Occupy Wall Street

This photo has been making the rounds on Facebook. . . rumor also has it that it has been photoshopped to add people. I don’t know one way or the other, but I loved this comment that I saw posted on it: What they forget, when they scuttle the economy and put alot of people out of work, those people have alot of time on their hands.

33 Responses

  1. Mich:What they forget, when they scuttle the economy and put alot of people out of work, those people have alot of time on their hands.Who exactly is "they"?

    Like

  2. Not snarky here, Michi, but I see reporting on this everywhere. Where is it not being covered, do you think?

    Like

  3. Scott: That amorphous "they" which embodies All Evil, obviously! :-)Troll: I agree that it is being covered very widely now; I don't know when the picture was taken but it may have been early on when not much reporting was being done on OWS. Although I pointed out on the PL the very first day that it had been a headline on msnbc's main page for part of the day, so it hasn't been as ignored as some would like to think it has been.

    Like

  4. OWS wasn't getting much coverage when it first started. But, now it's a thing, so the news is reporting on it. Plenty of coverage now, but I tend to agree with Scott on:What they forget, when they scuttle the economy and put alot of people out of work, those people have alot of time on their handsThere's someone intentionally scuttling the economy? Did they sabotage the economy expressly to put people out of work, or was that just a happy accident? ;)I suspect many of the top dogs who contributed to our current woes made the same mistake humans have made so often before, and will again. Hey, this is awesome. We're making money hand over fist without really producing anything. What could possibly go wrong?

    Like

  5. I didn't see where michi actually said they intentionally scuttled the economy or expressly put people out of work. Sometimes the result of greed is both unknown and unintended, although it generally results in someone's misery IMO.The movement was largely uncovered the first couple of weeks except for on left leaning blogs then the NYPD pepper sprayed a group of women behind the barrier and drew more attention to the movement. Apparently, ABC had a well articulated OWS protester on this morning so I'd say the ignoring days are over.If that picture is accurate, awesome.

    Like

  6. Hmm. The blog ate my comment. Oh well, I was posing a couple of provocative questions about the occupiers and one of my favorite whipping girls, Nancy P.

    Like

  7. Testing link function.

    Like

  8. lms:I didn't see where michi actually said they intentionally scuttled the economy or expressly put people out of work. The word scuttle implies intention, although they weren't Mich's words in any event…she was quoting someone.If that picture is accurate, awesome.I doubt it is accurate. Almost certainly photoshopped. But in any event, we'd all be a lot better off if all those people focused their energies on productive activities rather than protesting, er, whatever it is they are protesting.

    Like

  9. That link via NRO and ABC to an interview of Nancy Pelosi. In it, she perpetuates the lie that Tea Party protesters spat on members of Congress, pretends that "one or two" Democratic Senators have issues with Obama's jobs bill, and says that she supports the message of the occupiers, which she at one point says is "fairness" requiring that "everyone pay their fair share," i.e., raising taxes on high earners or "the rich" or whatever you want to call the target class.She calls this concept of fairness "the most endearing" American value. Assuming that she meant "enduring," does anyone really believe this? Can anyone make the case that the occupiers' demands for higher taxes and bigger government to provide them with benefits and entitlements the most enduring American value?

    Like

  10. "But in any event, we'd all be a lot better off if all those people focused their energies on productive activities rather than protesting, er, whatever it is they are protesting."Second this.One of my other questions was whether anyone can honestly say that you would hire the typical occupier. That you've seen or heard. There's no chance I would.

    Like

  11. I'm tempted to make a snarky comment about the lack of racial diversity amongst the OWS'ers, and wonder if it will be as big a deal on the left as the Teabaggers lack of racial diversity was, but I won't. It's beneath me. 😉

    Like

  12. I'm so glad you didn't go there but kept it on a high level, Troll. The very soul of restraint.

    Like

  13. I'm not aware of any demands the OWS protesters are making. Politicians, pundits and news organizations sure are trying to define their message though.Doesn't scuttle mean to sink one's own ship? I think it's a perfect word for what happened to the economy and it describes saving ones own butt without worrying about the effect on others which I don't necessarily believe implies intention other than self preservation and personal gain. I doubt anyone in the banking or mortgage industry intentionally planned on bringing down the world economy by their actions. It is too bad so many of the warnings were ignored and it looks particularly bad that so few walked away with so much at the expense of so many.

    Like

  14. Fairness, in regards to things like equal treatment under the law, is an enduring American value, IMO. Wealth redistribution may have positive aspects, but it's not really fair. The same goes for entitlement spending. Positive aspects, yes, but fair?

    Like

  15. Nice McWing. I wonder if you're aware that many in the AA community are torn by their commitment to Obama and joining the protests. Many on the left, including a large percentage of the protesters, are expressing negative views of the current administration.

    Like

  16. I don't think equal treatment or equality under the law have anything to do with the fairness that Nancy is holding up. Perhaps the best face to put on it would be something like Rawls' "justice as fairness." But imo it is closer to the opposite of the values on which the country was founded.

    Like

  17. lms, I get the dissatisfaction with the Administration. I do hear, when some are interviewed, that they will support Obama in the next election. While that is certainly their perogative, how does that force Obama towards the positions that they desire? I presume it would be leftwards.

    Like

  18. lms: It is too bad so many of the warnings were ignored and it looks particularly bad that so few walked away with so much at the expense of so many.Can you name some of these few, and explain how it is that what they got came at the expense of "so many"?

