Joey Can You See Occupy Fort lauderdale From Your Office

Thread Starter

loosewire

Joined Apr 25, 2008
1,686
Occupy raided again today,haul all the stuff away,the police ...members

only...the homeless.. how do we prove we are a member.
 

justtrying

Joined Mar 9, 2011
428
Obviously, the reason why the '99%' are so poor is that the '1%' are so rich.

Why don't you guys all get together, line the '1%' up against a wall, and shoot them.

Then watch the cash pour in.

It's happened before...It'll happen again...why delay the inevitable?

Meet the new boss....same as the old boss....
Actually, if you study your history, the true 1% (banks, scammers, etc) were never even touched, why do you think this system keeps regenerating itself? people lined up against the wall were usually the upper middle class and the skilled workers, so I'd say everyone participating in this forum would be screwed.
 

Thread Starter

loosewire

Joined Apr 25, 2008
1,686
The federal reserve is untouchable,run's all my it's self..all the money

is deposited in 6 federal reserve banks across the country.I don't

think anyone knows the amount of money they control,and if the


president could use it as a piggy bank. How that is untouchable

make you wonder about the rules we live under.
 

Thread Starter

loosewire

Joined Apr 25, 2008
1,686
Thats right,they approved it quietly a few months ago to aprove

$1.5 trillion more to kick in a few weeks ago,the press did not

cover the story while he was on vacation.
 
Last edited:

strantor

Joined Oct 3, 2010
5,225
these things I say, always a show stopper. Why is that? nobody wants to talk real about the real issues. Seen it enough times to call it a trend. Now if I dropped some politics I would get plenty of bites. people love to divide themselves over R vs D, C vs L. Squabble over the finer details but don't anybody address the root of all the problems. No, you start talking about that, and everybody clams up.
 

Thread Starter

loosewire

Joined Apr 25, 2008
1,686
Clams up about what,you need shorter post,too much information

to answer. Talk about what we have learned from the action in

Washington. Its not politics,its the action taken that effect us.

What have we learned,that the president can do recess appointments.

The congress can turn there job over to 8 members to solved the

nations problems. Signing statements,insider tradeing legal for

congress.So many one liners to go thru,without long post that

get twisted around as different members give there opinion

on a long post.Every one get a little lost. Lets chew on one

liners for a while. Google debating rules,we can have debate

on the issues.
 
Last edited:

thatoneguy

Joined Feb 19, 2009
6,359
This most recent housing crisis is another example - practically the entire world economy was taken down by predatory lending practices and a loosening of leveraging guidelines for banks and investment firms. Deregulation allowed a relatively small number of people in this world to destroy the life savings of countless hard working, honest people - all in pursuit of profit. This works? I don't doubt that capitalism creates a self-regulating system, but as Keynes showed government intervention is necessary to damp the wild oscillations of the free market. Otherwise the rest of us become grist to the mill.
Do you know WHY there was a housing crisis? Seriously?

Look up the CRA act of '74, that started the housing bubble rolling, it was expanded in the mid 90's despite protests that the "bubble would break", they expanded it anyway. The bubble broke. Everybody is SHOCKED. :rolleyes:

There isn't much the government can do that private entities can do better, other than spend money like a drunken sailor. A "job" provided by the government is not a net gain on our GDP, it' s a net loss.
 

Zazoo

Joined Jul 27, 2011
114
Do you know WHY there was a housing crisis? Seriously?

Look up the CRA act of '74, that started the housing bubble rolling, it was expanded in the mid 90's despite protests that the "bubble would break", they expanded it anyway. The bubble broke. Everybody is SHOCKED. :rolleyes:
No need to get snarky, we're all adults here.
That bubbles are a part of a free market is a given. Who said they weren't? No one is disputing that, certainly not me.

Second, the housing crisis, including the downward spiral of the CRA, beautifully illustrates a failure of proper government regulation and intervention - which is exactly my point.

You're also missing two really important events in this crisis that occured after the mid-90's.
1.) The repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act in 1999.
2.) The suspension of the net capital rule by the SEC in 2004

Both are instances of deregulation.
Acts of deregulation that allowed commerical banks to once again jump into the investment game and allowed the big five investment firms to leverage themselves to a ridiculously irresponsible level in the pursuit of profit.
All the while a strong housing market made mortgage-backed securities a (seemingly) low-risk, high-yield investment.
Put these two together and naturally the demand for these securities skyrocketed.

What little regulation still remained in the CRA by the mid-90's was gutted, or just plain ignored, through 2007 in an effort to get as many warm-bodies as possible to sign mortgages agreements - financial institutions couldn't package and sell these instruments fast enough. If you had a pulse you got a loan - who cared if you could actually afford the mini-mansion. This is an example of a lack of proper government oversight.

Everybody in finance and goverment knew the bubble was unsustainable. They knew that the bubble would burst, housing prices would tank, and a lot of people would be in a world of hurt real fast. But bubbles make savvy investors rich really fast. I think many underestimated just how bad they screwed the pooch though, and an unlucky few got tossed the grenade just before it went off.

How is this not an example of a inadequet government regulation and intervention in the free market?

Edit: (Just to clarify, I'm not saying that more government regulation is always the answer - only that no regulation would be a nightmare and far from the capitalist utopia envisioned by the likes of Ayn Rand.)
 
Last edited:

thatoneguy

Joined Feb 19, 2009
6,359
How is this not an example of a inadequate government regulation and intervention in the free market?
If there wasn't government legislation that essentially forced banks to hand out home loans to anybody with a pulse, those loans would have never been made. I agree the .gov put it into action then left it alone, rather than at least monitor/intervene some, but they didn't.

In the end, the total money "lost" on that is now a drop in the bucket, comparatively.

I think the government tries to regulate too many things, especially in areas where the regulation is to buy votes rather than actually protect American citizens from harm.
 

DerStrom8

Joined Feb 20, 2011
2,390
The fact that it results in a society that is richer (on the whole) than it otherwise would be is a beneficial side effect. Not its purpose.
Even so, if what you're saying is true, then it still isn't working properly. If there is no "side effect" of a richer community on the whole, then something isn't right. That was really all I was trying to say. The Occupy Wall Street movement is attempting to raise awareness of the problems that face capitalism and the U.S. nowadays. They're not trying to really do anything. They know that banks won't go out of business just because they're camping out in the middle of the city. They're only there to remind people that there is something wrong with the "capitalism" we practice today.

Loosie, sorry to pollute your thread. I'm sure this isn't quite what you had in mind. I hate to get all political, and I just hope our arguments won't get your thread closed.
 

jimkeith

Joined Oct 26, 2011
540
Fortunately, in every industry except banking, it is in the best interest of the company to get the money back to the people. Banks on the other hand like to see money tied up (in their pockets) so that the people have to come to them for loans, which get paid out to the other industries. That's why I have a problem with the OWS crowd; they are going after anybody who is rich, and rich people aren't the problem. banks are.
1% & 99% -on that point, they are right, the 1% are the ones in charge of the banks. the 99% is everybody else. when you start throwing aroun 30%/70% and 20%/80%, now you're talking about rich people.
Agree, except that it is not 1%. The trillionaire global elite that are fraudulently bankrupting the world consist of roughly 0.0001% -- some 4 orders of magnitude lower. They introduced the nefarious concept of debt-based money that must be loaned into existence and requires a continuous expansion of the money supply to function. To collapse the system, all they have to do is to withhold credit--they are doing this now as they did in 1929. These people are immune to such protests and own virtually all politicians of both parties.

Sounds like you've been listening to Alex Jones...
 

jimkeith

Joined Oct 26, 2011
540
Even so, if what you're saying is true, then it still isn't working properly. If there is no "side effect" of a richer community on the whole, then something isn't right. That was really all I was trying to say. The Occupy Wall Street movement is attempting to raise awareness of the problems that face capitalism and the U.S. nowadays. They're not trying to really do anything. They know that banks won't go out of business just because they're camping out in the middle of the city. They're only there to remind people that there is something wrong with the "capitalism" we practice today.
Please do not confuse Fee-Enterprise with Capitalism. What we have today is actually Fascism (big business linked with government) that includes banking, the military-industrial complex, insurance, medicine, big pharma and big Ag (Monsanto). This stuff is anything but Free-Enterprise and attempts to squash such by all possible means.

