Category: News and Views
dear zoners, what do you think about those who gather infront of banks and other business buildings every day and demonstrate against... well, they really don't know what they want. I personally think that they are lazy, unemployed imigrants but of course not only imigrants, who just have never be in a tough, hard situation.
by the way, if you're among them, please, do a favour, tell me what your demands are.
Katherine Ernst
You Say You Want a Revolution
What do the Wall Street protesters want? You know, stuff . . .
6 October 2011
F. D. ROSEVELT KNOWS WHAT TO DO. So reads a patch of the cardboard-carpet corner of Zuccotti Park, Lower Manhattan home base for the “Occupy Wall Street” protest. There was a second “o” above “Rosevelt,” with an arrow pointing between letters “o” and “s,” lest you think the erstwhile revolutionary who inked the sign is a few bongos short of a drum circle. When “the world is watching,” though, you should probably make sure your ace spell-checker is on duty.
The cardboard carpet is both adorably predictable and a little creepy: BILDERBERGERS WE KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE; MY PARENTS WERE FORCED FED A PREDATORY LOAN THEY COULDN’T AFFORD! THANKS HANK PAULSON!; WHERE’S MY FORESKIN? END MALE GENITAL MUTILATION. On one side, Japanese tourists take pictures and Scoop Bradys like me take notes; on the other, drab students scribble more bon mots, play guitar, or catch some shut-eye on a sea of cruddy tarps. There’s the obligatory drum circle to the east, a little cigarette-rolling enclave in the back. The ambitious give out pamphlets around the perimeter.
I chatted with some of the throng. All wanted me to know they were speaking only for themselves, not the group. So what’s the endgame here? “Uh . . . that’s hard to explain,” said Moses, a nice young man. His answer was a nonsensical roundabout, but he used the phrase “socio-economic” a lot. He implied he was unemployed, so I inquired about a dream job. “To be a decent human being . . . to not live in reaction to a market.” Gotcha.
Becca, a sweet “organic gardener” from Brooklyn, was there to “end a capitalist system that treats people like cattle” and live in an America where everyone has “equal wealth.” She wanted a country with a “high tax,” a la “Sweden and Finland,” to ensure “personal well-being.” (Those Scandinavian examples both have a much lower corporate tax rate—26 percent and 26.3 percent, respectively— than the U.S.’s 35 percent rate, but let’s not get hung up on details.) Then the irony gods flexed their muscles as a friend interrupted Becca; she handed him her Visa card to order something over the phone. The revolution will not be televised, but it will be magnetized.
Most everyone is aware of how unserious Occupy Wall Street is. The New Republic mocks it. Salon laments its fecklessness, and then curses Fox News for noticing it. Mother Jones sheepishly dubs the childish schizophrenia “The Kitchen Sink Approach” in a piece on the movement’s inertia. Nicolas Kristof of the New York Times, who must’ve seen Zuccotti Park through beer goggles, concedes: “Where the movement falters is in its demands: It doesn’t really have any. . . . So let me try to help.” He then offers some straight-laced financial bullet points, some nice tax n’ trade talk, as though the protesters just needed Dad to take off the training wheels so they can speed off by themselves into adulthood.
As much as the Zuccotti kids like to compare themselves with the “Arab Street,” they’re really much closer, I think, to their cousins across the pond. A Q&A with some of those rioters on the BBC swiftly became infamous. What are you all raising hell for, asked the Beeb, after two young girls giggled over their “free alcohol!” “It’s the government’s fault. I don’t know,” admitted one. “Conservatives,” chirped her friend. “Yeah, I forget who it is. I don’t know.” They eventually settled on an answer: “It’s the rich people, the people that got businesses, and that’s why all of this is happening, because of rich people. So we’re just showing the rich people we can do what we want.”
There’s this running gag on the Internet where, whenever someone makes a mountain out of a molehill—“GRRR! Glee sucking this season!!! FML!!!—someone retorts, “#FirstWorldProblems.” Three simple words, but they illustrate one’s lack of proportion with comparative ease. When life is exponentially easier for you than it was for most of the world throughout most of human history— right up until the mid-twentieth century—boredom creates a vacuum. To be a hero, you have to create your own dragon to slay. But fighting real oppression, the kind ayatollahs dispense daily? Too brutal, too gauche. Mastering the intricacies of credit-default swaps so as to articulate an effective reform of the broken financial system? Way too tough. Better to create a dragon that can only be slain with performance-art zombie metaphors.
Indeed, any honest contact with this group brings to mind some textbook Eric Hoffer, True Believer stuff:
The permanent misfits can find salvation only in a complete separation from the self; and they usually find it by losing themselves in the compact collectivity of a mass movement. By renouncing individual will, judgment and ambition, and dedicating all their powers to the service of an eternal cause, they are at last lifted off the endless treadmill which can never lead them to fulfillment.
New York magazine polled “100 protesters who are in it for the long haul.” The numbers: 50 percent of the group is aged 20-29 (a whopping 60 percent are under 30), 66 percent are male, and 55 percent didn’t vote in the last election (you might want to try the ballot box first, guys). The real takeaway is this, though: 34 percent are “convinced the U.S. is no better than, say, Al-Qaeda.” In other words, a significant percentage of this tiny-but-loud group of protesters are chasing a dragon.
Despite the copycat protests springing up around the world and bravos from Congress’s fringes, that’s not a recipe for an enduring movement. The “endless treadmill” has a way of tiring even the stalwart. I asked Becca how long she thinks she’ll make the trek to Zuccotti. “Well, it’s getting really cold,” she mused, non-ironically.
Ah, just what every revolution needs to succeed: a fair-weather friend.
Katherine Ernst is a writer living in New York City.
bunch of dumb ass kids who just want a reason to party! that pretty much somes it up. I love it when half of them don't even know why there there!
exactly. but i heard that some protesters had been arrested. why? what for if it was just a peacefull demonstration?
The issues being protested against are real (extensive corruption, effective corporate tax rate in the U.S. around 18% due to the myriad of loop holes, such as moving corporate profits overseas), destruction of the open market by overly rewarding greed and risk taking, depending on the tax payers to provide fallback if the attemtp fails (the guys in charge in the financial and corporate worldhave nothing to lose, if they succeed in a risky undertaking, they get huge bonuses, if they fail, they still get bonuses and the tax payers take on the corporation, they may be ffired, but only with tens of millions of dollars in severence pay). The wealth is so concentrated by now that monetary policy does not really work. If you give an extra dollar to someone who makes 30 million dollars, that person won't spend it back into the economy, they don't need to, or they move it somewhere else. If you give it to someone making 30000 dollars, or 80000 dollars, they will spend a part of it, and then the monetary instruments that are used to boost consumption are actually effective.
It is amazing that corporations can buy politicians, there are no limits on campaign donations (or at lesat no meaningful ones), ensuring that people only make it into high office with help of sponsors, and those sponsors are not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, but in order to hire someoone to protect their interest, usually at the expense of public policy.
The fact that the medical insurance companies are allowed to make huge profits and thrive, and that the medical industry has given over 12 million dollars to the gys on the budget committee is laughable, if there was something funny about how our future is slowly being destroyed out of greed, and the real power over America is slowly being handed to the middle East and China through investment vehicles and offshore scheming.
The protesters, sadly, are not well enough informed and united, making these protests a bit of a hippy campfire parade that really does not address any of the issues that should be addressed, no one takes them seriously, and why should they?
I have to totally agree with wildebrew here. While I'm willing to agree that there are some people who are only doing it to chill and hang out and whatever, there are some serious concerns that truly need to be expressed and dealt with. Right now, to sum things up the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and companies will continue outsourcing to keep that going. It wouldn't be so bad if they're the only perpetrators of such a belief. Let's not forget the congress which we all waste our times voting for in every election are a bunch of money-grubbing morons too that waste their money...Or should I say, the tax payers' money on yachts, mistresses and likely a host of other worthless expenses we don't know about.
As I said, I'm not going to try to convince you that everyone at the protest has a justifyable motive to be there, or is familiar with the issues. However, I wouldn't dismiss these protests offhand, or what they stand for when it really comes down to it. With all the latest issues surrounding the lack of jobs and still increasing income for all the rich people out there, you really can't blame those protesters. Especially the ones who are quite familiar with the issues being protested and who lost their jobs because the companies they worked for decided to shoot for cutbacks for their middle-class employees because a CEO wanted to give himself a raise so he can afford his next yacht and his next herem of whores to put on that yacht.
The middle class get poorer.
The only poor that don't get poorer are the tards who take entitlements, and then claim themselves capitalists / get upset when Middle America, who pays for their food shelter and toys, wants a break
If you're on Wall Street and you are indifferent to Middle America, that is understandable, if maybe not well liked. But the claims you see by some in the entitlements community, claims against Middle America who pays their way, are ridiculous.
I concur with Wildebrew, and rarely if ever think protesters are very effective. But we definitely need policy changes, and we won't get them as long as the corporate loopholes still exist, and as long as we have a huge amount of white, poor, entitlements users calling themselves Republican capitalist and getting angry when middle class working people need some of the burden lifted.
If you never use entitlements, you are wealthy enough to never need the tax break we middle-class people do, then you have a claim on us. Otherwise, you have no claim on us who pay for wellfare of the poor and tax breaks of the rich.
Go read Thomas Payne and Adam Smith again, kiddies. Modern so-called capitalism bears little resemblance to what you'll find there.
Instead of a Communist Party, we have a Corporate party. And its wide-eyed Jonesin' followers are taking entitlements Bush wouldn't even touch, even with all the so-called Conservatives he had in Congress. I suppose the only real effect is the democrats won't be able to scare the poor anymore by claiming the big bad Republicans are gonna take your titty away. Because, well, they haven't, and they won't. Time and again, tax relief comes to the corporate elite while tax hikes come to the middle class, and of course entitlements users pay no Federal taxes.
I know a few sympathizers of the protesters, people who were laid off as a direct consequence of the meltdown. Hardworking Americans you call anti-Capitalist, people who when employed paid for some people's food, shelter and toys, and were taxed to compensate for other billionaires' tax refunds.
This situation is so possitively ridiculous if I wasn't living here, I would find it hard to believe it wasn't an urban legend.
the protesters represent your average american, uninformed populas so I think the lack of any kind of reason or purpose for them to protest is a very accurate reflection of just how much the middle class american do not know in regards to the corruption and greed of the corporate world.
I am not convinced that a lot of these American protesters are, in fact, middle class. I think they might bemore the lower class, social benefits recipients, with nothing else to do. Of course, I have no idea about this, but I think the people we'd regard as middle class, hard working Americans, are probably there for a few days, but are mostly out looking for jobs, trying to make ends meet.
i thank everyone for all the explanations and thoughts which help me not to be so narrow-minded. I'm really willing to understand, to see deeper. i should be ashamed for my attetude towards these protesters... well, if there are people who follow their hearts and know their goals among anti-capitalists, i can only respect them, because i admire people who stand for their ideas sincerely and rationally.
One doesn’t require an Orwell-like preoccupation (“the working class smells”)
with the olfactory sense to be fixated on the stench issuing forth from ground
zero of the Wall Street protests. The familiar dog-urine smell of the subways
mixes with the body odor issuing forth from the unshaven armpits of the female
placard-wavers and the eye-watering effluvia of defecated-upon cop cars.
Then the appearance. There are those who follow the current fad of deliberate
dorkiness–Clark Kent glasses, baggy clothes, carefully torn sweaters. Mingling
with them are cigarette-wavers in mobster leather coats and the aged with their
wire-like hair and the pitted, sallow complexions of the old crones by the
guillotines of Revolutionary France. They are all dressed warmer than the
weather warrants, as if they are in another, colder city like say, St.
Petersburg. For a group so worried about what Wall Street is doing to their
America, they exhibit no worry lines on their foreheads; instead they have snarl
ones.
I came to New York after a ten year absence (I left in August 2001), expecting
that Sept. 11th had made the city into more of a police state, especially with
the anti-libertarian Bloomberg in charge. The violations I left the city over
were still there: tickets were still issued if you ran out of gas, sat on a
crate, smoked a cigarette in a restaurant. To me the establishment of New York
was a mix of corporate types and screaming lefties, all united in the sentiment
of money as the measurement of everything (once in a grad school seminar, I
heard a self-described Trotskyite insult a conservative opponent by showing that
she owned a better quality backpack than him).
That kind of fashion snottiness is still there among the protestors. Anyone
staring at or questioning them receive a bellow about their terrible haircuts or
bad ties. But there is a palpable fear in the air among segments of the
establishment. There are cops who seem to want to lash out, but there are others
who seem to hide behind their plexi-glass shields. The favored gesture of the
New Yorker is holstered among the corporate types attempting a day at the
office.
They seem aware that the Left no longer owns the media.
This gives rise to a Pol Pot-type preoccupation with fashion as an idelogical
identifier. Anyone wearing dockers and a button-down is a Fox News plant. Not
mingling, even for those who are dressed like them, is suspect. I myself, as
carefully grunged as a forty-four year-old white male could be, was asked,
because I clung to the sidelines and was seen scribbling in my reporter’s
notebook, what government security agency I was working for and where I was
wired. They know what not to say. One protestor witnessing a comrade being
questioned by a reporter about what economic system they hoped to replace
capitalism with, advised, “Don’t say it, man.”
They are clearly not readers, their literature is youtube and television. They
don’t know if they should applaud when the older quote Eugene Debs and FDR. They
do at the mention of Jon Stewart or the appearance of Micheal Moore and Susan
Sarandon who do a drop-by (the older reveal an ability to anticipate the charges
of the other side, evidenced by them blocking camera-views of the limos that
bore the stars to the protests). I asked one protester why he was wearing a Guy
Falkes mask. He looked at me as if I were the dumbest thing on earth and said,
“Man, that’s V For Vendetta.” Some of them wave signs whose content that don’t
know the meaning of. I asked one protestor waving a sign characterizing Wall
Street Workers as “little Eichmans” who Eichman was and was told he was a
Republican. Another holding a sign saying Christ was against Wall Street told me
the Son of God once “kicked the ass of those Jew money-changers” (anti-Semitism
is clearly fashionable; one protester, questioned by a yarmichal wearing
citizen, told him to “go back to Isreal, Jew.”)
But someone who has a read a book has coached them. Wall Street workers are
“fascists” rather than crony capitalists (the coaches might have feared that
this description might have tracked back to the president who bailed out the
corporations in the first place).
Despite their media-savvy, blemishes of their movement slip out.. Question them
and they alienate Middle America. I asked them what methods they would use on
Wall Street and they sounded like Soviet Purge Trial enthusiasts: “the
government has to use force.” What specifically I ask. Omniously, one says,
“whatever is necessay.” They exhibit the same kind of hypocrisy that keeps
citizens at home and not in theaters watching Sean Penn. Corporate workers are
“Nazi fags” (this against the backdrop of Act-Up signs).
Needing fresh air, I tried to wrap up my infiltration with a good question. I
asked a girl so attractive that not even layers of grime could hide it, why, if
they were so worried about unemployment, were they trying to wreck the group who
did the most hiring in society. Her answer gave me the kind of end sentence
every conservative journalist wishes for: “That’s the government’s job.”
Even in Zuccotti Park, greed is good.
Occupy Wall Street’s Finance Committee has nearly $500,000 in the bank, and
donations continue to pour in — but its reluctance to share the wealth with
other protestErs is fraying tempers.
Some drummers — incensed they got no money to replace or safeguard their drums
after a midnight vandal destroyed their instruments Wednesday — are threatening
to splinter off.
“F–k Finance. I hope Mayor Bloomberg gets an injunction and demands to see the
movement’s books. We need to know how much money we really have and where it’s
going,” said a frustrated Bryan Smith, 45, who joined OWS in Lower Manhattan
nearly three weeks ago from Los Angeles, where he works in TV production.
Smith is a member of the Comfort Working Group — one of about 30 small
collectives that have sprung up within OWS. The Comfort group is charged with
finding out what basic necessities campers need, like thermal underwear, and
then raising money by soliciting donations on the street.
“The other day, I took in $2,000. I kept $650 for my group, and gave the rest to
Finance. Then I went to them with a request — so many people need things, and
they should not be going without basic comfort items — and I was told to fill
out paperwork. Paperwork! Are they the government now?” Smith fumed, even as he
cajoled the passing crowd for more cash.
The Finance Committee dives on whatever dollars are raised by all the OWS
working groups, said Smith, and doesn’t give it back.
. So, the Working Groups want to keep more of the money they’ve
earned, rather than turn it over to a central authority. Imagine that!
Not to come off as rude, harsh, or otherwise, but to the author of this board, you are ignorant. Sinse you admit to your ignorants this should not offend you. I will shed some light on the situation:
Many, many people are sick of the bullshit that the system is shoveling and has indeed been shoveling for years. The education system is utter filth, the big boys in washington be it democrat or republican have proven time and time again that they cannot be trusted, and so called morality and "family values" are jammed down our throat. But you are saying, "Why margorp, why does this all happen." Friends, I will tell you. The damn tea-partiers and zellits feel the need to inject there conservatism into our society just as a prisoner inserts his you know what in another prisoner's you know where. Boys and girls, friends and neighbors, many of us have had it. The "little guy" is barely ever given a chance. And when someone does give us a chance it is done so grudgingly.
I hope I have answered your question and I thank you for asking it! Remember:
Without questions there are only answers. And an answer without a question is a statement.
I believe the last post may actually be the most idiotic, unfounded, ignorant, and purely stupid thing I have read. You go from saying "democrats and republicans" in one paragraph, as if that makes up for blaming every problem you can name on conservatism in the next paragraph. If your going to call people ignorant, you might at least not be a complete moron yourself.
Lets get a few facts out of the way here. First, communism, which a few people on here, and a few protesters I've spoken with are calling for, does not work. Name any place that has ever had communism, and it is either a crumbling economy that is eating itself, or it has already crumbled. China, can't afford to feed itself, is almost entirely dependent on outside business, and has to make laws against anyone speaking out against the government, otherwise their'd be a revolution.
Forget all that hype you hear about china taking over our economy, China is completely dependent on our economy. If you don't believe me, pick up a product, any product, I bet it probably says made in china somewhere on that product. That doesn't mean that we are dependent on them for their products, they are our products, made in China. China is dependent on our businesses to make our products in their country so that a few of their billions of people might be able to buy food.
Look at Cuba, its economy is a shambles, its infrastructure is a shambles, its pretty much anything is ashambles. Name any other country you want to that was or is communist, and tell me if its a glorious heaven of a place.
Now, lets look at the bastian of capitalism, no I do not mean the United States, we don't have capitalism here we have government regulated business structures, and that my friends is a watered down version of socialism. No, if you want a good bastian of capitalism, you have to take a little trip over to that little island called Hong Kong, the purest free market economy in the world. It also happens that it is the strongest economy in the world. Why is this you are probably asking, well its because of two things really. One, because the government lets businesses rise easily and fail naturally, they don't regulate them, they let the invisible hand regulate them. What is the invisible hand your probably asking now, well its the rules of free market economics. The point is you don't need government to regulate businesses, businesses will do that themselves. Now, some regulations are good things, anti-trust and anti-child labor were good, but those were over a century ago in our country. Let businesses run themselves, and the market is extremely stable.
The second reason Hong Kong is so strong, is because they don't have to deal with yuppy people who don't work expecting handouts for doing nothing. If you don't work, you don't get paid, that's how it works, and that's how they like it. If you want to sit on a street corner and play a guitar while smoking weed and touting the glories of communism to every passer by, fine, but you don't get paid for it. No one gets anything they don't earn. However, it is easy to start your own business there, you can literally do it in a day. You'd be lucky to do it in a year here in america.
Last little fact, the rich don't owe you anything, the middle class don't owe you anything, the poor, the slightly less poor, the people living off the grid, the people living on the grid, the CEO's, the janiters who clean up after the CEO's, the prostitutes who give blow jobs to both the CEO's and the janiters, no one owes you anything. If you want a slice of the pie, get a knife and cut one yourself, no one is going to cut one for you.
Now I don't mean to say that I think all the protesters are idiotic. I agree that business owners should be punished when they break the law, but stop complaining about how much money one person has as compared to the rest. That one percent earned that money, and you didn't. I garrantee if you had that money, you wouldn't want to give every penny of it away either.
Verry well thought out I must say. I cannot speak for the rest, but I am not a comunist. I do not preach comunism, and I am not against capitalism in it's purist form. I am, however, against greed. I am against the idea that the rich should not be held to the same standards as the rest of us.
I believe in heavier taxes for the upper class. Does that make me a hippy? A bleeding heart liberal? No, I feel it shows that I have at least some sense of responsibility to my fellow man.
I do feel that at times such protesting goes to far, however it is about time voices were heard. Now, I do not just sit back and leach off of the system. I work as an I t consultant. In fact, many of the protesters and liberal minded folks are lawyers, accountants, etc. Trust me, we mean no harm, we just want you to think.
If your against greed, why do you have food when there are starving children? If your against greed, why do you drink clean water when thousands die from water-borne diseases? If your against greed, how is it that you can afford a computer and internet access, when many schools throughout the country can't afford books, let alone technology to properly teach children. For someone against greed, you're extremely greedy.
Everyone is greedy, greed is what fuels our lives. Greed is the reason we buy things other than the three things we need to survive. the reason we have new inventions. The reason that they are constantly improving the existing technology. Do you think that apple would be releasing new models of its devices if no one were greedy, and never wanted any of those things?
we use the word greed like its this evil thing that is to be hated and feared, but we never stop to look at what we do out of greed. Even our cherity is fueled by greed. How many times do you see someone who literally gives everything to the poor? Never, that's how many times, no one completely impoverishes themselves. If a homeless man comes up to you, do you say "here's a dollar", or do you say, "here's the key to my house, make yourself at home, I'll take your cardboard box". Of course you say the first one. The reason is because A. we want to keep our stuff and our comforts, and B. because giving that little bit allows us to feel good about ourselves.
I invite you to sit down and think about greed with an open mind, think about all the things you do, and really decide if they are done out of greed or not.
As for the rich paying more in taxes than you do, when you pay over a million dollars a year in taxes as many CEO's do, then you can complain. Yes, they pay a lower percentage, but a low percentage of a high number, is greater than a high percentage of a low number. Ten percent of a thousand is a hundred, a hundred percent of ten is ten, see the difference? You make less money than they do, so they pay more in actual amounts than you do. Granted, the percentage is less, but that is because they have the power to get that. Some things you actually can buy with money. If you'd like that to happen, then I suggest you get some money.
Before you start condemning other people, think about how you would react in their situation. First, forget that idea that CEO's do nothing but play golf all day. If a CEO makes one mistake, they lose millions of dollars, and most of it not there's, most of it belongs to the stalk holders, who pay their sallary. that means that if they make one mistake, first they could cause an entire business to collapse, which loses every job it had, and all the product and money of the investors; then they could lose all the money they make, and they have things to pay for just like you do.
I can't stand these people who claim that the rich don't need all these fancy things, and the money could be used for better things. That may be true, but its not your money. I can't tell you not to go to burger king with the five dollars you have left. I have no right to tell you that you have to spend that five dollars on cherity, or shoes for your kids, or paying your water bill, or anything. Its not my money, its your money. If you want to buy a burger, its totally up to you. The same goes for the rich.
Lastly, if your going to say that someone else has to be made to suffer something at your command, you must be willing to undergo that same suffering at someone else's command. So let me ask you, are you willing to pay more taxes on the money you earn? Are you willing to give more of the money you bring home to the government and not see any return on it? If you are, feel free to open an address box and go to the department of the treasury's website, you can give donations to the US government; they're the same as paying taxes. If not, then you have no right to tell someone else that they have to.
Oh, and I might add, on the subject of responsibility to your fellow man, you have a responsibility to let him live his life as he sees fit. You do not have the right to make him live his life as you see fit, which is what you are trying to do.
Let us first speak of greed. Yes indeed I have things. We all have things of course. This is what makes the world go round. However, I am not selfish about what I have. As for charity:
Naturally I do not give my verry last dime but that is because I need food in order to live. I do give a good amount not simply because I like to give myself a pat on the back. I believe what I give helps.
Now about taxes. I have no problem giving to a government as long as that government does it's best to properly serve, protect, and whatever else it promisis. I do not wish to tell others how to live because it is not my place to do so.
Understand that I am a peaceful person who adopts a live and let live atitude. If you wish the rich to collect on the lesser class, fine. Just don't be upset when you see revolting. I feel we have seen enough of a rotten system. This is my view. If you do not share the same view that is fine. I was simply answering questions put forth by poster number 1.
Silver, I disagree iwth you on a lot of points:
Hong Kong is, in fact, not a free contry, but a part of China, and I have no insiht into its wealth, or the happiness of its citizens, show me a few figures. And it is not a given that its good fortunes are built on the free market principal, rather that it is the result of a strong education system and highly skilled labor force, something that the U.S. is getting less and less of, due to its underfunded educational system. This is particularly true when it comes to mathematics.
We need China as much as China needs us. The government has no money, privat enterprises have invested heavily in China and rely on China for the largest parts of both their incomes and their labor force, Chinese and middle eastern investors own majority shares in a lot of the largest U.S. cpmanies, not to mention billions of dollar of government debt. They could completely ruin the dollar by pulling their svings out and switching it to other currencies, if it suited their purpose. This is a relationship of mutual needs, so you're wrong saying that we need them but they do not need us.
It amuses me that whenever someone protests the super capitalist system, they are instantly branded communists. This is one of those choice words (communist, terrorist), popular phrases you throw at people who do not agree with you (by you, I mean a U.S. person/politician, not you personally). There are many levels of government, some of the world's most prosperous countries (Switzerland, Denmark, Germany, Norway) are socialist countries, with better balanced tax system and more responsible and responsive government. The U.S. government still steps in to save banks and pay bonuses to the bank CEOs, even when the bank fails. So the interesting point in your response, to me, is that perhaps the U.S. is failing because its goverment is socialist when things go badly, but not when things go well, which is something I often see from Republicans. They cry bloody murder when someone encourages them to have health insurance, or pay taxes on their coprorate profits, but they'll be the first ones in line at the hospital and in debt forgiveness, when they actually get hurt, or the bank goes under. I hear no free market complaints from Wall Street when the government bailed them out, not to mention the car company CEOs, that flew in corporate jets to ask for tax payer money.
And what you say about CEOs is only partly true. They have severence packages, and they get paid more in a year than the average skilled worker gets paid in a lifetime. If they fail, the company suffers, but they do not suffer .. unless you call a 10 to 20 million dollar severence package punishment, gosh, they really must have a hard time. There is no responsibility on them, and their pay does not suffer as a result of the company performance, they only make money when the company makes money.
Als their effective tax rate is about halfof what the middle class pays .. and you say they deserve it, because they can afford lawyerss and accountants to move it overseas, and they even deserve it? Really? Do you deserve millions when you run a company into the ground, making thousands of people who work hard lose their livelyhood?
You probably saw Warren Buffets letter to the government, encouraging higher taxes on the super wealthy?
Of course they don't give everything to charity .. if you do that, you need charity yourself, where is the sense in that?
Finally, regarding the actual number of dollars milionaires pay being a high amount, therefore they should pay lower percentages. There is definitely a baseline income that you need to live. I'd say this is about 50 to 60000 dollars a year if you want to live comfortably as an individual, about 100K as a family.
Any money above that is money that can b pissed away on luxury, or some other nonsense, money that you can easily do without, and for all the feel good talk you see every day on tv, you'd think that people are all too happy to do so, give to their fellow country men and human beings, and the greatest pleasure one can have comes from giving. Well, I think money in that range should be taxed higher, and I think tmilionaires should pay the same rate as the rest of us, or higher.
So, with failing education system, failing healthcare system, huge government debts, and largely owned by foreign investors, I can't say this capital idea appeals to me particularly.
Nor does it appeal to me. But as I have said, live and let live. Bathe in ignorants if it makes you smile.
So you never want another luxury again in your life? Why do you have the internet then? You don't need the internet, its a luxury, sure it helps with a lot of things, but you don't need it. So I guess we won't be seeing you on here anymore, right?
Or are you saying that the people who have more money than you should have less, simply because they have more money than you? Can you please explain the difference between that sentament and that annoying child who screams his head off because his sister's juice cup has more juice than his does?
Basic fact, if you want to have more money, it is possible in this country to get it. Yes, it is difficult, but it wasn't easy for anyone else, and your no different than they are. What gives you the right to take from them what they've earned? And what takes that right away from the people below you?
Would you be willing to submit to the budgetting and taxation system set down by someone who had absolutely no money? Would you be willing to let them dictate to you how much money you are allowed to have, and what you're allowed to spend it on? If you are, go find a homeless man and let him do your budgetting for you.
Another little fact of life that you may not like to hear, there are people at the top, and people at the bottom, the people at the top make a lot of money, and the people at the bottom don't make a lot of money, there is nothing you can do to change that. No matter what government system you put in place, or what market system you use, no matter what currency you employ or what god you plead with, you cannot change that. There will always be the CEO's with large amounts of money, and there will always be the poor with small amounts of money. The CEO's get paid more because very very few people have the ability to be CEO's. If you don't believe me, try it one day, its not as easy as you think. It isn't just yachts and martini bars.
Lastly, I have to ask, what gives you the right to decide how much someone else deserves to get, or spend, or save? Where do you derive this supreme right from? Where do you get the right to decide what is too much money for someone to make, and what is too little? Is it written down somewhere? Carved into a stone? Or did you just make it up because you have less, and they have more, and you are childishly upset by this?
The internet is not a luxury, it is a necessity. I derive my income from the internet, so you are simply wrong on that score.
I have the right to decide what I think is fair, what is a basic service, and what needs to change. And if politicians agree with me, and come up with such a policy, I have the right to vote them into office, to implement those policies. Amazing, but it's this little thing we call democracy, which gives "childish" people like me, an avenue to change the world, how money is distributed, and lots of other things and, oddly, all of us are allowed to have an opinion on what values we think are important.
If we followed your logic 200 years ago, then there are slaves, and there are slave owners, and there's nothing we can do about it or, 50 years ago, white people have the right to sit on the bus, black people don't, so get over it. If the rich peole don't like it, they can move somewhere else.
Oddly enough I know a few people in management positions, and I've been shocked how much of it is partying, see and be seen, and how they get renumerated for absolute bullshit work. I have 7 years in commercial banking to back this up, so I feel very confident in my statement here. No one is suggesting they don't get rewarded for that work, but it is simple logic for a company to be able to afford a manager who only can purchases 5 houses a year as opposed to 20, and using the extra money to hire additional experts and technical staff or to better train the staff on hand.
And CEOs can screw up their jobs without responsibility, and I will continue fighting for that right to be taken away from them, because they obviously can't do it.
I want to live in a healthy and happy society, where people have certain basic rights and services, that they themselves choose. I think the socialist model of Europe works better than the capitalist, preserving the high class model over here (and I know what you'll say . something along the lines of "move to Europe then", but there's another way, and that is to try and change things that I don't like, for what I think is better for society as a whole).
By limiting the outrageous sallaries, employing thousands more people for that money, or investing it into better health services and education, we ensure more growth, and a population that is better able to take on the challenges of tomorrow.
No, I would never tell you where to live, you can live wherever you like, with whatever opinion you like. I will ask this though, if you think Europe is better, explain Greece, and France, and England, and well... pretty much everything other than switzerland and Germany at this point. Explain why they are desperate for money.
Now, you are right, you do have the right to form your own opinions, and I applaud you for wanting to fight for them. But your examples of slavery and racism are slightly different from what your fighting for. You are not fighting for equality, you are fighting for superiority. You want them to pay more than you, you want to take away their status quo. In effect, you want to change their lives to fit what you think it should be. This, in effect, means you want to be the lord over them. You aren't their slave, your just a citizen who happens to feel that what they do is wrong; and that's fine.
Well, I think the fact that you derive your income from the internet is wrong. I don't do it, so its wrong. I think you should give it up. Find a real job like the rest of us who have to work for our living. I know people who derive their income from the internet, all they do is post a few photos, write a few articles, that's about it. They're lazy, and they're taking money away from those of us who work for a living. So, I think you should give up your job.
Now, the question is, how little did you care about my opinion? Do you think you'll actually give up your job just because I want you to? Do you think I have a right to tell you that your job is wrong, or your lifestyle is wrong, or anything about you is wrong?
I grant you that you have the right to demonstrate and to try to get your opinions put into action, and I applaud you again for doing so. However, I challenge you to find one place where it says that you have the right to dictate to others what is right and what is wrong.
As I've said before, I agree that CEO's should be held to the same legal standards as the rest of us. If they commit a crime, they should be punished for it. But what in the world gives you the right to say they should have anything taken away from them? And if you think they should have something taken away from them, then why aren't you willing to give up something of yours, as illustrated in the fact that your probably not going to give up your job deriving income from the internet.
My basic point is, put your money where your mouth is. You can sit and whine about how the richer people have it so easy, and how they're life is so good. Well guess what, to the homeless man who can't find enough money to feed his children, your life is paradise. So what are you going to give up? If your going to tell someone else they have to be on your level, then what in the world are you doing on a higher level than someone else?
Okay, I need to butt in:
Us "liberals" don't want the c e os to have anything taken away. Most, and I do mean most, of them have worked hard to get where they are and congradulations to them. We would just like them to stop shitting on the rest of us.
So wait, you are protesting because they get large paychecks, large bonuses, and large severance packages, without having high responsibility when the company goes under, but you think that you don't want anything taken away from them? You don't consider the high paychecks, the high bonuses,, or the high severance packages to be a something?
I have to ask, what is it that makes you think that you know the business model of a certain company with more detail than the actual company? You must have some knowledge of the inner workings of every single corporation for you to be able to make the claim that all the bonuses and paychecks earned by the CEO's are unfounded.
strangely, there are thousands of incorporated businesses whose CEO's make millions of dollars a year, and who aren't crumbling. There are thousands of them that give heavily to the poor. Throughout american history it has been the big CEO who has given the most to the poor. Without them, we wouldn't have the libraries, schools, colleges, museums, music halls, performing arts theaters, and a whole host of other structures that we do now.
You, and by you I mean the protester in general, perhaps not you specifically, though you have proven that you have some tendency of guilt in this, vilify the CEO and the corporations. You hate them, and protest them on your name brand computer and name brand cell phone which you bought with your name brand credit card. Practically everything in your life is created by corporations, and that's a good thing. Corporations are not designed to help the worker, they are designed to protect the business. Businesses are designed to help the worker, by giving them jobs. Do they all work, no, and nothing you can do will ever make them all work. That's how it should be.
If you are going to vilify the CEO and the corporation, stop using their products. Throw your computer away, your cell phone in the toilet, then throw your toilet away for good measure. Because until you do that, your being a hypocrit.
I am talking about equal responsibility should be placed on them. I think if they work for what they have, great. I just think higher ups think they are abuv the law and that should be nipped in the bud.
Then, in that respect, we are in agreement. They should be punished just like the rest of us when they break the law.
And, for the most part, they are. Granted, there are a few who get away with it, but that is true of any class, and any crime. There are middle class white males who get away with murder, but you don't complain about those.
Yes, CEO's get the golden parachute thing, but lets look at a few critical points. How many CEO's does a company have? That's right, one. How many every day workers does it have? That's right, probably hundreds if not thousands. Now, simple laws of supply and demand means that if there is a limited supply, the demand goes up, which means the value goes up. this means that CEO's are more highly prized than are your basic everyday worker. Lets face it, everyday workers are a dime a dozen. If you lose one, you can pretty easily replace him with another one. Not so with CEO's. Thus, they get paid more. That's how economics works. If you'd like to change that, good luck keeping businesses.
So, if your argument is based soully on the fact that some high ups in businesses get away with crimes, and you feel that they should be punished for them, I totally agree. But to vilify them just because they are rich and powerful and have more amenities than the average worker, is just idiotic. Of course they're rich, powerful, and have more amenities than the average worker, they're CEO's. If they were the same as an average worker, they would be an average worker, and they're not, they're CEO's.
It is simply wrong to say "oh we value you so we will look the other way as you imbezzle some funds. You do need to pay for that new airplane, after all. And hey when you are off buzzing around in that new jet and cheating on your wife, don't worry, my lips are sealed. Yes, you are far more important than the rest of us. May I wipe your ass for you, sir?"
Yes, of course its wrong to support criminals. So protest criminals, not CEO's. I can garrantee you, most CEO's are not criminals.
If you hate the banks don't use them. If you hate big supermarkets don't use them. If you hate energy companies don't use them. "What about my electricity and gas?" For thousands of years, people lived without electricity or gas, and if you hated the suppliers of electricity and gas so much, you wouldn't give them any of your money.
Over here we have Occupy the London Stock Exchange. They've occupied St Paul's Cathedral after being invited to stay there by the people who run it. The people who run it now want them to go but they won't. I have no sympathy for St Paul's Cathedral. They invited the protesters there, and they deserve all they get.
On the issues, I don't agree with tax avoidance/evasion. I don't object to big bonuses in the private sector. How private companies spend their money within the law is up to them. I do object to public money and money donated to voluntary sector organisations being spent on high wages and on big bonuses. What people do with public money doesn't seem to bother the protesters so much.
I favour responsible capitalism. I don't object to people being wealthy.
Amusing.
First of all, supply and demand, the higher the demand or the less the supply, the higher the price.
If there is one CEO position in a company (which there is), you bet there will be about a 1000 applicatns for it .. most of whom have prestigeious degrees from very respected business schools. In this scenario, supply far far far outweighs demand, hence price should go down.
If there are 100 decently paid positions you probably could have, say, 2000 applicants .. heck, back in the crazyness may be 80 applicants .. should be higher price, based on supply and demand ratio here.
Of course this is a tongue in cheak take on what you said, but the point is that there's a lot of very smart people out there that are willing to give a CEO position a chance, and many public companies have hired guys that clearly screwed up their jobs, which means they were awful candidates, but there is no consequence for that.
The other thing I strongly object to is this whole (oh, you got issues with high wages, you must hate capitalism), argument. I never said that, I consider myself slightly to the right/capitalist, of center. I think a responsible society should have a simple tax code that does not provide loop holes out encouraged excessive outsourcing of labor and capital. If you are proud to be an American, or an American company, show it, put your money where your mouth is, at least the money you should by rights pay towards our common good.
