'Occupy' types

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I posted this in one of the other political threads, but I think it belongs here. For those comparing the Tea Party movement to the Occupy movement, I would suggest there is a significant difference between the two. To be clear, I sympathize with elements of both movements - the Tea Party's theme of limited government and restoration of federalism, and the Occupy Movement's theme of corporate America's innate dysfunction and disconnect. I also disgree with both on many other issues. At the same time, from a practical analysis, I think the Tea Party has been (and will continue to be) a far more effective grass roots movement.

Unlike the the Tea Party, the Occupy movement is not actually organizing change it's just pouting about the problem. The Tea Party group - regardless of what you think of their message - organized, worked within the system, and elected numerous people who they believed would effect change. They were effective in that many politicians reflecting the "status quo" were defeated despite being backed by "the machine" (as it were). The Occupy folks have a clear and simple way to effect corporate change - buy in. Buy stocks and organize voting blocks within the corporations. It's hard, it's a lot of work, it would involve many setbacks, but there is a way for them to effectively change the structure. There is also, of course, the Tea Party route - identify an agenda, find individuals who support that agenda to run against machine politicians, and work like hell to elect those individuals -- or you can just sit in your own stench and whine. I am sure that will be effective too.

Just like the Tea Party, the Occupy movement oversimplifies both the problem & the solution and is just blatantly wrong on many things. They are every bit as stupid as those in the Tea Party whom the left likes to pillory. Of course, the dumb Tea Partiers probably don't have degrees from "I Am Smarter Than You & My Sh** Don't Stink" University so they are easier to pick on.

Excellent post.

Since the OWS movement has vague goals and even vaguer paths for achieving them, I have wondered how it can be brought to an end. When will people stop sitting in? For example, an anti-war movement can be ended by ending a war. But what can be given to the OWS folks to make them feel like, "We've achieved our goals"?

The only proximate endpoint that I can see for the Occupy movement is the onset of cold weather.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Excellent post.

Since the OWS movement has vague goals and even vaguer paths for achieving them, I have wondered how it can be brought to an end. When will people stop sitting in? For example, an anti-war movement can be ended by ending a war. But what can be given to the OWS folks to make them feel like, "We've achieved our goals"?

The only proximate endpoint that I can see for the Occupy movement is the onset of cold weather.

Or large corporations can show up and dump buckets of money and they would all leave to go buy Birkenstocks and bongs.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Or large corporations can show up and dump buckets of money and they would all leave to go buy Birkenstocks and bongs.

Profile much?

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Profile much?

He thinks he's pretty ****ing cute with his lame comments (and mocking a death/slaughtering of animals), but the reality of it is he's coming off like a huge douche bag.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Profile much?

No, I look at pictures.



http://www.lookingattheleft.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/101511_0063.jpg[/img]

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Profile much?

lol

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Excellent post.

Since the OWS movement has vague goals and even vaguer paths for achieving them, I have wondered how it can be brought to an end. When will people stop sitting in? For example, an anti-war movement can be ended by ending a war. But what can be given to the OWS folks to make them feel like, "We've achieved our goals"?

The only proximate endpoint that I can see for the Occupy movement is the onset of cold weather.

You know why it's not clear? THE MEDIA. They don't want to make it clear. They want to make it look like they are some rambling idiots just protesting just to protest. It's simple.

1) Criminally charge those who ran the economy/banking industry into the ground.

2) Remove corporate/wall street ties with government.

3) Tax corporations appropriately.


There is no ****ing way that those assholes that ran this economy into the ground should be walking away with hundreds of millions of dollars, while sticking the American people with the bill. **** that. Arrest the criminals and send them to jail. Liquidate ALL of their assets and give it back to the people/government.

The reason they aren't being tried and convicted is, they are in bed with the politicians. They are major contributors and basically set the policy at hand. The politicians aren't going to take a stand because it's biting the hand that feeds them, and many of them are making huge gains off of the very stuff they let slide.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You know why it's not clear? THE MEDIA. They don't want to make it clear. They want to make it look like they are some rambling idiots just protesting just to protest. It's simple.

