Occupy Wall St.

[GoIrish41]

I'm not so sure he is being hypocritical when it's obvious that someone in his family had to work hard to get where they are to pay for his education. You want him to say no to his parents money?

Like I said in a previous post of mine, you work hard so that the next generation of your family may be better off.

Heck no, I wouldn't expect him to say no to his parents money. I also wouldn't expect him to be so self righteous since he isn't the one who worked his butt off to pay for his education. Someone who didn't have to buckle down should not preach to others how they need to buckle down. That is hypocritical. He can't see past his own good fortune to see the reality of the world he lives in -- his situation is without a doubt the exception to the rule.

 

[connor_in]

FWIW...heard this on the radio and saw it going around the interwebs:
Zombie » The 99%: Official list of Occupy Wall Street’s supporters, sponsors and sympathizers

 

[GoIrish41]

The parts I bolded are exactly what is wrong with America right now:
1. People not listening to other people and writing them off.
2. People ignoring facts and focusing on anecdotal evidence and/or just deciding they're going to believe what they want and not listen to anything that might be to the contrary.

Oh OK, I'm what is wrong with America. Thing is that my story is much closer to your mother's than it is to yours. I grew up poor and I worked my way though college while serving in the Navy for eight years and was the first in my family to attend college. It is far more difficult to do that today than when I did it. Tuition has skyrocketed along with everything else in this country. And while costs continue to rise, jobs (especially good paying jobs) have become fewer and fewer. You can deny that all you want, but the fact of the matter is that is the world we live in right now. The last thing anyone needs right now is to listen to some dude who had his education paid for by mommy and daddy tell them how hard work and saccrifice are the ingredients to success.

I have four children and I intend to pay for each of them to go to college. I used to think it would be a good idea for them to join the military to get the GI bill, but after W. invented his little war in Iraq resulting in thousands of young men and women being killed over a lie, I am dead set against any of my kids joining the military. (But that is another issue). Now, I don't make what you make, but I do better than most and feel it is my obligation to my children to ensure they get an education to give them a head start in life. I also recognize that most people aren't in the same position that I am in and would never have the nerve to preach to them about sucking it up and overcoming the situations they are in.

Perhaps the problem with this country is that self righteous folks somehow convince themselves that their situations are the norm, that their saccrifice was somehow incredible compared to the average American. Heck, some of them even have to drive around in used cars where they have long commutes to jobs making three or four times what most families in this country live on every year. In their arrogance they develop strong opinions about what everyone else needs to do to succeed even though they never had to pay their dues themselves. To me, that is far more what is wrong with this country than someone who won't listen to a guy with no credibility on the topic he is spouting on about.

You say that my examples of friends who have had it rough over the past few years are anecdotal evidence that things are difficult for people. Fair enough, but they are no more anecdotal than your stories about your mother and the guy two cubes down are anecdotal evidence that everything is as it always was. I'm happy for you that you didn't have my path to get ahead in life, but get off your high horse and understand that people are suffering all over this country. You say my reaction to you is evidence of the problem with this country -- poor fella, I just won't listen to you. At the same time you aren't willing to listen to the Occupy Wall Steet folks enough to understand where they are coming from and that they might not have enjoyed your good fortune in life. You are a study in irony my friend.

 

[Rhode Irish]

FWIW...heard this on the radio and saw it going around the interwebs:
Zombie » The 99%: Official list of Occupy Wall Street’s supporters, sponsors and sympathizers

Um....seriously? You are entertaining the idea that the kids participating in these protests are sponsored and financed by Ayatollah Khamenei, Louis Farrakhan, David Duke, Hugo Chavez, Barack Obama and groups such as the Communist Party of China and White Evolution? They could not have come up with a more stereotypical list of hysterical right-wing bogeymen if they were doing satire.

 

[11cracker11]

Wow, someone call the wahhhhmbulance for all you cry babies. This site should be renamed LiberalEnvy.com(why I hate the USA, capitalism and anyone who is more successful than I am). I haven't heard anybody on this thread mention work ethic inequality, its all about the income disparity. In the words of Judge Smails, "The world needs ditch diggers too". Get over it, life isn't always fair. Although some of you with your misleading charts must think its all fairies and unicorns...

 

[NankerPhelge]

Wow, someone call the wahhhhmbulance for all you cry babies. This site should be renamed LiberalEnvy.com(why I hate the USA, capitalism and anyone who is more successful than I am). I haven't heard anybody on this thread mention work ethic inequality, its all about the income disparity. In the words of Judge Smails, "The world needs ditch diggers too". Get over it, life isn't always fair. Although some of you with your misleading charts must think its all fairies and unicorns...

'Bout time.

 

[Rhode Irish]

Wow, someone call the wahhhhmbulance for all you cry babies. This site should be renamed LiberalEnvy.com(why I hate the USA, capitalism and anyone who is more successful than I am). I haven't heard anybody on this thread mention work ethic inequality, its all about the income disparity. In the words of Judge Smails, "The world needs ditch diggers too". Get over it, life isn't always fair. Although some of you with your misleading charts must think its all fairies and unicorns...

The fact that we need ditch diggers does not help your argument at all. The point of those you are arguing with is that we all can't be hedge fund managers. Ditch diggers, cops, teachers, nurses, small business owners, lawyers, engineers, doctors, etc., are entitled to a piece of the pie that we help create, too. Instead, all of the world's wealth is concentrated with an increasingly small and increasingly powerful group (of which I am certain you are not a part, BTW).

It doesn't matter how hard you work or how strong your work ethic is, you will never work your way up from a normal beginning to the type of wealth that draws the ire of the OWS protesters. If you actually read the posts in this thread that you are criticizing here, you would realize that nobody hates this country or the concept of a free market economy. (Put simply: I don't have a problem with everyone that drive a Mercedes. I have a problem billionaires that operate multinational, parasitic conglomerates.)

Your post reveals a remarkable lack of knowledge or understanding about the thing you are attacking. I don't want to get into personal stuff in a public forum, but feel free to PM me and I'll share some information with you about what I do for living, where I live, how I was raised, what my parents do for a living, what my other political views are, etc. I think you would be surprised at how many people that you disagree with don't fit into your apparent stereotype of who they are.

 

[phork]

Wow, someone call the wahhhhmbulance for all you cry babies. This site should be renamed LiberalEnvy.com(why I hate the USA, capitalism and anyone who is more successful than I am). I haven't heard anybody on this thread mention work ethic inequality, its all about the income disparity. In the words of Judge Smails, "The world needs ditch diggers too". Get over it, life isn't always fair. Although some of you with your misleading charts must think its all fairies and unicorns...

Unfortunately all the ditch digging was farmed out to China years ago. If you can't see the growing divide between the haves and have nots then you are definitely missing something. It wasn't that long ago when you got yourself a job, worked at the same place for 30 years. Paid off your house, paid for your kids to go to school and retired, with a pension from said job! (I know shocking). Kids growing up today get to look forward to lower paying jobs, no benefits and no pensions. The average person cannot afford to attend a school like ND without sinking $200K in debt once they get out. Imagine starting out with a $200K anchor on your neck, before even buying a house.

Now saying that, some of these posts on We Are The 99% are a little off the deep end. No one forced you to attend a high tuition school. No one forced you to spend $200K on your education. And no one certainly guaranteed you would have a job, especially with a Liberal Arts degree.

 

[connor_in]

Um....seriously? You are entertaining the idea that the kids participating in these protests are sponsored and financed by Ayatollah Khamenei, Louis Farrakhan, David Duke, Hugo Chavez, Barack Obama and groups such as the Communist Party of China and White Evolution? They could not have come up with a more stereotypical list of hysterical right-wing bogeymen if they were doing satire.