Greed is good if channelled correctly, but it is up to the people who make the law to channel that greed responsibly.
A simple flat tax rate of 20% from 50000 dollar to a million, 30% from million to 5, and 40% for all income over 5 seems reasonable.
The CEO wages should be at most a fixed multiple of the lowest paid fulltime employee of the company (this is done in countries, Japan for instance), and this can be a heck of a generous figure, 5 million dollars (say 80 times) .. or something random in that range.
Bonuses should be tied to the companies longterm performance, and not paid out until there is some numbers backing up the CEO performance. This could be done with stock options or bonuses that are only effective x years after the CEO takes the reigns, if said CEO quits within that timeframe he has not done anything much for the company in any case, and doesn't deserve bonuses.
This country and its economy is going down fast, partly due to lack of skilled labor. Behind any American dream business man who makes it as a manager, there is a team of experts, analysts, scientists and others who make his vision happen. Without investment in people and education, and making sure these people can live decently, these dreams will not work, or all the resources this guy can provide will be shifted abroad to where such people are to be found (India for instance, or China).
There's lots of millionaires living in Europe, paying hgher taxes, and they don't seem to complain.
And it's not even as if I am expecting people to earn the same as me, I am expecting them to take at least the same responsibility for the well-being of their country as I do, not to pay less in taxes.
The middle class does most of the work, without it, America will be screwed. I belong to that class, and I am feeling increasingly betrayed and swindled by politicians who are bought out by big business, through my health care and possible sickness being turned into huge profits, if not illegally, then in ways that should be illegal (politicians should not be allowed to raise tens of millions in private capital, and their party affiliations have nothing to do with it, if you are bought into office, you owe debts to your sponsors, and you are not working for the people, democracy is supposed to b based on you working for the people, not protecting special interests).
I believe that this contry can be improved , and if I find politicians that broadly agree with my iew of the world, I'll back them up, whatever party they belong to. I have a lot of friends in this class, who feel exactly the same way, so I believe there is a huge group of people out there that want a change. I do not think we'll well represented by hippies camping out in Manhattan with Castro posters .. they don't represent me .. but I understand and feel the increasing dissatisfaction in this system, in the lack of responsibility and childish behavior of politicians who refuse to face the real situation in favor of appealing to their constituents or sponsors.
Government waste is as dangerous as waste in the private sector .. remember the $16 muffins served at official functions in Washington DC? My money is used to pay those, my money is also used to pay bonuses of CEOs of failed companies, Fannie May for instance, so I have a perfect right to be unhappy about that, and demand that we make sure it does not happen again. It does not mean, oddly enough, that I envy them .. I don't, I wouldn't want their jobs, nor their money, but I want my kids to be safe, and to get a decent education, and live ina society that does not solely revolve around money with 1% of people living in outrageous luxury while the rst starves (we're getting there, just look at numbers about average income over and wealth distribution .. there is no reason to believe this trend will not continue in the current climate). And you guys can seriously, with a straight face and happy heart, support continued tax breaks for the 1% wealthiest Americans, while the middle class pays more?
Why? Because of that one in ten million dream that you could somehow, by hook or by crook, be one of them?
Hey, it's up to you .. I don't understand that point of view, probably neither do you understand mine, and that's fair enough .. but I sure as hell am not going to vote for giving Bill Gates another 30 million dollars (I actually met him while working at Microsoft, great guy), while my taxes go up $3000 .. sorry, not happening Billy.
Our economy is going down the tubes so quicly and a big reason is that we have people who long ago became well astablished at the top and have hit the glass cieling. They can't go up and they won't come down. Now, the folks who want to try to come up have trouble because th guys on top block the stairwell. They seem to act like those old time pirates we all have heard about. "arg, this be my treasure. Har har, yo ho ho!"
Many supporting these top earners on this board are young, probably haven't yet felt the pinch of the middle class life as of yet.
When you find out your local municipality gave tax breaks to a large corporation in exchange for local jobs, then outsourced those jobs overseas, and you are left with higher property taxes, more community unemployment problems, etc. you will feel the pinch. Even if you still have your job, because your expenses will increase.
You will feel a pinch, a poke, a kick, and everything else from all that is happening. Trust me, I may sound like some ho hum hippy type who hates capitalism and smokes pot and washes myself with pachooly oil but I am a reasonable person. I am simply speaking out against the slack in the machine...the bugs in the operating system we call society.
Its funny, but I can't remember ever hearing someone say that they are the problem in society. No one ever says, "You know what, I'm an evil person who is a detriment to people around me". I've heard lots of people say, "such and such group/person is an evil group/person and is a detriment to people around him".
I love the fact that people are so willing to point fingers and say, "there, that is the problem, lets destroy that and everything will be fine". But they never examine their own lives and say, "You know, maybe I could do more with my own life". Or, and this would really make me a happy person if someone said this one, "You know, I have a lot of problems in my own life, maybe I should concentrate on them, and not try and force my principles, scruples, opinions or beliefs on anyone else. Maybe I should realize that I don't have the right, nor the knowledge to decide things for other people. Even if I disagree with their lifestyle, or the choices they have made, it isn't my place to oppose them, because it isn't any of my business."
All these things I keep hearing people touting. Businesses are failing, to which I ask, what's wrong with that? Workers are being exploited! No, workers are being given jobs, and sometimes those jobs end, no job is permanent, that's how life works, sometimes it sucks.
Now, many will say that I don't know what I'm talking about because I'm not grown up enough. After all, i'm only twenty-two, what the hell do I know. Well, I'm a writer, and if you could count how many rejection letters I've gotten from publishers, you'd be a person with more time on their hands than I am. Do I get upset about getting rejected, absolutely, do I want to take the publishing rights of another author and give them to me, absolutely not. I haven't earned it. Just like you haven't earned the millions of dollars that the rich make. They earned it, you did not.
The point is, you can't tell them what to do with their money, because its not your money. They can't tell you what to do with your money, because its your money. So what makes you think you have the right to tell someone else how they should live their life, run their business, or spend their money? If your a stock holder in the company, that would be different, but your not, are you. Your just someone who thinks that they are right, and everyone else is wrong.
so your job sucks, your not making as much as other people, taxes are too high, the rich aren't taxed enough, companies do... well what is essentially good business practice and follows the basic rules of economics, and it causes you to have to change a few things in your life. I have just one phrase to respond to that, "get... the fuck... over it." or to quote a comedian, "Life sucks, get a fuckin' helmet".
I am not going to sit around telling others that they should live in acordance with my views. I am saying, we have a problem, fix it. We know deep down what is wrong with our society and it is up to us as a whole to come together and solve the problems.
If that statement were anywhere near true, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all.
I am one, a union member standing up for other workers rights.
Silver lightning:
The reason we are having this conversation now is because many people are simply unwilling to remove their heads from their asses.
Of course, so because they have a different opinion than you do, their head is up their ass, and your not a pompous asshole for not having the mature capability to conclude that you might actually be wrong, or at the very least not be the only right answer.
No, the reason we are having this discussion is the fact that there are multiple opinions, and yours isn't the only one that matters. It may be the only one that matters to you, but unfortunately, your not really that important in the greater scheme of things. Or, with ignorant statements like that, perhaps I should say that you are fortunately not that important in the greater scheme of things.
One of the glories of this country is the fact that there are hundreds of different opinions, only a fool would say that they are absolutely right, and everyone else is completely wrong. You have just said this, so you must be a fool. Feel free to get offended and start spouting off about how wrong and ignorant I am now.
How people choose to run their businesses is up to them, but I think regulations should be implemented so that the pay of all staff has to increase by the same percentage of their wages. An organisation for which I volunteer implements this policy. The same goes for bonuses. There should be a structure so people receive the same percentage of their wage in bonuses.
The Occupy LSX protest issued a load of demands on Friday. They claim to represent 99% of the nation, but 99% wouldn't have had a clue what they were on about in their demands document.
I agree that some regulations should be implemented by the government, child labor laws, and safety laws to name but two. Those are already in place, and have been for over a century now. to enact a regulation that directs how much a business should pay its workers takes the running of the business out of the hands of the owners and stalk holders, and puts them in the hands of the voters. But, you, as a voter, don't have any right to dictate how a business should be owned. Its simple fact, as long as you are not an owner, or a share holder, your opinion, feelings, thoughts, ideas, whims, wishes and humanitarian urges do not matter in the slightest. You do not have the right to force them on another.
Now, that may upset you, because you think your opinions are good ones, but what if everyone had the right to impose beliefs on others? We had this before, in a little country called germany, it started around 1933, and ended in 1945. About six million or so people were killed because of it. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, right?
A basic human tenet, if you really want to be humanitarian, is to let others live their lives the way they think best, and live your life the way you think best. You shouldn't want to force your beliefs on others, because you shouldn't want other's beliefs forced on you.
Now you may ask, but aren't you forcing your opinions on a business by enacting child labor laws and safety laws? Well no, for one reason, the product that was put out by factories using unsafe utilities and child labor were unsafe and subpar. That effects everyone who buys the product. The wages of the workers does not effect you in the slightest. You may think it does, but you can't get poisoned by low pay workers, you can't eat meat that has human flesh in it because of under payed workers, or because of over payed CEO's. There is no direct cause and effect link there.
To give an example of this issue, there was a book written some years ago called the jungle. It illustrated the neglect of immigrants in slums, discussed their lives and how downtrodden they were. However, I bet none of you remember the jungle, if you remember it at all, for that reason. You rprobbly remember it for its descriptions of rats being thrown into sausage making machines, and workers fingers getting cut off and made into hamburger. It was some disgusting stuff, and it was all fiction.
