. However, your company fails miserably and you still bring home millions upon millions of dollars? If economics is the study of scarcity, for every dollar in excess a corporate executive gets, that's a dollar someone else goes without.

A CEO doesn’t get into his position via a bloody coup or winning in Thunderdome, he/she is put in place by the board/officers/shareholders…….if any board continually makes poor choices, their stock will fall etc……and they might be next……..Corporations, by and large, are democratic institutions to a degree….

[CPCFTW]

Of course we earned it. The elite did nothing but use their inheritance to sustain their position of power. Real production comes from the masses, and is property of the masses. That's why it is right to have an equalization tax on the wealthy, no one should be allowed to be that rich. They should be forced to pay more, so that the under-privileged, the down trodden have a chance to live too. What's wrong with that?

That's the way Canada and Europe are headed, like it or not. You may hate us, but you only hate us for our freedom.

You are clueless and disgusting. It's sickening to read this drivel from someone who obviously has no idea wtf he is talking about. Try educating yourself in finance and economics rather than letting your emotions control your every thought.

[jacee]

You are clueless and disgusting. It's sickening to read this drivel from someone who obviously has no idea wtf he is talking about. Try educating yourself in finance and economics rather than letting your emotions control your every thought.

We can do the math ...

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Figure_1.gif

[jacee]

Dp

Edited October 11, 2011 by jacee

[jacee]

---

[Rick]

You are clueless and disgusting. It's sickening to read this drivel from someone who obviously has no idea wtf he is talking about. Try educating yourself in finance and economics rather than letting your emotions control your every thought.

That's funny because your response once again shows the arrogance and ignorance of the right wing which is precisely what will lead to your downfall.

You think your rule from high cannot be toppled...

Silly aristocratic myopia....

[jacee]

Paul Buchheit, from DePaul University, revealed, "From 1980 to 2006 the richest 1% of America tripled our nation's total income, while the bottom 90% have seen their share drop over 20%." Robert Freeman added, "Between 2002 and 2006, it was even worse: an astounding three-quarters of all the economy's growth was captured by the top 1%."

Due to this, the United States already had the highest inequality of wealth in the industrialized world prior to the financial crisis. Since the crisis, which has hit the average worker much harder than CEOs, the gap between the top one percent and the remaining 99% of the US population has grown to a record high. The economic top one percent of the population now owns over 70% of all financial assets, an all time record.

http://www.alternet.org/economy/145705/the_richest_1%25_have_captured_america's_wealth_--_what's_it_going_to_take_to_get_it_back?page=entire

The corporate media appear to be obsessed with the idea that the Occupy Wall Street movement doesn't have a cohesive message. Of course, that misses the point: as Nathan Schneider wrote m agazine“More than demanding any particular policy proposal, the occupation is reminding Wall Street what real democracy looks like: a discussion among people, not a contest of money.

...

Choose a year from some fondly remembered past when the American economy generated broadly shared prosperity. How about 1947? That year, the top 1 percent of U.S. households grabbed a bit less than 12 percent of the nation's pre-tax income, and the other 99 percent shared around 88 percent of the take. It wasn't a perfect time, but it was an era when a large middle-class was emerging. the take. It wasn't a perfect time, but it was an era when a large middle-class was emerging. Or maybe you think 1967 was a great time to be an American worker. That year, the top 1 percent grabbed 10.7 percent of the pile, and the other 99 percent divvied up around 89 percent of our income.

Between 1949 and 1979, those at the top never took in more than 12.8 percent of the total. When Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980, they grabbed 10 percent of our economic output, and the rest of us shared 90 percent. And that's when things started to shift relatively rapidly. In Reagan's final year in office, the top 1 percent of American households grabbed 15.5 percent of the nation's income. By the time George W. Bush was elected, they were taking in 21.5 percent. And in 2007, the year before the crash, they were pulling in 23.5 percent of our pre-tax income, leaving the other 99 percent to share just 76.5 percent of the fruits of our output. According to Paul Buchheit, a professor with City Colleges of Chicago and founder of fightingpoverty.org, “if middle- and upper-middle-class families had maintained the same share of American productivity that they held in 1980, they would be making an average of $12,500 more per year.” The size of our economy, he wrote, “has quintupled since 1980, and we all contributed to that success. But our contributions have earned us nothing. While total income has also quintupled, percentage-wise almost all the gains went to the richest 1 percent.”

ost all the gains went to the richest 1 percent.” This upward redistribution of wealth “translates into a trillion extra dollars in income every year for the richest 1 percent.” There are two things that are vitally important to understand about this. First, those at the top of the ladder aren't any more virtuous, intelligent or hardworking than they were 30 years ago, and this didn't happen by accident. Some part of it may well have resulted from technological innovations, but the lion's share of that shift resulted from specific policy changes that the corporate Right fought hard to enact.

http://www.alternet.org/economy/152621/if_top_1_hadnt_ripped_off_trillions_youd_likely_be_making_thousands_of_dollars_more_right_now

Edited October 11, 2011 by jacee

[maple_leafs182]

...and governments. Why do you think they are called "poor people"?

Please, educate me as to why they are called poor people.

The reason the wealth is so consolidated is because we live in a corporatist world, we give corporations special privileges.

[sharkman]

All of this soapboxing by lefties on this thread wanting to define the mob is pointless. It won't change a thing, and neither will the protesters/rioters(give it time). This is merely the entitlement mentality of the American youth run amok after realizing that they won't be getting a piece of the American pie any time soon. What I wonder is when do they turn to rioting and when do they call in the National Guard.

[Sir Bandelot]

All of this soapboxing by lefties on this thread wanting to define the mob is pointless. It won't change a thing, and neither will the protesters/rioters(give it time). This is merely the entitlement mentality of the American youth run amok after realizing that they won't be getting a piece of the American pie any time soon. What I wonder is when do they turn to rioting and when do they call in the National Guard.

Soon. It will be when they discover that their parents pensions have been stolen, those who worked hard all their life for a slice of that American pie. The disparity arises when people realize that they put in the work, and won't be getting what was promised, while others ride the gravy train all the way to hell. I'm not talking about poor getting handouts, I'm talking about rich helping themselves to what was never theirs.

Meanwhile today's youth don't even have that option. They go to college, pay big bucks for tuition only to find jobs are ever more scarce. We outsourced their future. Seeing how the system is lawless and cannot be trusted, why would they even want to believe in it, and invest work and money that will only be taken away at the whim of the elite. Therefor the protests continue to spread.

[Shady]

I think this says it all when it comes to the bs these parasite protesters are pushing.

The top 1 percent of income earners paid 38 percent of all federal income taxes in 2008, while the bottom 50 percent paid only 3 percent.

Link

[Shady]

The Top 10 Percent of Earners Paid 70 Percent of Federal Income Taxes

L

[Sir Bandelot]

What about, the top 0.5%

[Shady]

What about, the top 0.5%

They're included in the top 1%.

[CPCFTW]

They're included in the top 1%.

But what about the top 0.147%?!? They must be the ones making me poor! I knew it was them all along!!

[Shady]

But what about the top 0.147%?!? They must be the ones making me poor! I knew it was them all along!!

LOL, great point! You gotta watch out for the top 0.038% too! They're up to no good!

[jbg]

You are clueless and disgusting. It's sickening to read this drivel from someone who obviously has no idea wtf he is talking about. Try educating yourself in finance and economics rather than letting your emotions control your every thought.

I think you know that many don't consider me one of the far left wing (though I am).

The problem that the "Occupy Wall Street" people should be highlighting is "socialism for the rich". The billions spent on bailouts that benefit largely unaccountable, highly compensated people who call themselves "professionals" is sickening. The middle-class correctly asks "where's my bailout"?

I lose about 50% of my income to taxes, maybe more, including state, federal and local taxes. I live in a relatively modest house, the mortgage is about 25% of the value of my house, and I pay my bills and mortgage in full every month. I have a real problem with people "above" me in standard of living who are benefitting from industry bailouts who are quite snobbish in the community.

I can understand the "mad as h***, not going to take it any more" mentality of both the "Occupy Wall Street" people and the "Tea Partiers".

[Michael Hardner]

I can understand the "mad as h***, not going to take it any more" mentality of both the "Occupy Wall Street" people and the "Tea Partiers".

Completely agree. I don't see any medium that will address these types of concerns properly, though. The mechanisms for negotiation are distrusted by both sides and that doesn't leave us with an easy way forward.

[bush_cheney2004]

....I don't see any medium that will address these types of concerns properly, though. The mechanisms for negotiation are distrusted by both sides and that doesn't leave us with an easy way forward.

I disagree...the medium and mechanisms are well established, they just haven't availed themselves of them and/or have failed to be successful when competing with other interests.

Get mad....Get organized...Get elected.

Perhaps they are "losers" for a reason?

Edited October 11, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[jbg]

I disagree...the medium and mechanisms are well established, they just haven't availed themselves of them and/or have failed to be successful when competing with other interests.

Get mad....Get organized...Get elected.

The problem, as MH correctly points out, is that Parliaments and Congresses don't hear the concern of ordinary people.

[Sir Bandelot]

Bahh. And when the people believed Obama would bring about the kind of changes he promised, what happened? Nothing, same old same old. Even if he really meant those things he promised. the problem is not as simple as getting elected. It is far more entrenched than that. Obama could not do it. Why would you expect that someone coming from the grass roots, with far less capital backing them up would be able to achieve more.

[bush_cheney2004]

The problem, as MH correctly points out, is that Parliaments and Congresses don't hear the concern of ordinary people.

Ordinary people are quite happy to accept entitlements, but don't want to pay for them. They want the "rich" to pay, right? That's just as greedy as any well heeled rich folk....only worse.