1) Criminally charge those who ran the economy/banking industry into the ground.

2) Remove corporate/wall street ties with government.

3) Tax corporations appropriately.


There is no ****ing way that those assholes that ran this economy into the ground should be walking away with hundreds of millions of dollars, while sticking the American people with the bill. **** that. Arrest the criminals and send them to jail. Liquidate ALL of their assets and give it back to the people/government.

The reason they aren't being tried and convicted is, they are in bed with the politicians. They are major contributors and basically set the policy at hand. The politicians aren't going to take a stand because it's biting the hand that feeds them, and many of them are making huge gains off of the very stuff they let slide.

I guess the media is also on youtube making these people look like fools without a clear msg. The part I highlight is the only thing you posted I agree with. You wnat the people convicted but the problem is that most of the people who ran this into the ground did not break laws they just made poor decisions or greedy decisions.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I guess the media is also on youtube making these people look like fools without a clear msg. The part I highlight is the only thing you posted I agree with. You wnat the people convicted but the problem is that most of the people who ran this into the ground did not break laws they just made poor decisions or greedy decisions.

Again FD, SELECTIVE EDITING. I can create any story you want by finding the exact responses and then editing them to make it look like all the people are ****ing stupid. HERP DERP! LOOK GUYS I INTERVIEWED 150 PEOPLE BUT WILL ONLY SHOW YOU 5 BECAUSE THOSE WERE THE MOST STUPID PEOPLE I COULD FIND. Give me a ****ing break. This kind of shit pisses me off and it does exactly what it is supposed to. Throw guys just like YOU off on the real problem. (greedy banks and corruption) Keep you focus on the real problem at hand, not what you perceive is a bunch of jerk wads wanting free handouts. Our media reminds me much like this part in this movie. Blind them with the moon (bullshit) so they continue towing the line they want you to believe.




You mean fraud isn't breaking the law? Let me quote you what friend of mine said who is in the financial industry.

The banks greed is what caused the collapse.

I was in the industry, so I have some institutional history.

You can blame the consumer all you want, but that simply isn't correct. There were primarily to types of loans that were bad loans.

1. Sub-prime: these were the high interest variable loans for people with bad credit history. They were often sold as a "fix your credit" loan. People were told that they could make payments consistently for two years at high rates and then refi it into a fixed conventional loan. The banks gambled every single time they sold these, but didn't care. The points, fees and rates were extremely high and they were making a ton of money.

2. Neg-Am loans: these loans had a deferred interest feature. I'm other words...let's say the going rate was 6%. They would lower your payment by only charging you 2%. The other 4% would get added to your balance, increasing your debt each month. These are the ones that people say that the consumer was to blame and they do deserve some blame, but listen to how they were sold...greedy as ****...

People were told 2 things to convince them it was a good loan. First...they told people that they could take that money (payment savings) and invest it making more than the amount of deferred interest. Also...they were told that they could refi it every 2 years (that was the max you could defer) essentially keeping their payment low. (more fees, more loans, higher profits, higher stock prices, ETC.)

This inflated property values because cost of the house became less important to consumers. Payment were still low. When property values

The problem was when property values peaked and stopped rising, the deferred interest piled up to a point where people owed more than it was worth and couldn't refinance...the rate jumped back up and people could no longer afford the payments.

It's important to remember that these bankers knew these were bad loans and that at some point it would all collapse. They didn't care. They saw it as a way to makes gobs of money...and they did.

Sorry for the lengthy response, but I hate the "blame the consumer" argument

Sounds like fraud to me. Nothing different from this and a Ponzi scheme.


Nope. Nothing wrong with this. /facepalm

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You mean fraud isn't breaking the law? Let me quote you what friend of mine said who is in the financial industry.

...

Sounds like fraud to me. Nothing different from this and a Ponzi scheme.

“Sounds like fraud” to you? That’s good enough for me!! Let’s just skip the whole charges, trial, judge & jury thing – lock’em up! Better yet, let's get a posse together and just go door to door shooting people. You make the list, I'll get the guns. No need to involve any government, lawyers or police. They'd just get in the way!

Sorry, but both examples cited by your "friend" (sub-prime loans, neg-am loans) were legal but risky loans for the banks to make and for consumers to take. Risky for the consumer and, as evidenced by the economic collapse, risky for the bank.

I am simply not going to dig it up, but there were plenty of individuals, both corporate and consumer, who went were criminally prosecuted for knowingly falsifying info (oh, wait, you cited one – see below). That’s fraud. On the other hand, selling pie-in-the-sky money to gullible people is not, never has been and never will be, illegal.

Nothing in either example required an economics degree to understand – people were told what they wanted to hear and they ate it up. For a while, everybody profited – not just the banks. Subsequently, everyone had to pay the piper – even the banks.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Nope. Nothing wrong with this. /facepalm

Actually, I agree - the disconnect between white collar crime & penalties and traditional “blue collar” crime penalties is something that needs to be addressed and corrected.

Following the OWS model for change, I’ll meet you in front of the Capital, you bring the bull-horn, I’ll bring the sign. I bet that will be much more effective than organizing an actual national grass-roots political movement, electing like minded people to enact practical and responsive legislation. Regardless of it's effectiveness, I'm sure our bull horn and sign will be easier. Can you remember to bring the Starbucks? Vente Latte please.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

They want to make it look like they are some rambling idiots just protesting just to protest.

For the most part they are.

1) Criminally charge those who ran the economy/banking industry into the ground.

Does that include folks in the Clinton Admin. and Bush Admins?

Bill Clinton's drive to increase homeownership went way too far - BusinessWeek

How about Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Maxine Waters, Greg Meeks, Lacy Clay, Athur Davis

Democrats were WARNED of Financial crisis and did...

Sen. Chris Dodd took millions from now-failing finance firms he oversees - latimes.com

There is no ****ing way that those assholes that ran this economy into the ground should be walking away with hundreds of millions of dollars, while sticking the American people with the bill. **** that. Arrest the criminals and send them to jail. Liquidate ALL of their assets and give it back to the people/government.

If folks broke the law they should be prosecuted and punished. If folks stayed within the laws/regulations then we need to look at the problem being gov't interference in the markets. Without gov't programs to incentivize home ownership, lending standards would not have been eased to create the bad mortgage assets that triggered the financial crisis.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

For the most part they are.

And so are most republicans. See what I did there?

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Does that include folks in the Clinton Admin. and Bush Admins?

Hey, it's politicians doing the bidding of big business. Guess who wants to eliminate ALL corporate sponsorship of campaigns? THIS GUY.


Funny you mention Clinton, but some of his policies really were the start of the downfall. (deregulation/NAFTA)

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

How about Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Maxine Waters, Greg Meeks, Lacy Clay, Athur Davis

What part of ALL of them didn't you get? I mean every last mother ****er that played a part in it. I mean like French Revolution style. Round them all up, and chop their heads off in public square.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Sen. Chris Dodd took millions from now-failing finance firms he oversees - latimes.com

I don't get you. Why in the **** are you up here trying to blast Democrats? Haven't you got it through your skull yet that I don't support ANY party and I think both parties are worthless? It's getting a bit annoying with your petty Repbulican vs Democrat bickering. That's the problem. Most of you guys are so blinded by the whole Repubs vs Dem that you take that mantle and run with it. You'd think many of you see it as a Cowboys vs Redskins rivalry. DEMOCRATS SUCK!!......REPUBLICANS ARE MORONS!!

News Flash: They are all equally worthless. The Republicans just show it more.

Sorry about the rant, but stop acting as I'm some dude toting a blue donkey flag parroting Democrat wishes.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You know why it's not clear? THE MEDIA. They don't want to make it clear. They want to make it look like they are some rambling idiots just protesting just to protest.

One, all I have heard from the media is sympathy for the OWS movement - how they are a populist movement striving to focus their outrage. All sorts of little guy v. big bad corporations. At the same time, I am sure that media from the right is doing as you say. I am equally sure that left leaning media is portraying them as modern day evangelists/heros - little Davids against big bad Goliaths. Sunday OWS Notes - NYTimes.com; Occupy Wall Street reacts to Goldman Sachs pay - Oct. 20, 2011; Occupy Wall Street shows muscle, raises $300K - US news - Life - msnbc.com

The typical preachers are talking to the typical choirs. The facts are out there and being reported. Depending on which channel you listen to, the space between the facts is filled with red or blue spin.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

It's simple.

1) Criminally charge those who ran the economy/banking industry into the ground.

2) Remove corporate/wall street ties with government.

3) Tax corporations appropriately.

I get it. You hate corporations and rich people. The OWS movement must just have you salivating like crack to an addict. However, if what you say is truly "the message", than the OWS is just plain dumb and is exhibiting a fundamental failure to understand economics and criminal law 101.

(1) Cite me the specific criminal statutes violated by specific individuals. Not some generic bull sh**. Facts & laws - specifics. When, where and how? Who, specifically, committed what specific crimes? Before you start depriving individuals of their liberty, I would suggest they are entitled to a little due process of the law.

If those "who ran the economy/banking industry into the ground" did so out of epically bad judgment rather than through specific criminal actions - does the OWS still support criminal sanctions? I, for one, don't support a movement that would suggest we allow the retroactive imposition of criminal penalties for actions not deemed criminal at the time they were taken. Seems to me a bad, bad precedent.

(2, 3) So tax corporations and take property from their investors but don't let those self-same investors have a voice in government through the corporate entity. More simply, tax but allow no representation - seems to me that was the underlying theme of some other revolution in history.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

There is no ****ing way that those assholes that ran this economy into the ground should be walking away with hundreds of millions of dollars, while sticking the American people with the bill. **** that. Arrest the criminals and send them to jail. Liquidate ALL of their assets and give it back to the people/government.

And it was allllll "the corporations" fault - not all those taking advantage of easy money, applying for loans with inflated home values and false income information or purchasing homes on speculation.

BTW - Is the same govt in which you have no faith that you would have collecting and performing the wealth distribution?

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

The reason they aren't being tried and convicted is, they are in bed with the politicians. They are major contributors and basically set the policy at hand. The politicians aren't going to take a stand because it's biting the hand that feeds them, and many of them are making huge gains off of the very stuff they let slide.

No. The reason they aren't being tried and convicted is, to my knowledge, they have not done anything criminal but, rather, made dumb/bad investments and used traditionally accepted, but risky, accounting procedures to inflate values in an effort to create the most wealth for their investors.

Ultimately, with corporations, there is inherent conflict/disconnect between the need for and purpose of a corporation's legal existence and the proper functioning of a free market. Corporations exist to pool resources and protect individuals from personal liability which allows for greater risk and larger investment. At the same time, in doing so, the corporate entity shields managers from suffering the same penalty the corporation suffers for bad investments - loss of value. It is this disconnect that allows these large corporations to make dumb, risky investments while having the managers profit regardless of whether or not the corporation wins or loses.

If the OWS really wants to change things then, as the Tea Party has done, create a specific agenda that addresses the real inequities and market dysfunction of corporate law as it applies to large corporations. Find a way to preserve the real and needed protections of the corporate structure while at the same time creating a practical market accountability for managers who exercise poor judgment. I suggest to you that the devil is in the details and that screaming "Corporations are bad" is ineffective, counter-productive and, mostly, just plain stupid.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Lol, NC_Skins. First things first, just what in the code did they violate? You can't charge someone with a crime without identifying the crime first.

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

(1) Cite me the specific criminal statutes violated by specific individuals. Not some generic bull sh**. Facts & laws - specifics. When, where and how? Who, specifically, committed what specific crimes? Before you start depriving individuals of their liberty, I would suggest they are entitled to a little due process of the law.

I've got nothing on the above. What you both said is 100% true. I guess I'm more pissed there aren't laws and regulations just for this very thing. I do in fact believe many of these guys that got away (with millions and millions) did perpetrate fraud. Were there any investigations? I mean Congress sure went after MLB and steroid testing, but let those jackasses in Wall Street get a pass?

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

And it was allllll "the corporations" fault - not all those taking advantage of easy money, applying for loans with inflated home values and false income information or purchasing homes on speculation.

Not so much corporations as it was the banking industry. Not all corporations abuses it's wealth and power to influence government to do their bidding. It's just the major ones. They were giving out loans to people they knew they couldn't afford them and even talking them into these loans. I stated you information from a friend of mine in the industry. However, his professional opinion was passed off as it weren't correct, yet nobody can refute anything he said. This is the key here.

It's important to remember that these bankers knew these were bad loans and that at some point it would all collapse. They didn't care. They saw it as a way to makes gobs of money...and they did.

If I go into a bank and make $60,000, and apply for a loan of 5 million dollars, why on earth would they give me that loan knowing good and damn well I'm going to default? Same thing they did here. Not only did they give out the bad loans, they enticed people by offering them low payments. It is ALL of their fault.

Why are we having to bail these asshats out? To big to fail my ass. The thing about "free market" and capitalism is that with the fail of one business, another will rise from the ashes.

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I get it. You hate corporations and rich people.

You keep saying this, but it doesn't make it true no matter how many times you repeat it. It's almost to the point that Slinging Sammy keeps wanting to refer to me as the Libs/Dem side of the fence. I talk about corporate corruption a lot because it's widespread and they are embedded within our government. I have a HUGE problem with that, much like I do with religion and our government.

I'll say this again. I have 0 problems with corporations as long as they aren't influencing our government/news media, abiding by regulations, and paying their fair share of taxes. Do I need to make this a sig?

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

BTW - Is the same govt in which you have no faith that you would have collecting and performing the wealth distribution?

Not in the current set of assholes residing in DC. No.

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

If those "who ran the economy/banking industry into the ground" did so out of epically bad judgment rather than through specific criminal actions - does the OWS still support criminal sanctions?

I don't believe it was done on "bad judgment". Those guys knew exactly what they were doing. No, I do not support punishment retroactive on crimes committed.

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

(2, 3) So tax corporations and take property from their investors but don't let those self-same investors have a voice in government through the corporate entity. More simply, tax but allow no representation - seems to me that was the underlying theme of some other revolution in history.

Corporations are NOT people, no matter what idiot law might say they are. They are a business and should be treated as such. I think corporations should pay their fair share of tax, just like everybody else. This GE making 14 billion dollars, but paying 0 tax dollars is absurd.

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I suggest to you that the devil is in the details and that screaming "Corporations are bad" is ineffective, counter-productive and, mostly, just plain stupid.

I think you are reading what you want to. I've stated my thoughts on this and you continue to ignore what I've said and focus on the negative issues I bring up with corporations.

[SirClintonPortis]

The reason banks went and gave out subprime mortgages like crazy was that they could pass off the risk on those mortgages to investors who bought mortgage-backed securities. They were protected from the risk those mortgages had and thus didn't give a damn about whether the mortgages would get paid off. Hence, it is a matter of incentives leading the banks to do what they did. It was, as an economics guy would call it, an agency problem, and specifically "moral hazard".
Moral hazard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And I wouldn't call the consumer blameless. Not many will sympathize with falling for advanced-fee fraud(i.e Nigerian scam) schemes, so why should those "hoodwinked" by banks get a pass. Not to mention that low credit score people usually have no inhibitions about lying their asses off or deliberately ****ing around with you into giving them money to spend(or in the case of renting, "ethical" leverage into not filing for an eviction or not paying rent).