There is no evidence, and there never was any, that factories were using these practices. The meat was safe, and there was very little rat residue or bug parts. (note: there still is very little rat residue or bug parts in meat. I didn't say none, did I.) Upton Sinclaire made the whole thing up, and people bought it. They protested, boycotted, and eventually got the government to make several regulations on something that was already being regulated.
The factories didn't want to sell spoiled meat. If they did that, they wouldn't sell more meat. They wouldn't make a profit off of it. But that didn't matter to the protesters.
The same thing is happening here. All these protesters, even the ones who actualy know what they're talking about, go out and protest something that doesn't need to be regulated. The market, if let alone, will regulate it for you without the government doing anything.
Silver lightning:
I am not saying that I am always right. I am simply urging you and the other right wingers to be a bit more humane. Perhaps if you did, we'd all be better off.
First, I am not right wing or left wing or any wing. Saying that someone is right wing or left wing means they agree with that party line on all subjects, which certainly does not describe me; but that is trivial.
I ask you, what is humane, to force someone to live the way you want them too, or to let them alone and let them live the way they deem necessary and desirable?
If you look at it mathematically, it works out like this. Right now, ninety-nine percent of the population has most of the money. So if we take all the money from them and distribute it to everyone, then everyone has a little, but no one has a lot. They're equal, but they're equal in poverty. You can't make people rich by taking money from one person and giving it to another. It just doesn't work that way.
If your going to make everyone equal, then your going to make everyone equal in poverty. That's simple mathematics.
But, just to make it a little more basic, can you please tell me what human rights have been violated? Are these people being starved, tortured, beaten, experimented on without their consent? What exactly do you feel is the great scurge against humanity that is being perpetrated? Is it making money?
Of course it's not making money that is the crime! The problem arises from taking more than your share and then chuckling to yourself while you watch the one's under you flop about like fish out of water. And as far as my right wing comment, I should have said conservative; sorry about that.
I'm not going to lie to you. I've said bad things about the tea party. Lots of bad things. I've been
snide. I've been demeaning. It's hard not to be when the term "tea party" has most often been associated
with the radical fringe of the Republican Party, with folks who seem more interested in attacking
science than fixing the economy, with those who seem to believe that their taxes have been raised (they
haven't) that there are thousands of new regulations burdening businesses (there aren't) and that
President Obama is in some kind of anti-American radical (he's not) who wrecked the economy (check your
calendar).
But several people have told me that those people, the ones sponsoring the rigidly ideological debates,
the ones that cheered for a congressman shouting "you lie!" during the State of the Union address, the
ones with the signs where Obama is dressed up like a witchdoctor or smeared with Joker paint... that
those people aren't the real tea party. Not the real, grassroots local folks who came out to protest
what they saw as a failing government. Not the people who, like the folks at Occupy Wall Street, came
out to raise their voices about injustice and unequal treatment.
So, okay. I'll buy that. I'm willing to believe that the guys with the buses and the TV shows don't
represent you. I believe you're still frustrated. I believe you're still searching. I believe you're
feeling lost and neglected.
You know who wants to see the American government more beholding to ordinary folks? Liberals (oops I
said the l-word) and Progressives. Who wants to see American kids reaching their potential?
Progressives. Who wants to cut back on waste, eliminate fraud, and make government as efficient as
possible? Dare I say "ditto?"
I know there are folks who've been telling you that we're the enemy. That we want to take your stuff,
control your lives, limit your rights. Those people, the ones who are saying these things? Sorry that
there's not a nicer way to put it, but they are lying to you.
Stop me if I'm wrong, but I think you want to see your kids going to good schools, you want them to have
the chance at good jobs, you want to see them go as high as their ability and their effort can drive
them. You want to be able to go where you please, worship as you please, make your own choices about
your own life without the government stepping in. Guess what? We're right there with you. Buddy, we want
those things, as well.
So please take your rifles and turn them around. You're pointing at the people who are trying to help
you. By the way, when it comes to those rifles? We don't want them. Heck, I've got one of my own. I
don't want to give it up and I don't need yours. The people who've been getting you agitated about evil
liberals coming to snatch every gun in America just want to sell you ammo at jacked up prices, but buy
all you want. No one is going to stop you. Just know that they're laughing every time they convince you
to buy another box "before Obama takes them away."
Some of those same folks trying to scare you also want you to think that progressives don't think
America is a special place. They're lying about that too. We also believe in American exceptionalism. We
believe that the founding principles of America--equality, democracy, opportunity--are unique and
wonderful; that the establishment of this nation lifted the whole world.
However, we also believe that America cannot rest on its laurels. Democracy and human rights? Still as
great as ever, but it's been decades, even centuries, since the US could stake any kind of unique claim
to those ideals. It's been a long time since most of the things that make people say "only in America"
or "could really only happen in America." We helped give those ideas to the world, but we don't always
do the best job of living up to them. We need to do better. The best way we can spread democracy and
human rights is just the way our founding fathers wanted--by making sure we protect the best example of
those principles right here at home. That's all progressives want.
Since we're talking about the founders, let's talk about what the founders wanted out of their
government. They wanted protection, sure. They wanted the ability to defend themselves from enemies
without and enemies within. They wanted to guard their rights.
They also wanted to regulate business.
Listen, I know that's enough to make some people choke, but that's what this country is about. Hey, it's
what just about every country is about. What good would a government be if it didn't protect you from
fraud and deception? Do you really want to face off one on one with billion dollar international
companies? Our founders didn't want that. They went out of their way to empower the government to keep
business in check. They didn't do it to be cruel. They didn't do it because they wanted to stop people
from becoming wealthy. They did it because they understood all too well what an unregulated market looks
like.
There's nothing un-American about a well regulated market. Nothing wrong with the government investing
in infrastructure, with the government championing industries or taking over banks--just ask George
Washington. Letting the market control the government instead of the other way around, that's un-
American. Worse, it's just plain stupid.
Over the last thirty years we've run a kind of long experiment. We've cut back and cut back on the
regulation of the markets. And we've dropped the tax rates lower, and lower, and lower. We called it
"supply side economics."
Thirty years ago, the average CEO made 40 times as much as the average worker. That means those CEOs
were taking home $400,000 for every $10,000 their workers made. That seems like a lot, doesn't it?
Today, the average CEO makes 200 times what his workers are making. He takes home $2 million for every
$10,000 that a worker makes. Does that mean CEOs have gotten 5 times better while workers stayed the
same? Hardly. The failure rate of companies is no better than it's ever been. In fact, it's worse, so
CEOs are not making golden decisions. On the other hand, worker productivity is way, way up in America.
Workers are actually working harder, working longer, and contributing a lot more value to their
companies than they did 30 years ago. They're just not getting a share in the profits. The guys at the
top are taking it all. CEOs didn't get better. They just learned that they could buy enough political
cover to take all the cash. That way, it didn't matter if they did a good job.
Conservative economics just doesn't work. We've tried it for thirty years now. Tax rates are down by 60%
on the people at the top. Their salaries are way up. They are sitting on record piles of cash. So are
the corporations they control. For everyone else, things have gotten worse. And the only answer they
have is "give us more." Take the last crumb--the 2% of the wealth that's controlled by 50% of the
people--take that crumb and give it to the guys on top. That's what they're telling you now.
It hasn't worked here, or elsewhere, anywhere, any when, ever. It won't work. It doesn't work. It can't
work.
You know what really scares those guys? They're afraid you'll remember. They're afraid you'll remember
that the nation isn't supposed to belong to them. They're afraid you'll realize that they are not the
job creators. You are. It's the average folks, the 99%, who create demand. Demand creates jobs. As long
as all the money sits stagnant at the top, there will be no demand.
To be continued.
Bob
Continued from the previous message.
You know what really scares those guys? They're afraid you'll remember. They're afraid you'll remember
that the nation isn't supposed to belong to them. They're afraid you'll realize that they are not the
job creators. You are. It's the average folks, the 99%, who create demand. Demand creates jobs. As long
as all the money sits stagnant at the top, there will be no demand.
You want to stand against the forces that are distorting our government, the forces that are making it
harder for average people to get by, the forces that are threatening the future for you, your kids, and
your grandkids? We're there. Right there with you. It doesn't take a blackboard and a lot of weird
theories about ultra-secret conspiracies to understand what's going wrong. The guys who are pocketing
the bucks aren't making a secret of it.
Just this past week, the GDP of the nation actually passed where it had been before the crash. It hit
record values. Did you notice? Probably not, because the GDP helps measure the wealth of the nation, but
not the health of the nation. All that wealth is in very few hands.
So, tea party, you can let those folks get you to keep holding the door for them while they walk off
with the last crumbs, or you can join us in trying to put things right.
You remember how they want you to believe we want to take your stuff and control your lives? The people
who are telling you that, are the ones who are already doing it. They're taking your wealth, taking your
legacy, robbing your children of a good education, stealing from you the retirement you've earned. When
are you going to say enough?
Let me finish up with a little Lincoln...
block quote I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion
may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. block quote end You want to really take
this country back for the common person? You may not have noticed, but we've been shouting the same
thing. So help us. Work with us. Let's stop fighting for the amusement of the people robbing us, and
figure out how to bar the door.
Bob
hmmm, so when's the last time you've herd about this sort of thing going on with those terrible tea-partiers? I even did a search at news.google.com for rape at tea party and couldn't find anything.
So tell us more about those peaceful hippies that just want to get along man, just want everyone to be cool, dude!
Q: You said a deaf guy was raped?
A: Yeah…
Q: Did the guy, I mean, do these, did that get reported to the police, or did
that stay inside the camp?
A: Well, OK, I’m not sure for that particular incident. Yeah, no I–that might
have stayed inside the camp.
It’s time for New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg to pull the plug on the dangerous
circus in crime zone Zuccotti Park.
People have the right to protest, to assemble peaceably, to raise their voices
and petition their government. They do not have the right to break the law. And
Mayor Bloomberg has the duty to uphold the law.
Today, Big Government is releasing the first of several videos filmed yesterday
in Zuccotti Park, featuring an activist who has been at the Occupy Wall Street
protest since it began.
The young woman, whom we believe to be an activist named Channing Kehoe, refers
to part of Zuccotti Park as a “ghetto,” and discusses the prevalence of drug
abuse, sexual assault, rape, and other violent crimes among the demonstrators:
We’re trying to figure out what to do about [the drugs]…It’s putting all these
people in danger–that, there’s sexual assault going on, we’re trying to deal
with that…mostly drunk guys, going, groping girls, there was a guy that got
raped, too, here–a deaf younger man…
She estimates there have been “at least ten” incidents of sexual assault and
affirms that Occupy Wall Street has been “unsafe for women” for the past three
to four weeks. She describes the failure of security measures taken by activists
to police themselves, as well as the reluctance of New York Police Department
officers to intervene:
There was a guy that got arrested for assault. He was, like, he hit a lady–or,
he almost hit a pregnant lady, and then he hit a guy, he had, like, some kind
of, like, baton–and he got arrested, but he came back here afterwards.
She adds that the Occupy Wall Street activists are apparently in possession of
photographs of individuals who are suspected of committing acts of sexual
assault. These photographs may amount to what is more commonly known as
“evidence.”
Last week, Big Government contributor Brandon Darby wrote an article entitled,
“#Occupy Movement Is Unsafe for Women: Attacks and Threats Show Dangers of
Anarchist Organizing.” In it, he pointed out the numerous instances of rape and
sexual assault haunting the Occupy movement.
What is greatly unsettling, and affirmed by the video above, is that these
violent acts are often unreported and are dealt with “internally,” where victims
may be victimized again by being forced into silence while the perpetrators are,
at worst, asked to stay away. As Channing suggests, these predators sometimes
simply return.
The chaos and crime at Occupy Wall Street reflects similar patterns of apparent
violent disorder at Occupy protests across North America–from heroin dealing in
Boston, to assaults at Occupy Oakland, to an alleged rape at Occupy Cleveland,
to alleged sexual assault at Occupy Ottawa, and to an unexplained death at
Occupy Oklahoma City. Activists have, at several sites, discouraged each other
from reporting serious crimes–including rape–to the police.
It is true that the Occupy Wall Street protest is taking place on private
property. Yet Mayor Bloomberg’s responsibility does not end at the curbside. In
fact, he may have a special responsibility to act, since it was his strange
prediction of “riots” on September 16, 2011 that helped set the stage for the
Occupy Wall Street protest that began the very next day.
Mayor Bloomberg is allowing New York’s inmates to run the asylum. That has set a
bad example that is being repeated across the country, with dozens of known
victims.
It is time for Mayor Bloomberg to close down the violent crime zone that he
helped create.
How much of this crap did you witness first hand?
I admit my city--San Antonio--is not New York city, but the three times I participated in occupy san antonio, it was very peaceful--in fact boreingly so.
I suggest you go back and watch some more "fair and balanced" reporting from Fox unnews.
Bob
Ah, fox news, yes program the robots. Lol.
Well you asked where are the liberals who want peace and all that? Look around you.
Dude that is a totally good idea, I know there is a group in dallas close to city hall. I know about it because a guy who was a registered sex afender got arrested there for sexually molesting a 14 year old. but I'm sure that was just the news making something out of nothing? right? Same as the guy who got killed in Oclahoma, it's all a big conspiracy, dude let me put down my bong so I can continue.
I'm going to dres down all grungy, maybe not take a bath for a few days and go hang out with them. Provided I can get a few days off work. I bet I can record most of it. Maybe I can then sell the recordings to the media. isn't capitalism grand?
Got a couple of questions for you "dudette".
Do you dream this stuff at night, or perhaps Glenn Beck comes to you in a vision. Which is it?
Bob
It's actually that rush person. Goodness but he makes me sick. Go work for fox news. Now, where was I?
Oh yes, *puff puff*
well, ahh, dude, you see the government keeps us on drugs. they use like the black helocopters and the drug companies to keep the man down! They force us to get like, loans and stuff so will be in debt for the rest of our lives jus so we can go to school, man! coff, coff, totally not our fault. I think everyone should make 20 dollars a hour whether they work, go to school, or do nothing. I heard a pot head say that in one of the videos on the news the other night. Or was it glenn beck, rush, no wait it was NBC. I'll post it if I can dig it up from there web site.
getting back to the protesters, there young, stupid, and never lived in the real world or paid any kind of taxes. most of them will spend the next few years bouncing from rehab or living on the street.
what do I think of them? well the lot are useful idiots who has nothing better to do and are not fixing problems but are adding to them. they are not for calpitalism they are for socialism and chrony capitalism. the problem is not the banks or the fed it's the way washington is conducting itself. and these people want to close the banks or burn down the fed which is not the right solutions. the banks help them and isn't trying to hurt them. it's washington, the dod frank bill, over spending, bailouts, and allowing bad banks to be bailed out that's the issue. it's also not true that the rich do not pay enough. You know they pay 35 percent of all income? That is alot. For people who actually pay income tax as someone else on here I am not convinced that most of these protesters do they only pay 18 percent which is a lot yes, but not as much as 35 percent of overall income which the rich must pay. If these folks are angry they should go to the whitehouse to protest.
they are not so much immigrants. but unemployable mooches, that have no desire to be employed unless it's unions to make a lot of noise! most of them have never worked a decent job in there life.
The thread title asks "who are they?"
Many of the usual suspects have appeared at the Occupy LSX demo. Some of the occupiers openly take drugs.
The problem with direct democracy is being exposed as opponents try to establish diplomatic relations with the occupiers. The Occupy LSX minutes show that the occupiers are struggling to respond to the challenges they face. They're being held back by their direct democracy. It doesn't work for them, and it wouldn't work as a system of government. Representitive democracy ftw.
But rachael, you got it wrong. Those of us who protest are really just sick of the way the system is. We, or at least I, are(am) not against capitalism.
Those who say or think the protesters are anti-capitalism are the ones uninformed.
The protesters want to end the 1%'s control over elections.
They also want health care for all American's not just those who can afford it.
They also want to close the gap between the rich and the middle class.
Total Capitalism has failed this country and it's time to find a better balance.
Anyone who thinks these protests are in some way incorrect should do some research...and that doesn't mean getting their information from the corporate owned news channels such as the bbc or fox. Also, if your happy with the way things are then maybe you should come out of your comfort zone and take a look at the people governing us, and the manner in which corporations are sucking the plannets resources dry. Soon the euro will crash, but we the tax payer will be baling out the banks. I could write pages on all the problems our so-called "capitalist democracy" which is more like socialism is causing, but it is up to us all as individuals to learn about the problems, instead of staying in our bubbles. The best way to start is to turn off the news. All that tells us is to stay scared and go shopping.
Indeed. I'm sorry but we are on the cusp of a revolution. Why? Because of the conservatism that has taken us over. Quite frankly, I've had it with the right wingers and more conservative media not doing research.
I heard a clip about someone saying how these protesters live in dirt, are into drugs, rape, don't shower, etc. Stop running your mouths.
Well Margorp one of the reasons why people have started the propaganda machine about the protesters is because the rich bastards, and their bed buddies that own this country are scared. They're scared of the people rising up and taking back what rightfully belongs to us.
This is also the reason why non-violent protesters are met with violence and obvious shows of force. This is why protesters are also met with police in riot gear and SWAT teams and why so many people have been injured including two Iraq Veterans, an 83 year old grand mother, a New York city Councilman and a pregnant woman. Not to mention the multiple arrests of members of the media.
I find it hilarious how these right wing republican morons think they can do this to shut the people up. Violence on the side of the opposition has always made the side fighting for justice win. Look at what happened during the civil rights movement. Assholes became violent, and the movement became stronger. The same thing will happen here.
I have to ask this, can you please explain to me how it rightfully belongs to you?
I didn't say it belonged to me. I said this country belongs to us, as in ALL Americans not just a few rich people or politicians.
So you want to be equal with them? You think everyone should be rich, powerful CEO's who run their own businesses? You think everyone should have health care, even if they can't afford it? But then, shouldn't everyone have food, nice clothes, the car they want, the house they want, in the place they want it to be, the time to enjoy all the things they have, and the ability to get them without working? Isn't that what we all want in life? Isn't that pretty much called happiness?
One thing I heard once that I really liked. IN america, you are garranteed the right to the pursuit of happiness, you aren't garranteed to catch it. It sounds to me like not only do these protesters want to catch it, they want it caught for them and brought to them at their convenience. That seems wrong to me. What right to we have to take something from someone else, and give it to another person, or take it for ourselves? Where do we derive that right? Who decides who is taken from and who is given too? What happens when the poor who have been given too become rich, and the rich who have been taken from become poor? Do you again take from the rich to give to the poor? Then again give it back to the original poor once the rich become rich again?
My basic point is, why can't we just let everyone work for what they get? If you want a house, scrimp, save and work hard to get one. If you can't afford health care, get on the government health care, or find cheaper health care. I realize its difficult, and there is a better way to fix it. How about we stop accusing the doctors of things they can't control, and stop threatening to sue them for everything. Then, they wouldn't need to pay for their own insurance, and health care would go down drastically in price, then you wouldn't really even need health care to begin with.
And please don't try to make the argument that you can't even get the doctor's attention if you can't pay for it. Walk into an emergency room, if your sick or wounded, they have to see you. Go to a clinic. There are ways around these things.
I firmly believe that today's generation has been tought that everything will simply appear before them. Gone are the days when we were happy to flip burgers and work our way through college. I think the pop psychology of the eighties has corrupted us so much, that we're terrified of real life. I dread to think what would have happened were this generation the generation of the 1930's or 1940's. How much different would our history be if that were true?
Silver I love how your putting words in my mouth and assuming that I'm making arguments that I clearly haven't made. Just shows your intellectual dishonesty. Twice now you've done this. Twice now you've damaged your credibility. I guess I should expect it from someone so young and inexperienced.
So try forming a real argument using sources and facts rather then intellectually dishonest tactics such as twisting arguments then maybe we can talk.
one more thing I love your "gone are the days" comment funny as hell especially since the 30's and 40's were our most prosperous times.
I'm putting words in your mouth? So the dracula that wrote post 58, is a totally different dracula, who absolutely wasn't you. So when you said that the protesters want health care for everyone, not just those that can afford it, you werw what, speaking metaphorically? When you said they wanted to close the gap between the rich and the poor, you absolutely did not mean that they should be equal, just that there shouldn't be a gap. So, gapless but not equal.
IN that case I wholeheartedly invite you to explain your argument, because it seems to me like it a jumbled mess that doesn't make sense to anyone, you least of all. Or, perhaps my first idea was true, and post 58 was written by someone totally different.
Clearly we also have a different version of what prosporous means also. I kinda tend to think that the great depression wasn't a good time for us. Granted, it didn't destroy us, but it wasn't really a good time for us. I mean, jobs were hard to get, food was hard to get, plus a lot of the aggriculture was failing because of the dust bowl on the great plains. Then the fourties, yes they were economically prosporous, but that doesn't mean they were easy. We had that whole little catfight known as WWII. That's world war Two in case your not read up on your initialisms. I'm sure you've heard of it, had something to do with nazis; look it up, it wasn't a fun time.
So, before you accuse me of intellectual dishonesty; which doesn't even make sense in the first place because I followed up my questions about your argument with a point of my own, making any dishonesty at all a simple misunderstanding on the part of the reader, or an unwillingness to actually give any creedance to my argument, perhaps you should... I don't know... not being a fucking moron who is stupid enough to accuse me of something that all you have to do is look up a few posts to prove I'm not doing. I think it a lot more likely that you have no way to counter my argument, so your just falling back on the age old ploy of simply saying I'm being dishonest, and I'm too young to understand. Instead of wasting your time trying to insult me, and whining about how I'm being intellectually dishonest, how about you actually take the time to have an original thought that you couldn't have gotten from a sixteen year old girl who just heard something about how capitalism sucks from a fall out boy album, and create an argument that could possibly, by some stretch of the imagination be called insightful or well-thought out. Basically, to put it straightforward for you, how about you stop being a whiny little bitch and defend your position; you could start by answering my original question.
Yes you are putting words in my mouth Silver. Maybe sharpen your reading comprehension skills a bit as well.
Holy wall of text Batman. Paragraphs are our friends.
I never said we should be equal to the rich (Your first mistake), that's just fucking stupid. I did say close the gap between the rich and the poor. You can close the gap without making everyone equal (Your second mistake)
The distribution of income in this country among the rich has steadily gone up since the 1970's while at the same time the income of the poor has gone down. At the same time the income for the middle class has remained the same.
Okay I should have said the 40's (despite WW2) and 50's The great depression was nearly over by 1938. That point I will concede.
I know what initialisms are. My father fought in that war and woke up every night in cold sweats because of it you pretentious shit.
As for the Intellectual dishonesty goes Look it up.
"1 Intellectual dishonesty is the advocacy of a position known to be false. 2 An argument which is misused to advance an agenda or to reinforce one's deeply held beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence contrary."
Primarily the second. blatant Misuse of my arguments to achieve your own goal of looking to be the intellectual.
Oh and ad-hominems pretty much prove that your the whiny little bitch since you're the one going off on me complaining because you're butthurt.
but you want to play like this then I can as well, and I'll do it without resorting to name calling.
"So you want to be equal with them? You think everyone should be rich, powerful CEO's who run their own businesses? "
No clue where you got this as I've never said I wanted everyone to be equal. I only said to close the gap.
"You think everyone should have health care, even if they can't afford it? But then, shouldn't everyone have food, nice clothes, the car they want, the house they want, in the place they want it to be, the time to enjoy all the things they have, and the ability to get them without working?"
Yes I think everyone should have free healthcare. Many other Countries do this quite successfully. It's called the right to have quality of life.
The rest of your comment is moot considering you're taking my comment far out of context.
"Isn't that what we all want in life? Isn't that pretty much called happiness?"
For some maybe. But since happiness is subjective I'll leave that by the wayside.
"One thing I heard once that I really liked. IN america, you are garranteed the right to the pursuit of happiness, you aren't garranteed to catch it."
My Grandfather used to say this. You know when there wasn't so much income inequality. When the American dream was still alive. When someone could work hard make an honest living and be well off, buy the house and car that they want, not worry about health care.
Now it's a completely different story Just last night I read an article how the middle class neighborhoods are disappearing. Reports also show that the income of the top 1% has grown by 275% from 1979 to 2007, whereas the average income of the bottom fifth of earners only grew by 18%. The top 1% also have a lower tax rate then middle class or poor earners.
Source for income
http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/124xx/doc12485/10-25-HouseholdIncome.pdf
Source for tax rates.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jul/12/timothy-geithner/geithner-says-top-1-percent-have-tax-rate-low-20s/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/14/tax-cuts-for-wealthy-americans_n_1011601.html
"It sounds to me like not only do these protesters want to catch it, they want it caught for them and brought to them at their convenience. That seems wrong to me."
That would be wrong period. Luckily that is not the case. The occupy movement is not about getting handed everything. It's about getting ones fair share. Of course dumb fucks like those at fox news distort everything they can. The fact of the matter is they are fighting, as I've said, for a fair share, to stop corporate America from deciding elections. Giving this country back to the people.
" What right to we have to take something from someone else, and give it to another person, or take it for ourselves? Where do we derive that right? Who decides who is taken from and who is given too?"
Huh I hate to break it to you but the Government has that right. They take money from people and give it to others all the time. How do you think the mail man, Cops and garbage men get paid? The Government takes our money (taxes) and gives it to others. Not to mention the tax dollars that go to social programs. Money that is redistributed to the poor.
"What happens when the poor who have been given too become rich, and the rich who have been taken from become poor? Do you again take from the rich to give to the poor? Then again give it back to the original poor once the rich become rich again? "
This will never happen, and it's never happened. I think you're over thinking your point.
"My basic point is, why can't we just let everyone work for what they get?"
Because it really doesn't work that way anymore, sure back in the 70's and 80's when I was growing up it did, but now it's a new ballgame. People like myself are paying more taxes, while at the same time the 1% get numerous tax breaks. It's not the gross income that's the problem. It's the higher taxes that the middle class have to pay. Were flipping the bill for the richest in America.
"If you want a house, scrimp, save and work hard to get one. If you can't afford health care, get on the government health care, or find cheaper health care."
Again it doesn't work hat way. If it did everyone would be a home owner. You have to contend with mortgage loans, and credit checks, not to mention even more taxes such as property tax and home insurance taxes.
See where I'm going with this?
As far as healthcare is concerned again it's not that simple. Even if you go through your employers health care you still have to pay for it. Many people can't afford that when they're raising a family, paying for mortgage loans, and every bullshit tax under the sun.
Government health care does not take any of this into account. They only look at overall income. This means most Americans (I won't pull any numbers out of my ass since I don't have any) are denied Government health care. Hell even I was denied. Why was I denied? Because I don't have any children. Yep that's why. Since I'm intelligent and refuse to have kids that I know I can't pay for I'm penalized for it.
"I realize its difficult, and there is a better way to fix it. How about we stop accusing the doctors of things they can't control, and stop threatening to sue them for everything. Then, they wouldn't need to pay for their own insurance, and health care would go down drastically in price, then you wouldn't really even need health care to begin with."
In a perfect world that might work, but this isn't a perfect world. Actually lawsuits against doctors are a very small percentage and barely has any affect on healthcare costs. What does raise healthcare cost are those who go into an emergency room and never pay the bill as well as other medical bills never being paid. I don't have the actual numbers but I can find them if you want.
"And please don't try to make the argument that you can't even get the doctor's attention if you can't pay for it. Walk into an emergency room, if your sick or wounded, they have to see you. Go to a clinic."
Actually that's not entirely the case. If the staff do not see your situation as an emergency they can refuse to admit you.
Source.
http://healthcare.uslegal.com/patient-rights/the-right-to-treatment/
Continued.
God damn it there needs to be a quote button.
"I firmly believe that today's generation has been tought that everything will simply appear before them. Gone are the days when we were happy to flip burgers and work our way through college. I think the pop psychology of the eighties has corrupted us so much, that we're terrified of real life. I dread to think what would have happened were this generation the generation of the 1930's or 1940's. How much different would our history be if that were true?"
Funny how you mention gone are the days, when you're part of the generation you believe wants everything handed to them.
No one is ever happy flipping burgers (I should know I've done it) Also College back even 30 or 40 years ago was much less expensive then it is today, hell one can argue that college is a needless institution.
Yeah I would love to see this Generation become a generation who believed beating your wife and kids was acceptable, and if you didn't marry then you must have been affected with the gay disease (Yes homosexuality was taught to be a contagious disease), blacks were beneath whites and Asians were considered stupid, or better yet atheists were communists and should be shunned.
Yes I know that the Generation of the 40's then did huge things, but you must also look at the good and bad qualities as well.
I don't understand why violance must be used against the peaceful. In california not to long ago, students who were peacefully protesting were maced. Why? Because the conservatives have no leg to stand on.