Continuing in the same direction through positive infinity brings us full circle to negative infinity or Communism.
 

strantor

Joined Oct 3, 2010
5,225
If you guys want to continue focusing on regulation VS deregulation, consider this: Who stands to gain from all these bulbbles? not the American people. The government? not really*. Banks? YES! they do. They make massive profits as the bubble builds, and then when it bursts the FED bails them out. Not to mention, when people default on mortages and other collateral-based loans the bank gets your house, your car, your boat, your business, whatever. They materialize money, want interest paid on it, and then get physical goods when you can't pay. These cycles of regulation, then deregulation only serve to ensure that the bubble happens. They get what they want. So do you really think the government makes any decisions on the topic without a little nudge from the banks?
*indirectly, from "gifts" from the banks
 

strantor

Joined Oct 3, 2010
5,225
Clams up about what,you need shorter post,too much information
clams up about the fact that our enitre monetary & government system is overcome with a cancer that can't be cut out. A cancer that goes to the very root. several generations of it, and everybody is involved. The only way out of it is a total wiping of the slate and start over. Everybody knows that's true but it makes them cringe to think of it, so they would rather not speak of it.
 

DerStrom8

Joined Feb 20, 2011
2,390
Please do not confuse Fee-Enterprise with Capitalism. What we have today is actually Fascism (big business linked with government) that includes banking, the military-industrial complex, insurance, medicine, big pharma and big Ag (Monsanto). This stuff is anything but Free-Enterprise and attempts to squash such by all possible means.

Continuing in the same direction through positive infinity brings us full circle to negative infinity or Communism.
I agree, that is exactly what I feel is happening. The U.S. has practically turned to Fascism, but people still claim it's Capitalism. That's why I put capitalism in quotation marks in my last post. We are not actually practicing capitalism, though we still say we are. That is my point--the U.S. needs to re-think its direction and turn itself around. Capitalism has gone down the toilet in this country. We need to find a way to bring it back.

I think that's part of the point of the Occupy movement. They're trying to show people that we've turned to Fascism under the mask of Capitalism. That is why, for the most part, I support the movement.
 

shortbus

Joined Sep 30, 2009
7,461
these things I say, always a show stopper. Why is that? nobody wants to talk real about the real issues. Seen it enough times to call it a trend. Now if I dropped some politics I would get plenty of bites. people love to divide themselves over R vs D, C vs L. Squabble over the finer details but don't anybody address the root of all the problems. No, you start talking about that, and everybody clams up.
OK, how would we go about changing things? The people in charge are the only ones that can make the changes. The one thing they have learned from history is "don't kill the goose that lays the golden egg". The only way it can be changed is a revolution. And don't see that happening.

If there was a new Constitutional amendment made that ALL government officials were like the presidency - two terms maximum - things might get better. Don't think the founding fathers meant for a person to spend their whole life in one position. The longer some one holds a position of power, they get more corrupt. Don't believe it just look at history of the ones that have been in politics, more corrupt ones than honest ones.

There should be a way of the majority of the people to introduce a change to the Constitution of the US, just like in most state constitutions.

If you think things are bad now, just wait until the corporations find out how far they can go due to the "Citizens United" decision. It will really go bad then.
 
Last edited:

strantor

Joined Oct 3, 2010
5,225
OK, how would we go about changing things? The people in charge are the only ones that can make the changes. The one thing they have learned from history is "don't kill the goose that lays the golden egg". The only way it can be changed is a revolution. And don't see that happening.

If there was a new Constitutional amendment made that ALL government officials were like the presidency - two terms maximum - things might get better. Don't think the founding fathers meant for a person to spend their whole life in one position. The longer some one holds a position of power, they get more corrupt. Don't believe it just look at history of the ones that have been in politics, more corrupt ones than honest ones.

There should be a way of the majority of the people to introduce a change to the Constitution of the US, just like in most state constitutions.
no amount of ammendments are going to change it. You are absolutely right on all counts. What we need is a revolution, and it's not going to happen. Why? because the American people are so damned apathetic. We've let ourselves be lulled into a state of utter complacency. We would not discomfort ourselves long enough to right the wrong. This will be our downfall. We will turn our own freedoms over to the hands of the coming dictatorship if it is the path of least resistance.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--
Things will have to get a lot worse before anybody gets inspired to make them better, and by the time that happens, it will probably be too late.
 
Top