    Like

  19. ScottNot only did the banking industry receive the bailout but according to the Audit the Fed GAO report they also had access to upwards of $16T in low interest/no interest money. To see what they walked away with you need look no further than the lining of the pockets of people like Mozillo, other mortgage brokerage firms, bank CEO's of crashing banks and politicians, while everyone else lost value in not only their retirement funds, home value, fixed income interest rates and jobs but also have a much dimmer future than they imagined. What's the average CEO pay now compared to their own company's workers (who are also losing their jobs)? This is what is driving the protests.I've already said that not every banker, hedge fund manager or day trader is a greedy bastard, but it's difficult to deny that greed brought down the economy. Sure there were a few citizens who participated just like there are fire chiefs double dipping into retirement funds. Greed isn't necessarily a left/right issue, it's a human frailty in my opinion.

    Like

  20. McWing, pushing Obama leftward may be part of what these protests are about. Personally, I'll probably vote for him because the choices are pretty limited from where I'm sitting. It won't be the first time I've voted for the lesser of two evils. He's taking a more populist tone now but it's pretty hard to deny that he's catered to the health insurance industry, the energy industry, the financial industry and the MIC. I don't know what's in his heart, but I've seen the results, and I'm not seeing too many people better off now than they were three years ago. But you won't see me voting for a party that offers even less hope by dismantling what little protection the average citizen has left.

    Like

  21. "McWing, pushing Obama leftward may be part of what these protests are about. Personally, I'll probably vote for him because the choices are pretty limited from where I'm sitting. It won't be the first time I've voted for the lesser of two evils."I understand what you're writing, but why would Obama actually move left, knowing this? Wouldn't it be better to primary him? If so, why has no one done it?

    Like

  22. Wouldn't it be better to primary him? If so, why has no one done it?For the same reason Chris Christie isn't running. No one thinks they can beat him or the money he will raise. Also, many democrats think a primary season will hand the reins over to the GOP. I actually would have taken that chance but I'm more of a purist than a Dem, lol. His rhetoric is moving left and I think people actually believe he will be better in the second term (pssssst, I don't).

    Like

  23. lms:Not only did the banking industry receive the bailout…The bank bailout came at the expense of (future) taxpayers, but has largely been re-paid by most banks, with interest, so it has not really been a great expense at all. BTW, there was also a huge bailout of general motors, but no one seems to be protesting the "greed" of union workers who benefitted at the expense of the taxpayer in precisely the same way as bank workers. Also, what makes you think bank employees, even highly paid ones including CEOs, have been exempt from decreasing values of homes, investment, and retirement accounts, and job insecurity? The need to find a villain who screwed everyone else over always baffles me.Who is Mozillo? it's difficult to deny that greed brought down the economy.It's equally difficult to deny that it built up the economy.

    Like

  24. Angelo Mozilo (sorry one l) from Countrywide. I notice you haven't mentioned the $16T. I realize that TARP has been repaid but like the auto industry it's been a drop in the bucket. I wonder how much Lewis (BofA) both walked away with and made in the last decade? The economic crash was a perfect storm of conditions of which most people were too busy making money to realize the giant sucking sound just around the corner.There's plenty of blame and even more reasons but I think you'll find most Americans will blame the financial industry and those who were supposed to be supervising them, politicians and regulators. Why do you think there is so much anger still out here?

    Like

  25. It's equally difficult to deny that it built up the economy.A false economy built on inflated home values and over leveraging.

    Like

  26. McWingI think I read somewhere that Tavis Smiley and Cornell West were discussing the AA issue and the protests and one of them suggested that AA's need to choose, either the guy or the issue.

    Like

  27. ScottYou still haven't said anything about the $16T and if I remember we're due another GAO report this month re conflict of interest in loaning out that money. Just sayin'.

    Like

  28. lms: I notice you haven't mentioned the $16T.It's not particularly relevant to your original claim about the few benefiting at the expense of the many. In the first place, the loans were collateralized and were repaid, so I don't quite see how at who's "expense" they came.Second, the $16T figure is highly deceptive. The loans were, by definition, overnight loans. (The emergency loan program was aimed at providing very short term liquidity to the market.) Therefore, if a single bank accessed the program for, say, $1 billion for a week, that would have been reported as $7 billion in loans. To put that into perspective, if the Solyndra loan guarantee had been accounted for on a similar basis, it could be said that the government had provided $460 billion in loan guarantees to Solyndra, since the $535 million guarantee was in place for 894 days. Does that make any sense?Why do you think there is so much anger still out here?Because the economy is not doing well. And many people naturally want to blame their woes on an identifiable villain, which of course politicians are happy to provide them with.

    Like

  29. I'm off to bed, lms.

    Like

  30. I realize they are overnight or short term loans but even today it is occurring and while the banks get to tap the Fed, the rest of us suffer with almost zero percent interest earned on our money. Do you see the preferential treatment here? And on paying back the TARP money, there is an awful lot of concern that the money was paid back to soon, that the stress tests were a sham, and that the true balance sheets of the big banks will not actually reflect all the confidence these endeavors tried to instill. We still haven't seen the actual cost of the mortgage fiasco on the banks. And while we continue to prop them up out of fear of financial collapse, citizens are collapsing. Again, there is no love lost between citizens and politicians or between citizens and the financial industry.

    Like

  31. Good night scott, I'm sure we'll do this again.

    Like

Be kind, show respect, and all will be right with the world.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: