Occupy Wall Street

[Scrapheap]

That's because no one cares. I'm not saying it is right, but it's true. If Snooki goes and joins them, THEN it will be national news 

Who?

Michael Moore has already joined them.

 I would like to see Michael Moore pepper sprayed and beat up by the police though unlike the rest of the demonstrators

 

Michael More is a twunt.

[Phallacy]

Want to make a difference? Get some guns and shoot the bastards. Holding up a few signs won't make a lot of people give a fuck.

If that happened, then the corporates and the politicians who got shot would become "victims" and the protesters would be considered scum of the earth, thanks to the mass media. The masses are as dumb as beasts, and the mass media has them wrapped around their little finger.

[Frolic_Fun]

I'll be working FOR the mass media. Have fun being controlled.

[The_Chosen_One]

Get some cunts to fly a plane into the Empire State. That'll make headlines.

[Scrapheap]

I'll be working FOR the mass media. Have fun being controlled.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

Unfortunately the steam has run out of this movement.   

[Jack]

Unfortunately the steam has run out of this movement.   

Unemployment rates are now back to equivalents of before the recession.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

... but Wall Street still stole our money.   

[Jack]

Maybe people are back to work and simply no longer have time to protest their outrage in not being among the one percent. People at the time were frightened because so many people were losing their jobs and subsequently their homes. This fear was expressed as anger, angry about the government bailing out corporations, banks, and the government itself, but the government, large corporations and banks are exactly what employ and sustain the vast majority of the ninety nine percent, so it's very important for those institutions to survive and remain sustainable during a recession. In retrospect, the five percent of the population who were suddenly unemployed during the recession but now employed again might be grateful for that, especially if they work for a large corporate label, financial institution, or position paid by the city, state, or federal government. Duke said it well on the first page of this thread when he said, the people in control only care about themselves. Though the people being controlled only care about themselves too and that's why capitalism works in general, and why this movement lost its momentum.

[Pyraxis]

the government, large corporations and banks are exactly what employ and sustain the vast majority of the ninety nine percent, so it's very important for those institutions to survive and remain sustainable during a recession.

That's the party line we get fed, sure, but it's bullshit. Bailing out corporations rewards them for unsustainable, unethical behavior and gives no incentive for change. That's not in average people's interests. Sure there are periods of instability when a large organization fails, but in the long run it's worth it. Large organizations are stretching the rules as far as they can already, getting tax breaks, employing people for 39 instead of 40 hours so that they don't have to provide health insurance, increasing executive pay so that the discrepancy between CEO and average-worker pay is larger than its ever been. Why the everloving fuck, other than sheer fear, would it be in my interests to bail out such bloated, inefficient, and cheating organizations?

[Jack]

the government, large corporations and banks are exactly what employ and sustain the vast majority of the ninety nine percent, so it's very important for those institutions to survive and remain sustainable during a recession.

That's the party line we get fed, sure, but it's bullshit. Bailing out corporations rewards them for unsustainable, unethical behavior and gives no incentive for change. That's not in average people's interests. Sure there are periods of instability when a large organization fails, but in the long run it's worth it. Large organizations are stretching the rules as far as they can already, getting tax breaks, employing people for 39 instead of 40 hours so that they don't have to provide health insurance, increasing executive pay so that the discrepancy between CEO and average-worker pay is larger than its ever been. Why the everloving fuck, other than sheer fear, would it be in my interests to bail out such bloated, inefficient, and cheating organizations?

When speaking in terms of recession, it's difficult to say what is an organization failing due to poor practices and what's failing due to a an economic situation. Banks are a good example of that. Financial institutions were failing because people were losing their income and couldn't pay their loans. Have gotten the impression many people think banks are lurking around the corner just waiting for people to miss a payment so they can foreclose on their property, but the fact is banks don't want people's property; they want people's money, they want for people to make their payments and pay off their loans and subsequent interest. That's how banks survive and profit, they certainly don't profit by being stuck with tons of houses which are worth less than the loaned amount, due to a failing economy in a time when no one wants to buy them. Corporations are a tougher example because they produce products and services and it's easier to think of them as more expendable, but corporations are people, employed by people, owned by shareholders who are people. It's not bullshit that the government, large corporations and banks are exactly what employs and sustains the vast majority of the ninety nine percent. Though will agree to say it's important for those entities to survive a recession is in fact a matter of opinion.

[Jack]

employing people for 39 instead of 40 hours so that they don't have to provide health insurance

That's a difficult point to address, as small businesses are doing that too since it's now required and small business generally can't afford to offer insurance. Any business which previously didn't offer insurance before the insurance requirement is now working people part time. Thinking 32 hours is the magic number.

[Pyraxis]

When speaking in terms of recession, it's difficult to say what is an organization failing due to poor practices and what's failing due to a an economic situation. Banks are a good example of that. Financial institutions were failing because people were losing their income and couldn't pay their loans. Have gotten the impression many people think banks are lurking around the corner just waiting for people to miss a payment so they can foreclose on their property, but the fact is banks don't want people's property; they want people's money, they want for people to make their payments and pay off their loans and subsequent interest. That's how banks survive and profit, they certainly don't profit by being stuck with tons of houses which are worth less than the loaned amount, due to a failing economy in a time when no one wants to buy them. Corporations are a tougher example because they produce products and services and it's easier to think of them as more expendable, but corporations are people, employed by people, owned by shareholders who are people. It's not bullshit that the government, large corporations and banks are exactly what employs and sustains the vast majority of the ninety nine percent. Though will agree to say it's important for those entities to survive a recession is in fact a matter of opinion.

Banks may not "want" to foreclose on people's property, but the major banks, by virtue of their size, treat foreclosure as an impersonal process without enough, if any, human oversight. You've probably already heard the horror stories about Bank of America or Wells Fargo initiating foreclosure processes in error, because it was done by an automated system, and then going for months or years refusing to correct the mistake while people's lives are left in limbo.

The thing about treating corporations as people - and I know that legally they are - is that large systems acquire emergent traits of their own. It may not be the fault of any individual member, and it may not be a question of any individual member's ethics. A group of basically decent human beings can still form mobs, commit atrocities, if the individual members are inexperienced with group dynamics. The same is true of a bureaucracy, whether government or corporation. It may be incompetence or automation instead of malevolence, but that's irrelevant to the damage caused by its mechanics. When people rail against corporations, it's not just about deluded imaginings of evil intent. It's about the pragmatic results of the system in action. Treating a corporation as a person may be convenient legal shorthand for the purposes of calculating taxes, but the rules of ethics don't generalize as easily.

[Jack]

Don't want to get too much into the realm of ethics, because while a capitalist system isn't a perfect one, ethical problems of controlling powers and the reality of the one percent exist in societies without a capitalistic economy too. Found this website regarding the figures for the bailouts. https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list  Of course, there's a number sites out there with these figures, and maybe even more reputable sites, but really like this one because it also includes the amount which has been paid back. The figures in black in the far right column are profits, with remaining balances in negative reds. It also notes in the text heading that some negatives for mortgage services and state housing bailouts aren't in red because they were aid not intended to be paid back; though not sure what made mortgage services special in that regard. Was very surprised to see the number of actual corporate bailouts was very small, and the vast majority of supported institutions are financial institutions. While not certain why those particular corporations were considered to be important enough for government assistance, will agree with you that the economy would probably had been fine if those corporations had been allowed to fail, considering they were so few. Would like to spend more time with the figures in that link; it's interesting. Not certain exactly how much aid was provided and not expected to be returned, or the total of profits, or the totals for business noted in pink which have not repaid the government. Don't have excel on my home computer specifically for graphs like that one, where I would spend much time analyzing data of no real use to me.

[Pyraxis]

Maybe it shows my ignorance, but I had no idea bailout money had to be paid back. I thought the government was buying corporations their way out of trouble, not giving them a loan with an interest rate.

Also, holy cow that's a lot of money.