Manhattan Buckeye;929655 wrote:Yes.

Do I need to repost the Atlanta meeting? What exactly do they want?

In particular, what do you want? How do you see the U.S. getting out of this mess? Do you expect us to go full government control of everything? How has that worked out for us for the last few years?

So you are calling doctors,lawyers,And teachers stupid,uneducated fools?

I Wear Pants;929658 wrote:What have we taken full government control of?

The bankruptcy process for one, as long as it is deemed too big to fail.

I ask you the same question as I did Moon Boy, with a few more. What do you want? How do you get us out of this? What has this administration done to solicit this type of populist response? Do you really think these people have a point? Or a semblance of a point?

Ty Webb;929663 wrote:So you are calling doctors,lawyers,And teachers stupid,uneducated fools?

A fool with a degree is still a fool. Just a fool with a degree.

Why do we even allow corporate lobbying?

Ty Webb;929663 wrote:So you are calling doctors,lawyers,And teachers stupid,uneducated fools?

One can be educated in his profession. But uneducated and foolish outside of it.

Manhattan Buckeye;929667 wrote:The bankruptcy process for one, as long as it is deemed too big to fail.

I ask you the same question as I did Moon Boy, with a few more. What do you want? How do you get us out of this? What has this administration done to solicit this type of populist response? Do you really think these people have a point? Or a semblance of a point?

Are you assuming all these people are on Obama's side?

Manhattan Buckeye;929671 wrote:A fool with a degree is still a fool. Just a fool with a degree.

You can't be that stupid can you?

I Wear Pants;929672 wrote:Why do we even allow corporate lobbying?

Because corporations are groups of people that have a right to lobby their representative. Lobbying is not the problem.

I Wear Pants;929675 wrote:Are you assuming all these people are on Obama's side?

Perhaps not all, but the vast majority. And the POTUS appears to enjoy the movement. Not that I can blame him given the utter incompetence of his performance thus far. At least he has this feather in his cap - populist rage against something or the other...again, they don't even know.

Ty Webb;929676 wrote:You can't be that stupid can you?

My second grade teacher sent me to the Principal's office because I argued with her that the word "eagle" has two syllables when she claimed it had one. You'll have to forgive me if I think every teacher is a genius. And I've worked with more than a few lawyers that were utterly incompetent.

Cleveland Buck;929468 wrote:There is no point in regulating these things. When you are a banker and have access to borrow unlimited trillions at almost zero percent interest, and you know you have a lender of last resort waiting to bail you out, you are going to speculate in something with it. If the government regulates one thing, they blow up a bubble in another. Either way, the problem is not that government isn't regulating enough things, it is that these bankers have access to nearly free money that is created out of thin air and they are free to speculate knowing they will be bailed out when their bubble bursts.

This is nonsense. the FDIC-plus-regulations-plus-lender of last resort system kept us free of banking crises for 50 years after the Great Depression; it was only when we once again began venturing into the intoxicating vice of financial deregulation when eroded that system and bad stuff started happening again. You must have skipped over Adam Smith on you way to Hayek who compared the need for bank regulation to the need for fire codes in urban buildings. There's always the threat of regulatory capture but we know (but which you refuse to accept) from past experience that letting banks fail whether it's because Hank Paulson wants to make an example out of one or because the FED is constrained by the Gold Standard has disastrous consequences.

And here's the quote from smith if you're interested.

"Such regulations may, no doubt, be considered as in some respect a violation of natural liberty. But those exertions of the natural liberty of a few individuals, which might endanger the security of the whole society, are, and ought to be, restrained by the laws of all governments; of the most free, as well as or the most despotical. The obligation of building party walls, in order to prevent the communication of fire, is a violation of natural liberty, exactly of the same kind with the regulations of the banking trade which are here proposed."

majorspark;929678 wrote:Because corporations are groups of people that have a right to lobby their representative. Lobbying is not the problem.

You don't believe that Wall Street spending millions of dollars to influence politicians to protect them at the detriment of regular Americans is a problem?

Mooney44Cards;929537 wrote:Feces covered miscreants are Americans.

Soiled greens is people.

Mooney44Cards;929594 wrote:This is pretty much what's happening except the money isn't going to regular Americans.

Indeed. However, the big tycoon types don't have the ability to force this action. The Fed is just as guilty.

Which is why more centralized power is not going to help.

Mooney44Cards;929605 wrote:But Washington does need more power ...

Categorically and unequivocally incorrect.

Mooney44Cards;929605 wrote:... but the power to protect its people.

It already has the power. It does not have the WILL. If you hand over more power to an entity that isn't interested in protecting all citizens, it's not going to make that entity suddenly feel more responsible.

Mooney44Cards;929605 wrote:As it is, Washington cannot protect the people because they are paid off by the big corporations in what is essentially a legal bribe to protect the best interests of Wall Street to the detriment of average joes.

Um ... they could refuse the payoff in that scenario. You can't get paid off against your will. If Washington is being paid off, then Washington is as crooked as anyone in the game.

Mooney44Cards;929605 wrote: I still don't understand why people waste energy attacking these people. No they are not perfect white God-fearing well dressed citizens, no not all of their ideas are good, no there is no clear "end-game" here. But shouldn't you be mocking the real problem, not the people who want to solve it....even if they have no idea how?

No, because the problem is serious. I don't mock serious things.

They are NOT a serious solution. They are not viable. They are not helping or serving any purpose toward any solution whatsoever.

As such, they are more of a distraction than anything, which is detrimental to finding an actual solution.

Thus, if it is warranted, I will mock them.

If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. The problem with the OWSers is lack of intestinal fortitude to go get a job. Sorry that you went to law school, engineering school, your major was in education or basket weaving & you can't find a job in your desired field. A degree (diploma) only shows that you have an ability to learn it is not a guarantee for a job in your field. So you flip burgers, work at the movie house or do lawnscaping for a couple of years, boo hoo!

The other day I was thinking of my immediate family, brother, sister, myself & two cousins plus all of our sibling's (brother & sister inlaws). 24 people total & there are a couple that aren't employed because they choose to be stay at home moms. Union carpenters, engineer, doctor, industrial designers, teachers, utility employee, computer tech, secretary, therapist, etc. We all contribute to society because our parents (& grandparents) taught us as Americans it was our job to pull our own weight & not be a burden on our neighbor.

These marches are an indication of lack of proper upbringing & lack of love for your fellow man. How can a bunch of hippies that love to smoke dope (not all OWSers) want the freedom to live life & no one bother them but then turn insist that a rich guy give him money or just some job pulled out of thin air? Leave the rich guy alone & let him live his life the way he chooses...... ......HYPOCITES!

We all have the freedom & privilege to make money then take the risks involved to start our own business, invest money & become rich but few of us have the stones to attempt it. That is why most of us collect a paycheck. In 27 years of employment I have never worked for a poor person. Was laid off once for three months & was ashamed to collect unemployment. I couldn't wait to find new work no matter what it was. These people should be setting up camp in front of the WH instead of Wall St. The TARP money was paid back with interest. Wall St kept up their end of the bargin.

All I see is a bunch of slackers. If they want ideas they should buy things made in the USA only. Sorry that won't work out for them because they spent the last 15 years buying Chinese goods. Maybe they should pressure Washington to reduce the highest corporate tax rate in the world (35%) so those free rich guys that should be able to make money however they see fit can afford to do business over here..... Hypocrites is what I see!

O-Trap;929704 wrote: Um ... they could refuse the payoff in that scenario. You can't get paid off against your will. If Washington is being paid off, then Washington is as crooked as anyone in the game.



No, because the problem is serious. I don't mock serious things.

They are NOT a serious solution. They are not viable. They are not helping or serving any purpose toward any solution whatsoever.

As such, they are more of a distraction than anything, which is detrimental to finding an actual solution.

Thus, if it is warranted, I will mock them.

#1 I think Washington IS crooked and part of the problem. So you and I agree on that.

#2 If the worst thing these protests do is make more people aware of the problem then they have done some good. We have been pointing the finger at politicians for too long, they are part of the problem but not the only problem. We vote people out of office and vote someone in their place who is just as quick and eager to hold out their palm and take more corporate money and do Wall Street's bidding. If OWS helps draw the blame and attention to not just Washington but the relationship between Wall Street and Washington then again, I think they have done some good.

Mooney44Cards;929698 wrote:You don't believe that Wall Street spending millions of dollars to influence politicians to protect them at the detriment of regular Americans is a problem?

No the problem is corrupt politicians that allow that money to influence them and centralized power helps facilitate those corrupt politicians . These pigs have only one trough to feed in. Go back and read post #274. Also read the article I attached. It spells out the problem.

Are you saying only individuals enjoy the protections of the constitution and the bill of rights?

BigYtownRed;929709 wrote:If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. The problem with the OWSers is lack of intestinal fortitude to go get a job. Sorry that you went to law school, engineering school, your major was in education or basket weaving & you can't find a job in your desired field. A degree (diploma) only shows that you have an ability to learn it is not a guarantee for a job in your field. So you flip burgers, work at the movie house or do lawnscaping for a couple of years, boo hoo!

The other day I was thinking of my immediate family, brother, sister, myself & two cousins plus all of our sibling's (brother & sister inlaws). 24 people total & there are a couple that aren't employed because they choose to be stay at home moms. Union carpenters, engineer, doctor, industrial designers, teachers, utility employee, computer tech, secretary, therapist, etc. We all contribute to society because our parents (& grandparents) taught us as Americans it was our job to pull our own weight & not be a burden on our neighbor.

These marches are an indication of lack of proper upbringing & lack of love for your fellow man. How can a bunch of hippies that love to smoke dope (not all OWSers) want the freedom to live life & no one bother them but then turn insist that a rich guy to give him money? Leave the rich guy alone & let him live his life the way he chooses...... ......HYPOCITES!

We all have the freedom & privilege to make money then take the risks involved to start our own business, invest money & become rich but few of us have the stones to attempt it. That is why most of us collect a paycheck. In 27 years of employment I have never worked for a poor person. Was laid off once for three months & was ashamed to collect unemployment. I couldn't wait to find new work no matter what it was. These people should be setting up camp in front of the WH instead of Wall St. The TARP money was paid back with interest. Wall St kept up their end of the bargin.

All I see is a bunch of slackers. If they want ideas they should buy things made in the USA only. Sorry that won't work out for them because they spent the last 15 years buying Chinese goods. Maybe they should pressure Washington to reduce the highest corporate tax rate in the world (35%) so those free rich guys that should be able to make money however they see fit can afford to do business over here..... Hypocrites is what I see!

LOL "Listen to my anecdote, that proves that these people are wrong! My situation is so typical of America"

As if everyone is just unemployed because they are too lazy to get a job. I guess the unemployment rate rises solely because there is a rash of lazy people not because there is anything wrong with the economy or our country. Thanks for clearing this up.

majorspark;929713 wrote:No the problem is corrupt politicians that allow that money to influence them and centralized power. These pigs have only one trough to feed in. Go back and read post #274. Also read the article I attached. It spells out the problem.

Are you saying only individuals enjoy the protections of the constitution and the bill of rights?

Umm, yes? When the Constitution was ratified in each state it was signed by "The People".

Mooney44Cards;929721 wrote:Umm, yes? When the Constitution was ratified in each state it was signed by "The People".

So corporate entities which are made up of groups of those people do not hold the same constitutional protections?

majorspark;929726 wrote:So corporate entities which are made up of groups of those people do not hold the same constitutional protections?

They do. But corporations are not people no matter what our legal system wants to tell us.

majorspark;929726 wrote:So corporate entities which are made up of groups of those people do not hold the same constitutional protections?

The corporate entities themselves do not....and if you think they do you are crazy,stupid,or both

Do corporate entities include SEIU, AFSCME and other bootlickers?

majorspark;929726 wrote:So corporate entities which are made up of groups of those people do not hold the same constitutional protections?

So they have to be treated like people, but not taxed like them? They need to enjoy all the same freedoms and advantages but not be held accountable for breaking laws?

Fraud is defined as "intentional deception made for personal gain". An individual goes to jail for it. Why have no individuals from Wall Street gone to jail for selling junk CDOs, telling investors they were good investments, then making money off that CDO failing?

Manhattan Buckeye;929736 wrote:Do corporate entities include SEIU, AFSCME and other bootlickers?

They give good lip-service to the working man, but they are almost as bad as the corporations.

Unions are not inherently wrong, they are meant to protect workers from being exploited by business. Too many bad apples have spoiled the bunch.

Manhattan Buckeye;929736 wrote:Do corporate entities include SEIU, AFSCME and other bootlickers?

Yes.....no corporation has rights guaranteed to them in the Constitution....only the people working for them.

Why in the world do you think you always see the statement "The following comments do not reflect the personal feelings of So and So INC.?