Dude...
1) I did not make the list...merely passed on that it is out there and heard it on radio and internet
2) The article provides links where each person/group listed has expressed their support/backing for OWS...that it includes what it includes do not blame me
3) The article also leaves out a number of people including Jay-Z, Michael Moore, large chucks of Hollywood, large chunks of the MSM
4) In actuallity, in a very general sense, some of what is being protested in OWS mirrors some of what was being protested by the Tea Party. The Tea Party was against the bail outs in most cases as well. Where the groups diverge is on pretty much every other matter of how to go about it, the otherviews, possible solutions, and treatment by the MSM

 

[Mr. Larson]

Wow, someone call the wahhhhmbulance for all you cry babies. This site should be renamed LiberalEnvy.com(why I hate the USA, capitalism and anyone who is more successful than I am). I haven't heard anybody on this thread mention work ethic inequality, its all about the income disparity. In the words of Judge Smails, "The world needs ditch diggers too". Get over it, life isn't always fair. Although some of you with your misleading charts must think its all fairies and unicorns...

Funny you brought up Smails as he was a charicature of old-money-elitist-pricks.

Willing to bet that dumb-f*ck Spaulding had a trust fund as well.

 

[DonnieNarco]

So much ignorance for one thread!

 

[11cracker11]

Do you to make $14 the hard way?

Do you to make $14 the hard way?

Funny you brought up Smails as he was a charicature of old-money-elitist-pricks.

Willing to bet that dumb-f*ck Spaulding had a trust fund as well.

And who is the richest guy in the whole gosh darn movie, Al Czervik. Rodney Dangerfield's absolutely hilarious portrayal of a boorish, common man who has done so well in life he might have a $60 million funeral. So get off your high horse, Caddyshack is a great example and Al Czervik wouldn't be at the OWS protest, but that douchebag Terry selling the weed to Lacey Underalls would. Also, I think this place is restricted Wang, so don't tell him you're Jewish.

 

[BeauBenken]

Heck no, I wouldn't expect him to say no to his parents money. I also wouldn't expect him to be so self righteous since he isn't the one who worked his butt off to pay for his education. Someone who didn't have to buckle down should not preach to others how they need to buckle down. That is hypocritical. He can't see past his own good fortune to see the reality of the world he lives in -- his situation is without a doubt the exception to the rule.

Someone in his family had to buckle down so he didn't though. Someone in his family worked hard so I think he has every right to say that someone in another family should too. It's a "Look where I am. It's because of my family working hard. You could be here too if someone in your family took the initiative." I'm looking at it from a family perspective where you're looking at it as more of an individual perspective.

I get how you see it as hypocritical, but it doesn't mean he's wrong. People have to work hard for success.

Note: I honestly didn't read his post that you first responded too though so I'm not sure if he really was or was not so "self righteous".

 

[Mr. Larson]

And who is the richest guy in the whole gosh darn movie, Al Czervik. Rodney Dangerfield's absolutely hilarious portrayal of a boorish, common man who has done so well in life he might have a $60 million funeral. So get off your high horse, Caddyshack is a great example and Al Czervik wouldn't be at the OWS protest, but that douchebag Terry selling the weed to Lacey Underalls would. Also, I think this place is restricted Wang, so don't tell him you're Jewish.

Good chance the drug dealers were sent to Occupy Wall Street by NYPD.

At Occupy Wall Street central, a rift is growing between east and west sides of the plaza - NY Daily News

Also, Caddyshack can't really be a great example: self made vs. old money. Looks more like a wash to me.

 

[IrishLax]

Someone in his family had to buckle down so he didn't though. Someone in his family worked hard so I think he has every right to say that someone in another family should too. It's a "Look where I am. It's because of my family working hard. You could be here too if someone in your family took the initiative." I'm looking at it from a family perspective where you're looking at it as more of an individual perspective.

I get how you see it as hypocritical, but it doesn't mean he's wrong. People have to work hard for success.

Note: I honestly didn't read his post that you first responded too though so I'm not sure if he really was or was not so "self righteous".

I wasn't. Classic case of using a straw man. Seems to be all the rage these days... doesn't matter if you're Glenn Beck, Rachel Maddow, Al Sharpton, Rush Limbaugh, etc. It's much easier to just rant and rave about a person and use villifying adjectives than to actually address what they said. Good for him, it's effective. Now it's being taken as "fact" that I'm a self-righteous trust fund baby who doesn't work hard. *eye roll*

I'm sorry but if you actually break down how this has gone, GoIrish didn't read any of my subsequent posts and has stated that he refuses to, is attacking something I never said and then later clarified for him so there is no mistaking my position, and then obfuscates his argument so badly it's impossible to even make heads or tails of what he's going for... except that he's mad, and he's mad at me because... why? That I'm not a single parent who also had to balance taking care of a child with school? Because I got a degree in something that would give me a tangible skill in field that won't go away (engineering)? Because I didn't have student loans?

I mean really the only thing I'm fortunate about is that I don't have loans. Everything else I earned myself going through the same system as everyone else in America. I went to public school, then went to college, then got a job. Tell me exactly what I didn't "buckle down" to do? And what do you think I do for my salary? Just sit around? My timesheet for last week had 60+ hours and 400+ miles driven on it. I had a workday on a weekend that ran from a concrete pour at 2AM to 7PM. The only reason I make the money that I do is that I work extreme amounts of OT... my base salary isn't even in the top 25%. Since when did a 17 hour workday Saturdays in the field become the easy, fortunate, not-buckling-down life?

I dunno. It's just disappointing to me that one guy with a closed-minded agenda derailed a thread that actually had open and civil discussion in it for a couple pages. You see good back and forth, people listening to each other, etc.

There are just so many things in his lonnnnnnnng rants where he pins statements/ideas/argmuents on people who never said anything close to what he is railing against. Reading his other posts (specifically #116) it's clear that he does not believe in a difference between skilled labor and unskilled labor, and either does not accept or cannot comprehend why it makes perfect sense that some people who aren't working "harder" (completely subjective term) make more money than a janitor. He also thinks income disparity automatically = bad for the economy, which shows he either didn't read earlier posts or isn't interested in changing his opinion to match actually historical data that shows the economy doing well is largely independent of wealth disparity between the top and bottom. So yeah... pretty pointless to keep going. At least the thread had a good 7 page run before it went to hell. Oh well. It's the internet.

 

[irishog77]

I wasn't. Classic case of using a straw man. Seems to be all the rage these days... doesn't matter if you're Glenn Beck, Rachel Maddow, Al Sharpton, Rush Limbaugh, etc. It's much easier to just rant and rave about a person and use villifying adjectives than to actually address what they said. Good for him, it's effective. Now it's being taken as "fact" that I'm a self-righteous trust fund baby who doesn't work hard. *eye roll*

I'm sorry but if you actually break down how this has gone, GoIrish didn't read any of my subsequent posts and has stated that he refuses to, is attacking something I never said and then later clarified for him so there is no mistaking my position, and then obfuscates his argument so badly it's impossible to even make heads or tails of what he's going for... except that he's mad, and he's mad at me because... why? That I'm not a single parent who also had to balance taking care of a child with school? Because I got a degree in something that would give me a tangible skill in field that won't go away (engineering)? Because I didn't have student loans?

I mean really the only thing I'm fortunate about is that I don't have loans. Everything else I earned myself going through the same system as everyone else in America. I went to public school, then went to college, then got a job. Tell me exactly what I didn't "buckle down" to do? And what do you think I do for my salary? Just sit around? My timesheet for last week had 60+ hours and 400+ miles driven on it. I had a workday on a weekend that ran from a concrete pour at 2AM to 7PM. The only reason I make the money that I do is that I work extreme amounts of OT... my base salary isn't even in the top 25%. Since when did a 17 hour workday Saturdays in the field become the easy, fortunate, not-buckling-down life?

I dunno. It's just disappointing to me that one guy with a closed-minded agenda derailed a thread that actually had open and civil discussion in it for a couple pages. You see good back and forth, people listening to each other, etc.

There are just so many things in his lonnnnnnnng rants where he pins statements/ideas/argmuents on people who never said anything close to what he is railing against. Reading his other posts (specifically #116) it's clear that he does not believe in a difference between skilled labor and unskilled labor, and either does not accept or cannot comprehend why it makes perfect sense that some people who aren't working "harder" (completely subjective term) make more money than a janitor. He also thinks income disparity automatically = bad for the economy, which shows he either didn't read earlier posts or isn't interested in changing his opinion to match actually historical data that shows the economy doing well is largely independent of wealth disparity between the top and bottom. So yeah... pretty pointless to keep going. At least the thread had a good 7 page run before it went to hell. Oh well. It's the internet.

I have merely been a casual observer on this thread until now. I'll be honest, I'm pretty much entrenched with the "anti-OWS" posters around here (although I will also admit that I am enraged by the guhvment's bailout of the banks and auto industry).

But now, Lax, I think you've crossed the line. This thread, in my opinion, has just now gotten highly entertaining and useful...as any Caddyshack discussion is not only useful, but humorous and thought provoking as well! There can NEVER be enough Caddyshack in one's life. It's like Cowbell.

 

[phork]

Good chance the drug dealers were sent to Occupy Wall Street by NYPD.

At Occupy Wall Street central, a rift is growing between east and west sides of the plaza - NY Daily News

Also, Caddyshack can't really be a great example: self made vs. old money. Looks more like a wash to me.

Before anyone says "The police would never do that". I suggest you check out multiple youtube videos showing police plants in G7 and G20 protests.

I have merely been a casual observer on this thread until now. I'll be honest, I'm pretty much entrenched with the "anti-OWS" posters around here (although I will also admit that I am enraged by the guhvment's bailout of the banks and auto industry).

But now, Lax, I think you've crossed the line. This thread, in my opinion, has just now gotten highly entertaining and useful...as any Caddyshack discussion is not only useful, but humorous and thought provoking as well! There can NEVER be enough Caddyshack in one's life. It's like Cowbell.

Just to clarify, BigAuto paid back their loans & Ford didn't take any. The banks, however, took that money and shut out people it was supposed to help. And to this point haven't paid much, if any, back.

 

[Al H.]

It's not really a cohesive movement, but the common thread is the lack of representation for the people, and our elective representatives legislating for corporations and private interests instead of American interests. I completely agree and think this country is corrupt on both sides of the aisle. It's the left/right paradigm, made to give you the illusion of choice because when it comes down to it, foreign policy, debt, and monetary system, both parties are in agreement and have acted as such over the last two administrations. They disagree over incendiary issues which divide the voters along party lines and then keep the same policies going administration after administration.

That's mostly the sense I have of it. I think they're a great antidote for the Tea Party. In '08 we nearly crashed the economy and the majority of the fault lies with Wall St. and the Bankers who were deregulated under the Bush presidency. Many real Americans and people around the world have suffered consequences that are dire as a result of the greed. Yet, there have been no indictments of a substantive kind to come out of it. 3 years later! People are getting fed up and they want action taken to regulate banking systems and have some retribution for the insane acts of greed that caused the crash. Since so many lives are effected you hear a jumble of reasons why people are out there to Occupy Wall Street, but it boils down to mismanagement of the country, its assets and its peoples lives. There needs to be an accounting! That's what they want and in the process a re-structuring of the system that was so sorely abused with the unnecessary war in Iraq and the fixing of the game in the market place.

 

[pkt77242]

Before anyone says "The police would never do that". I suggest you check out multiple youtube videos showing police plants in G7 and G20 protests.



Just to clarify, BigAuto paid back their loans & Ford didn't take any. The banks, however, took that money and shut out people it was supposed to help. And to this point haven't paid much, if any, back.

Well that is misleading at best. Most of the large banks that took TARP (and some were forced to take it) have repaid it. In reality smaller banks have had more trouble repaying the investment.

http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/briefing-room/reports/tarp-transactions/DocumentsTARPTransactions/7-18-11%20Transactions%20Report%20as%20of%207-14-11_INVESTMENT.pdf

Also the TARP bank program has show a profit, meaning the government made money on it (well possibly did, depends on the interest in the treasury bonds they had to sell to come up with the money)

$1.7 Billion Additional TARP Funds Returned to Taxpayers, Positive Return on TARP Bank Programs Reaches $10 Billion

 

[BobD]

I heard on the news today, AIG has repaid another billion dollars.

 

[pkt77242]

Now things like this are why people hate Wall Street

Corzine-run firm admits using clients' money - Business - US business - msnbc.com

 

[RallySonsOfND]

Something I hope you all know is that not all banks took TARP. There were some smart banks that refused to do sub-prime, interest only, etc bull$h!t mortgages. Not all bankers are "bad guys" trying to screw the little guy. Banks don't want people to lose their homes, banks don't want them. I just love how the government sends in people who tell banks how to do their business. Different branches of the FDIC come in and say completely opposite things about what they should do as well. Government is the problem, not the solution.

 

[phgreek]

And why is that? Is it the politicians' fault? The corporations' fault? No, it's "we the people's" fault!

Politicians need money to get elected. And they need a lot of it, because the average American voter is slightly more politically savvy than a box of rocks. Instead of taking their vote seriously and researching the candidates on the ballot, they simply watch political ads and make up their mind based on what they've heard the most. If you tell someone something enough times, they will begin to believe it to be fact. So politicians need a large war chest, so that they can buy enough time slots to influence the voters. So the biggest issue is a lazy, stupid electorate. Couple that with the fact that "Politician" is now a career, instead of a temporary calling, and you have our dysfunctional government. To counter that, these slack-jawed malcontents showing everyone just how stupid the average American voter is. Brilliant!!

Ding, Ding, Ding...give that man a beer.

Specific incidences of winners and losers is not the right game to be angry about...its the unapologetic stupidity of the general population as relates to our system. In this world you get EXACTLY what you deserve. We deserve the politicians we get...until we fix that "causers" will be chasing the next set of winners, crying foul...until it all collapses.

 

[BobD]

Something I hope you all know is that not all banks took TARP. There were some smart banks that refused to do sub-prime, interest only, etc bull$h!t mortgages. Not all bankers are "bad guys" trying to screw the little guy. Banks don't want people to lose their homes, banks don't want them. I just love how the government sends in people who tell banks how to do their business. Different branches of the FDIC come in and say completely opposite things about what they should do as well. Government is the problem, not the solution.

I think one of our biggest problems today is these mega banks. These huge companies don't know you or care about you or your needs. When I hear the word "Banker", it makes me think back to the days when people at your bank, knew your name and had you and your families best interest at heart. They knew the best way to become a successful bank was to have financially successful depositors.....they wouldn't let you get into a mortgage you couldn't afford and they worked hard at making your money work for you.

I don't usually support the government regulating a business, but I think I could support regulating how large a bank could be.

 

[irishog77]

Before anyone says "The police would never do that". I suggest you check out multiple youtube videos showing police plants in G7 and G20 protests.



Just to clarify, BigAuto paid back their loans & Ford didn't take any. The banks, however, took that money and shut out people it was supposed to help. And to this point haven't paid much, if any, back.

Just to clarify, I think the government giving money to the auto industry was still bullsh!t. Mostly, GM has paid the government back in the form of their stock...which isn't worth as much as it used to be. The government still has to wait for the share price to get higher before it can make its money back. Would you rather have $100 bucks in your pocket, or an IOU for a $100...that you think/are hopeful/praying/have your fingers crossed will one day be $100 from a company that has been run p!ss poor?

Regardless of any of that though, I still am upset that the government bailed out banks and the auto industry (and disagree with them paying farmers to grow soybeans or corn...or paying them NOT to grow soybeans or corn as well as many other endeavors they seem to find themselves in). And still regardless of any of that, I also understand Economics and Political Philosophy. But, after all, phork, it's just to clarify.

 

[pkt77242]

Just to clarify, I think the government giving money to the auto industry was still bullsh!t. Mostly, GM has paid the government back in the form of their stock...which isn't worth as much as it used to be. The government still has to wait for the share price to get higher before it can make its money back. Would you rather have $100 bucks in your pocket, or an IOU for a $100...that you think/are hopeful/praying/have your fingers crossed will one day be $100 from a company that has been run p!ss poor?

Regardless of any of that though, I still am upset that the government bailed out banks and the auto industry (and disagree with them paying farmers to grow soybeans or corn...or paying them NOT to grow soybeans or corn as well as many other endeavors they seem to find themselves in). And still regardless of any of that, I also understand Economics and Political Philosophy. But, after all, phork, it's just to clarify.

I don't like the idea of bailing out banks and car companies but the reality of the situation left them with few other palatable options. It was the best option of a bunch of ****** ones.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I don't like the idea of bailing out banks and car companies but the reality of the situation left them with few other palatable options. It was the best option of a bunch of ****** ones.

You're probably right. I don't know that we had much recourse.

But, to then turn around and slash unemployment insurance (a huge economic boost - that money goes right back into the economy) and teacher pensions (that are promised to them) to balance the budget while the bank CEOs are given their bonus millions (because they had been promised to them) and are not forced to take any cuts in pay...?

We can regulate the system to prevent the kind of centralized power that created "too big to fail" in the first place. Therefore, AIG would have been allowed to fail because the market dictated it. The centralized power (monopolies) made it such that the entire economy would have collapsed without a bailout.

That's where pure capitalism needs to be held back here and there.

 

[adsnorri]

National preservation is the main reason you bail out banks, automobile industry, subsidize farmers.
The govt does not want to become dependent upon other nations to provide food, money and vehicles to its people. Any govt dependent upon another for major resources is in trouble (oil). Lol I'm enlightened to see hybrids and alternative fuels being used because we are becoming less dependent in that aspect.

On another show we can talk about how other countries subsidize not only their farmers like we do but these other industries (automobile, money market, etc). This amongst other factors, in turn tilts the playing field in their favor just a lil bit in order to prosper in a multinational competition.

 

[tadman95]

You're probably right. I don't know that we had much recourse.

But, to then turn around and slash unemployment insurance (a huge economic boost - that money goes right back into the economy) and teacher pensions (that are promised to them) to balance the budget while the bank CEOs are given their bonus millions (because they had been promised to them) and are not forced to take any cuts in pay...?

We can regulate the system to prevent the kind of centralized power that created "too big to fail" in the first place. Therefore, AIG would have been allowed to fail because the market dictated it. The centralized power (monopolies) made it such that the entire economy would have collapsed without a bailout.

That's where pure capitalism needs to be held back here and there.

Good Post! With AIG essential selling insurance guaranteeing the loan packages without any oversight, the amount of risk in the financial system was off the chart.

The banks got protected, for the most part, but homeowners have lost trillions in equity because home values were way overvalued due to a false demand created by the mortgage industry. Homeowners bore the brunt of a runaway financial system. Free markets (if there really is such a thing) work well when everyone does the right thing. Of course we know that won't happen so you have have to have oversight.

 

[BeauBenken]

A friend of mine just uploaded this to Facebook. Possibly the coolest thing I've seen on there in a while.