Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Occupy Wall Street


ILOTSMYBRAIN
 Share

Recommended Posts

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
  • Replies 963
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

i enjoyed that episode thoroughly, but i don't see how it counters the above.

 

 

It doesn't counter his argument to abolish the fed, but it does explain just how complex this issue of economic policy is, humanizes the fed and describes what the fed did differently in 2008 than it's ever done before. There are two tribes of economists. There's one that agrees with AOD, and the other one, which is the majority of economists that couldn't see America without a central bank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't counter his argument to abolish the fed, but it does explain just how complex this issue of economic policy is, humanizes the fed and describes what the fed did differently in 2008 than it's ever done before. There are two tribes of economists. There's one that agrees with AOD, and the other one, which is the majority of economists that couldn't see America without a central bank.

 

you know in the early 19th century, most people in american couldnt see black slaves living free. the objections ranged from them being savages to 'who will pick the cotton?' little did we know that a century and a half later cotton is being picked by gps guided cotton gins. whodathunkit?

i think the moral objection to the FED is first and foremost, the practical objections to it run a close second. the other main objection, that it causes infinitely more harm than good is also quite valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't counter his argument to abolish the fed, but it does explain just how complex this issue of economic policy is, humanizes the fed and describes what the fed did differently in 2008 than it's ever done before. There are two tribes of economists. There's one that agrees with AOD, and the other one, which is the majority of economists that couldn't see America without a central bank.

 

So, the economics is so complicated only people whom are employed by the FED have the ability and understanding to fix these issue's?

 

You are talking about Austrian Economics and Keynesianism, the latter lead us to where we are, which is apparently what you believe in. The former is what I, and obviously AOD support. It is also what Ron Paul supports and to me is a much better economic view point. I am no expert, don't claim to be, and I would love to see the United States and any other country that relies on a "central bank" to be free of that burden.

 

A lot of people are listening to RP at least in his economic policy, hopefully this is a changing of the guard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yea i do agree with 11, i think all debt should be wiped out. why should we be paying back criminal institutions? if the world's debt needs to be paid somehow, it should be paid by the elitists who manipulate the system, inflate countries currencies, etc. there should be trials and proceedings against these corporations who took advantage and have them pay the debt. don't bail them out. don't give them more money and pretend that they aren't doing anything wrong. don't give them more power and control over our economies. don't put the debt all on the people...

 

do you guys plan on paying that debt too? you know we're going to have to pay it back, your children, your grand-children, probably your future generations...

 

soup you're hilarious, get with it man. we're moving forward and you're still stuck in the denial stage.

 

I mean, listen we have seen now... around the world... protests and revolutions at their beginning stages. The people of the world are undergoing some sort of global revolution, whether or not the ideologies of the individuals involved are all correct or on point... the fact is that people are upset and are starting to take action against their governments and the powers that be. It's sort of an awakening stage for humanity that can definitely lead to some substantial outcomes for the whole world. I support it, even though I don't agree with all of these demands and think a lot of the people involved have ridiculous idealogies... I support it because we need to start this discussion and push back against everything that has been occurring. We have to start somewhere. Let's leave people that are cynical and still in denial alone, and you'll see that the conversations and debates will start really educating the people who know things are wrong and there will be a new renaissance in america and hopefully around the world.

 

i guess i'd say, i'm only worried about people being further manipulated. with the way a lot of these protesters are thinking, i'm guessing it's very possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anonymous Makes More Waves with Wall Street Threat

Than Occupy Wall Street Has

By L. Vincent Poupard | Yahoo! Contributor Network - Wed, Oct

5, 2011

COMMENTARY | The hacker group that refers to itself as

Anonymous made a splash this past Monday that has sent

waves across many communities. Their threat to shut down Wall

Street on Monday is being taken very serious by the FBI. It

should be noted the thought about Anonymous shutting down

Wall Street is more impactful than the thousands of people that

are protesting in the Occupy Wall Street rallies across the

country.

As a former political/business consultant, I find that the lack of

coverage by the media on the Occupy Wall Street movement

has been interesting. It was not until that last few days that

most people even heard about the protests that have been

going on for three weeks. Anonymous made a statement last

night about taking down Wall Street, and there is already

international attention coming.

The thought that a handful (theoretically) of hackers can have

more of an impact on Wall Street than thousands of protestors

is amazing and tells us something about not only our

technology, but our culture. The thought that the voices of

thousands cannot be paid attention to but the tweet of a

handful of people can drive the FBI to an immediate

investigation.

In theory, if Anonymous was able to take down Wall Street even

for the matter of a few minutes, the impact could be felt around

the world. Confidence in the system could fall faster than the

market ever has. The thought that a group of hackers could

cause international turmoil is fascinating. The fact that

thousands of voices asking for change were ignored for two

and a half weeks and then made the butt of jokes is depressing.

In a country where we pride ourselves on fighting back against

"The Man," it is interesting that those that are making their

voices loud enough are still not being heard. The fact that we

live in a technology- driven nation that could be threatened by

the altering of a few lines of programming code is also

interesting. The fact that Wall Street can deal with people

screaming outside the windows and blocking traffic but is afraid

of hackers that hide from the law is almost humorous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the economics is so complicated only people whom are employed by the FED have the ability and understanding to fix these issue's?

 

You are talking about Austrian Economics and Keynesianism, the latter lead us to where we are, which is apparently what you believe in. The former is what I, and obviously AOD support. It is also what Ron Paul supports and to me is a much better economic view point. I am no expert, don't claim to be, and I would love to see the United States and any other country that relies on a "central bank" to be free of that burden.

 

A lot of people are listening to RP at least in his economic policy, hopefully this is a changing of the guard.

 

Im really not arguing with you. Really I'm not. I've heard all those opinions before and I respect it and value it, but I'm just declining to agree on the grounds that it's too radical. Im really not trying to change your mind. What i said was that economic policies are very complex and hard to understand even by the leading economists of the world today. I liked the analogy NPR used: the Fed was inputing movements into the steering wheel of a tanker. They're still researching what effect the policies of 40 years ago truly had, if any. I don't think the US Federal Reserve knows more than anyone, but I think modern economists know more than we did during the great depression. I could even say the fact that we didn't have a second great depression is evidence enough that economic policies are on the up and up.

 

How anyone has rightly come to the conclusion that we're definitely, without a doubt better off without a central banking system confuses me. There just isn't enough data out there to support such a radical conclusion. Every country in the world has a central bank except for Andorra and Monaco. That's a lot of different kinds of economies still using the same fundamental principle, so maybe the problem lies elsewhere? All I'm saying is I'm slow to point fingers.

 

Again, you might be right, but at this time i don't see how you can, without a doubt, know that are.

 

 

 

 

Sorry Shai and whoever else for the brief derailment. On with the show!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have permission to spread the word about this, so here goes-

 

OccupyOakland will begin at Frank Ogawa Plaza (AKA City Hall) Monday 10/10/11 at 5 pm. There's a march prior to the assembly, I'm not sure where it begins but it definitely winds up at City Hall.

 

IF YOU DECIDE TO COME OUT, KEEP THESE TWO THINGS IN MIND-

 

1) This is a NON-VIOLENT protest, and

 

2) Frank Ogawa Plaza is city owned property, which means that the cops can (and very likely will ) come in and arrest everyone for unlawful assembly and other various things. So be prepared for that.

 

I will probably be there but not camping, so if you see me say hi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CS gas aint shit if you know how to wrap up.

 

And you truly are a huge faggot.

 

I bet you wouldn't call me a faggot to my face..But Im glad that I annoy you enough for you to even make

such a comment. now go beat drum chant some hara krisha , socialist fuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if the British came to DC tomorrow and said "You're on our land, we're taking this shit back" would you simply acquiesce to that? I mean, if you wanted to look at things a certain way the UK DOES have a right to be in control, and being patriotic to the US is technically being patriotic to an occupying government (albeit a recognized/established one)...and we became tax evaders once we pulled that Boston Tea Party stunt, so...I don't know.

 

Dissent is one of the few liberties Americans have left and it's always been patriotic. Too bad there's not more of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good news- Not only did OccupySF regroup (I was at the Fed briefly around 4 pm today), they got most of the stuff the city confiscated back and might donate anything they don't need to OccupyOakland if they can coordinate a time and place for pickup.

 

Bad news- However, there's a heavy UC presence downtown towards the Union Square area. I figured that out based on seeing where all the cops were headed as soon as I got off BART.

 

Funny/strange news- While observing that I almost got hit on my bike by an unmarked SUV whipping a u-turn out of a parking space on Market Street. After I flipped him off (seemed reasonable) he hit the lights and sirens (presumably to explain why he was pulling such a retarded move) to which I responded with "THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!" and kept riding.

 

I'm going to be in SF for most of the weekend so I'll probably be updating this if anything interesting happens (and I don't get arrested).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I should have been clearer.

Acts or institutions deemed useful to the state can be simultaneously antagonistic to it's people. I don't see any intrinsic connection between an institution useful to the state and an institution useful for the states constituency. In this sense, that most states have some kind of central bank or another is not proof that there is a broad based economic benefit of having this institution. Simply that there is an economic benefit for the state itself.

 

Are you trying to say a Central bank is bad because a government can just print money when it wants to? That's an inaccurate statement. The Federal reserve refuses government demands all the time. It's a private entity and isn't government controlled, and thank god because politicians ask the fed for money pretty frequently.

 

That's not to say that a central bank has never given into the demands of politicians before, the podcast i posted last page even talks about one instance of that happening in Brazil, which caused massive inflation killing the value of the brazilian Real, and skyrocketing the prices of groceries for Brazilians. Then four new economists were placed in charge of their central bank. Now Brazil has the seventh strongest economy in the world, and the Real has been gaining in strength ever since.

 

 

 

Sorry i didn't think i was going to be getting into this any more. Shai, whats the deal with the people in this protest? Are they anarchists? Are they progressives? What's their beef with the Fed, yo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its not a simple question of jealousy, its a question of a voice in our democracy. the wealthy can lobby for their laws on tax, environmental protection, worker pay, etc while the vast majority of us have virtually no voice. our system is greatly flawed and an imbalanced distribution of wealth allows them a greater voice, and thus great control in our democracy.

 

individually its not such a big deal, but as a whole (read fortune 500 companies) they reflect the asymmetrical growth that has greatly affected the livelihoods of those living within our economy.

the graph above your post shows the ratio of ceo pay to average worker pay 475:1. 30 years ago it was only about 40:1.

 

here's a clearer picture.

snap20060621.jpg

 

while cost of living has increased drastically over the last several decades the wages of the worker have not grown at a comparable rate (comparable to cost of living increase, obv not ceo income growth rate).

 

money is power, and the 80-85% of us that hold only 7% of the wealth VS the 15-20% that hold over 90% of the wealth don't stand a chance of having our voice heard and having our interests watched by the people we elect...

 

there are many complaints, thats mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...