E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Christopher Berkey for msnbc.com
Samantha Blanchard works in the Occupy Nashville protest camp on Monday.
NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Compared to “Occupy” protests on the coasts, the rebel encampment tucked between Tennessee’s War Memorial Plaza and the Statehouse – a few dozen tents adorned with American flags and even a libertarian one – has a decidedly Southern feel.
While protesters in New York, California and elsewhere may often pass their downtime playing drums, meditating or knitting, their Tennessee counterparts could be playing football, hosting a square dance, flying kites, skateboarding or welcoming opponents with cookies.
And if conversations on the coasts tend toward left-wing political theory, such as anarchy, Marxism and socialism, protesters here work on bridging a different divide: uniting the “blue” and “red” factions in their local audience.
"We do have a lot of conservative voices in this camp and the thing that is really appealing to all of us is we believe in the common ties that bind us,” said Samantha Blanchard, a 30-year-old office administrator who was sheltering in a tent as rain poured down on a frosty, grey Sunday afternoon.
“This is a place where if people were really going to come together and form that 'purple' (combination of blue and red political affiliations) that everybody lusts for, it’s going to probably happen in this camp.”
While occupiers in several other cities have been forced to retreat, Nashville’s protest -- a core group of about 90 and a looser support network of 400 part-timers -- has survived two attempted evictions on Oct. 28-29. Fifty-five people were arrested on misdemeanor charges of criminal trespassing that were eventually dismissed, said William P. York II, one of the attorneys who represented them.
Among them was 64-year-old Bill Howell, regional organizer for the Tennesseans for Fair Taxation.
'I've been treated like a rock star'
Howell, who said he had never been arrested before, had planned for the moment, leading other protesters in a reading of the Declaration of Independence before he was taken into custody.
Christopher Berkey for MSNBC
Bill Howell, 64, a regional organizer of Tennesseans for Fair Taxation, at the Occupy Nashville protest camp on Monday, Nov. 28. The "23" tag signifies that he was the 23rd protestor arrested in Nashville.
Reaction to the “Occupy Nashville” protest has been varied, he said, with “some people going by honking and hollering, ‘Get a job!’ and you know all the usual stuff. In my community, in some circles, I’ve been treated like a rock star,” he said chuckling, as a train horn blared in the background.
A preliminary injunction has allowed the camp to remain for now, but a status conference will be held with a federal judge on Feb. 3. However, protesters say “side attacks” have continued, with city inspectors warning about food preparation safety standards and the state attempting to deny them port-a-potties, which was revealed in emails obtained under Tennessee's open records law, said another one of the Occupy Nashville attorneys, William W. Hunt III.
But efforts to squelch the movement only served to fire up “couch occupiers,” said Jason Steen, 32, an office administrator.
“We had a good number of people here, but it suddenly turned into a First Amendment issue when Governor (Bill) Haslam started evicting everyone for curfew rights,” he said, estimating that the camp size has more than doubled to about 60 tents in the wake of the arrests.
Though Steen has a home, he spends most of his time at the camp and sometimes sleeps there.
“I just feel that strong about it because if we don’t have people down here for when all the legislators are in session and looking out their windows … what kind of impact are we going to have?”
One of those drawn in over First Amendment concerns was Jon Louis, who describes himself as a right-winger with some liberal social tendencies. He said he grew "irritated" as he watched state troopers arrest protesters.
Christopher Berkey for msnbc.com
Samantha Blanchard, Matthew Hamill and Jon Louis spend time in the Occupy Nashville protest camp on Monday.
Louis, who said some on the right have cast him as a “plant” in the movement while friends have taken to calling him a "hippie," noted that he does not agree with all of the views put forward at the camp and that it took him a while learning about it before he joined.
"There’s some like minds here and there’s also, you know, a melting pot of different opinions," he said, noting he was “trying to get to the more right conservative South … mindsets and try to explain it to them, that we aren’t just a bunch of lefties (because) I’m most certainly not a lefty."
Three goals
Despite the range of political beliefs represented in the camp – and Nashville’s reputation as a liberal bastion in the state -- the protesters have winnowed their “goals” down to three, which are printed on a blue index card and handed out to visitors. They are: ending corporate personhood, getting money out of politics and supporting Occupy Wall Street.
“It’s a lot more conservative here so we definitely have to tailor our approach and our message,” said Elli Whiteway, a 21-year-old college student. “… We kind of pride ourselves on being a common denominator movement … that’s been our approach, just trying to be, not exactly centrist, but applicable to both sides of the political spectrum.”
That approach hasn’t won over all conservatives.
The Vanderbilt College Republicans organized a protest at the camp on Nov. 3 – which the occupiers said they welcomed with cookies and open dialogue.
"We wanted to make known that not all the youths are with the movement, as is perceived by many. Their demands will do nothing but add to the burgeoning debt already on our shoulders," Stephen Siao, the group's president, wrote to msnbc.com in an email. "We think the Occupy Nashville movement is misguided -- they should be protesting at the White House, not at the State Capitol or Wall Street. It's this administration's policies that are prolonging this dreadful economy."
He also said that while Occupy Nashville "might have one or two members who claim to be conservative," the "core of conservatism is personal responsibility, and that is completely the opposite of their demands. We don't believe prosperity should be punished."
At a General Assembly meeting on Sunday, the protesters shivered, stamped their feet and huddled together to keep warm in 45-degree temperatures while outlining upcoming protests, addressing financial donations and discussing a planned two-day meeting of all the state’s occupations – about a dozen total from towns and cities – for this weekend.
On the sidelines, Michael Custer, a 47-year-old father of four and self-described rabble-rouser, said that Nashville brings a "unique perspective" to the global movement but also has some additional challenges.
Christopher Berkey for MSNBC
Michael Custer shakes his hands in approval during the General Assembly at the Occupy Nashville protest camp on Monday, Nov. 28.
"We’re the incubation place for Martin Luther King’s nonviolent struggles. This is his test kitchen. … So we have some unique perspective on the nonviolent aspect of these types of struggles,” he said. “The South is generally a lot more laidback and a lot more difficult to motivate. But as you can see … we are out here in the cold and rain so obviously there are quite a few of us that are motivated.”
Custer said he will always be "vocal," but others are not as willing to express their opinions.
“People are terrified of government, they are terrified to the point that they won’t speak out. They’ll tell you what they think behind closed doors,” he said. “I think a lot of that’s held over from the old Klan days where when you spoke out, they came and beat you up, or tried to kill you.”
'Express yourself'
With other camps across the country shut down by authorities in recent weeks or facing the threat of eviction, “it really gives us an opportunity to step in and just become one of the most action-oriented occupations,” said Matt Hamill, 26, a self-described political conservative who works for Radio Free Nashville and hosts a weekly radio show on the movement.
Those actions include even lighter fare, such as a square dancing event with a live band held recently in the plaza.
“(It) really kind of hit home … (that) this is what occupying is about,” Hamill said of the livestream of the event, which garnered positive feedback from supporters around the country. “… You should be allowed to express yourself however you want to and not have to worry about anybody coming in and trying to silence your voice or shut you down.”
Blanchard also noted that people in the chat were saying they needed to see such a lighthearted event, that it was “so cathartic to see a camp having fun.”
“I feel like in a lot of ways … Nashville is starting to become maybe a bit of a tender spot or a hearthstone for other occupiers,” she added. “We’re like the little heartbeat, the little southern hospitality of the movement.”
Defying calls to leave, Occupy LA protesters build a 'stronghold'
To demand or not to demand? That is the 'Occupy' question
Homeowner taps 'Occupy' protest to avoid foreclosure
Faces of the Tea Party (revisited): Views on the election and the 'Occupy' movement
Dissension among the ranks at Occupy Wall Street
Leave a Comment:
Get a clue Hannity lover, the truth will never find you unless you do.
If Occupy people want to camp out to promote a cause, the host city should provide them an area other than a public park. Others have a right to use and enjoy public parks as they were intended.
As they were intended? And just how is that? In the bible somewhere?
got a lot of rage john?????????????????????
how did the Bible come up???????????????
strange response indeed.
Have a great week.
Why pay $200-$400 a night for a hotel room in NY?
My company can get you a nice campsite in Central park for just $20 a night!
You don't need a permit, you can urinate where you please and do you really need to bathe?
We provide you with a cardboard sign that says: "Do not disturb, Protesting" that you can hang right outside your tent.
This sign exempts you from all laws and regulations.
So please respond if you are interested. Space is limited.
Ryan in Texas, as native-born Texan -- meaning one actually born in the state, in a hospital in Fort Worth -- I sure as hell hope you aren't REALLY from Texas. It's idiotic statements such as yours that make so many people think ALL Texans are ignorant rednecks. Of course, some are -- and if you really are from Texas, whether born in the state or an immigrant from elsewhere (including another U.S. state or territory), then you're one of those ignorant rednecks. How about moving, oh -- to the Moon. the far side, preferably.
No need to send any postcards, though . . .
"I don't wanna work, I just want to bang on the drum all day."
... and play Farmville on the Facebook all night.
Yes, while the rich eat caviar, get a tee time, and buy another Porsche just for fun.
As do most people.
"I don't expect anyone to give me anything."
except perhaps a job, so that you can work...and produce...and earn....and do well.
I suspect, you didnt create your own company...and therefore create your own "position" or line of work, correct? No doubt, you worked hard to EARN the job they gave you...but without that job existing, you wouldnt be WORKING IT, now would you?
Imagine all the jobs in the line of work you do - no longer exist.
Are you still working hard and doing it all on your own...?
Now imagine all the jobs even relatively RELATED to what you do disappear...and you're 45 years old, and even if you wanted to go back to school and get re-trained in a new career path...wouldnt matter, no one would hire you once you got re-educated.
Would you still believe you werent succeeding simply because you weren't working hard enough?
I understand, it's hard for people who are working, doing well and kicking ass to believe it's not ALL of their own doing...that there are realities far beyond them that have ALLOWED YOU to be as successful as you are, and a good portion of those realities have little to do with you and how hard you work or dont work.
It's hard for people who are successful in one way or another to come to appreciate their success has always been reliant on other peoples success..in some way or another.
I have a job, I work hard, I produce and I do well (by my own standards, not by any wall street tycoons standards).
But I understand my ABILITY to work hard and be successful at what I do depends on a whole lot more than how much effort I put into this. When the economy tanked in 2008, we saw a lot of our customers budgets shrink...we saw some of our customers fold, and we saw new customers who had always had long standing relationships with other printers knocking on our door wondering if perhaps they could save some more money by doing business with us...
perhaps it's too complicted a process for most to understand...but your success, isnt all your own doing...and the quicker most of you came to grasp this, the better off our entire nation would be.
I love, love, love your post, Jessica. Unfortunately, I think that you are correct in saying that it may be too complicated a process for most to understand. I wish I had your ability to explain it. Thanks for posting.
Great post Jessica,
It seems like the people that still have a decent job just don't get it that their precious job might be the next one lost to Free Trade for the Communists. Everyone can be replaced!!!!!
I own my onw business and am doing well, but I sure as hell see what's going on to all my countrymen who are hurting badly and it makes me sick... Sick how they shipped evry American job abroad for their corporate profit margins..
excellent
looks like the guy they show, Custer should de-bug his hair, free baths for America- FBA man it's what we stand for- it's the govt's responsibility to clothe us, feed us, yet they aren't doing enough to pay our debts, student loans and we salute the hippies of the sixties- they inspire us to look a mess- end Nam man I say- hey they got better weed down under the bridge-its time to move down there man- I heard they got ho's downtown or they're having a ho-down-we'll rise like rebels in the civil war man- hey that's still on isn't it
That's right, people with money look different than people without money. Stunning powers of observation.
If you cared enough to REALLY read and watch REAL news, you would know that the Occupy Movement includes a broad cross cut of our societey, INCLUDING people who are actually working, but believe inough in in what the Occupy Movement Stands for enough to spend their off time with the movement. If you REALLY have a job, you had better be speneding time insuring you will have a job tomorrow. If you were my employee TruthFindsUNow, I wopuld have a short-minded person like you on my short list of people we can live without.
@TruthFindsUNow - you are an idiot. End of story. I don't care enough about your tripe to post more. What does bother me is that you seem to think you are much better than everyone else, which isn't true in anyone's head but your own. Very nice that you took the time to correct someone's spelling and told them to go back to school. How 5th grade. Grow up.
Well, see, TruthFindsUNow, it seems you're lucky enough to have an employer who doesn't throw his fellow Americans under the bus to maximize profits for shareholders by opting for near-slave labor wages in those piece of crap countries you mentioned; y'know, places where the government doesn't give a rat's a$$ about things like the environment, child labor or safe working conditions. Now see, where I work, I know a bunch of folks like you who said, "Five years and I retire," and then we go through a reorg, their job is sent to India or China or wherever, they're let go and then all those benefits they were looking forward to are gone. And that is a huge part of what OWS is all about.
OWS doesn't hate rich people. You don't see them protesting actos, athletes or musicians, do you? No. They are protesting those rich people who get rich by throwing the rest of us under the bus. I'm fully employed and I don't want any handouts. I don't want to be rich. I live simply so that others may simply live. But what I do want is our governement to fight to get us, the American workers, a globally level playing field so we don't have to compete with sweatshops half way around the world.
And if that is something for which OWS fights, and it is, then then they have my full support.
You know what I think is really funny? When someone tries to be the grammar police and correct other poster's comments, yet they make a mistake in the very first line of their "teachin' session."
Learn the difference between THEN and THAN.....THEN you can spend more time talking about real issues THAN correcting grammar
The others are right, TruthFindsUNow, you have no clue. I support my local OWS movement by participating. I hold a good job and so does my wife, placing us in the top 15% nationally for income. We are not looking for handouts. We are looking to reform politics so that it supports citizens, not businesses. More of us are employed than not.
A few things to keep in mind before you open your trap:
1. Business is here to support the populace, not the other way around.
2. You should be buying locally. Buying American will follow naturally.
3. Telling people to 'get a job' and correcting their spelling is avoiding the actual conversation. Quit getting sidetracked with irrelevant points and focus on the topic at hand please.
He's not sidetracked, he's a troll. If you posted a response to his tripe, then you followed the troll yourself. Just ignore him. He's largely useless as he posts nothing but his own self-rightous nonsense and contributes nothing at all to the discourse.
truthfindsusnow,
Not everyone who loses their job is lazy or stupid. I have a Master's degree from MIT in Computer Science with 20 years of experience in my field. I was let go and replaced with 5 people in India because it was cheaper!
"truthfindsunow" is a re-reg (11/2011) TROLL. Don't feed it.
Very impressive Sam, a Masters degree in computer science and you were let go in favor of five people overseas that would work cheaper. Ok, it seems that with those academic credentials you should have a job by now, unless you bopped in waving your degree and demanded 50,000K to start. I saw the same thing, sort of, when I was looking for a job back in the 1970's, no fancy job, just blue collar as a machinist. I asked at one place why the company wasn't hiring people who wanted to learn. The personnel rep said simply; "Because they want $20 an hour to start and they can't do a damn thing." My point is that the more valuable you make yourself to an employer the more secure your employment is. Could it be that the five people "Over there" could and would do a better job? After all, with your 20 years of experience you should have established your worth to your employer.
I call BS on this. I'm looking for CS grads, and cannot find them so I am sponsoring visas. There are no shortage of CS jobs, my biggest problem is hiring someone before someone else snatches them up.
Physician, heal thyself.
lose THERE jobs?
I agree. IT jobs are EVERYWHERE.
Republican, jobs are everywhere. Well, maybe not in all places but they are out there. I used to work for a old Jew when I was in high school, he owned a plumbing shop. Interesting old man, he came to America as a kid with his family, from Russia right before the Communist take-over. He talked about seeing the Bolshevik shells hitting in Odessa while he was on a ship waiting to leave port. He had a lot of "Pearls of wisdom" that are still with me today and one I remember clearly; "John, in America there's money laying on the ground and all you have to do is be willing to bend over and pick it up." People scoff at that, say it sounds good but it isn't true. Ok, but he wound up in my home town, Chicago, and using a horse and wagon picked up junk in the alleys. When I knew him he was doing well and nobody ever gave him a thing, he worked hard. People scoff at working hard. Ok, that's their priviledge but it's a shame when it's used as an excuse. Where I was working once, in Chicago, there were a lot of immigrants in the shop mostly German, Polish and Hungarian. A lot of them told me: "You American kids are spoiled, we come over here working like we did in the old country and we can't help but get ahead, we take it all away from you." I was young, the wife and I had just had our first baby and I was moaning about not making enough money. Lol, "You aren't making more money because you aren't worth more, you're lucky to be making what you are. If you want more, make yourself more valuable, get a part-time job learning something." So, I hunted around and found a part-time job where I would learn mills and lathes, for $2 an hour, in the 1980's. What's funny is that when I told some friends, native born, what I was doing they said I was crazy, "A American shouldn't have to do that." What's even funnier is that three years later they were still making low wages, and, complaining about not making enough. So, that old Jew was right, the money is there but a person has to be willing to bend over, sacrifice a bit, to get it.
Funny when truth sees the name Sam Adams he only thinks of beer. <shaking my head?>
Don't know where you live but the IT jobs in VA have dried up. DC maybe OK, but nowhere else.
I have friends that were IT mgr's and have taken demotions just to stay employed. Many more I know have been let go.
Age discrimination might have something to do with it, if you're over 50. I took an IT job for what I was making in 1974 and when it ended I was not able to find another one. But my spouse still works and looking in another area has not been an option.
LiA, you're right. The over 50 IT workers cost more than the younger recruits, so guess who's first to go.
How can these folks be the have-nots when they have enough cookies to share, electricity, and laptops? Seems like they have an awful lot to be thankful for.
"uniting the "blue" and "red" factions"
Amen!!!
The international corporations are undermining our Democracy by flooding the representatives of THIS country with huge amounts of "contributions" (bribes).
When it comes to finance, energy, and pharmaceutical companies in particular, the amount of power they have amassed is staggering.
They can now cheat, pollute and prevent competition from lowering prices.
Until we stop having corporations pay for American elections, the differences the "two" parties make is no where near enough to stop the US from destroying itself.
Other countries like NEW Zealand don't have this problem because their government pays the total cost of the elections, and "contributions" and "gifts" are forbidden.
They also pay their politicians very well and have severe punishments for those who are stupid enough not to know they have a good deal.
Lets stop this ridiculous left-right divide crap and fix this deadly problem.
Good observation. Just who is paying for their electricity? Oh that would be the working middle class that pays their taxes. Just another example of the free handout they want at the expense of someone else.
OWS is middle class.
The poor have benefits live medicaid and SSI.
The middle class are worried that the financial decay of the US brought on by crony capitalism is going to destroy their futures.
Wonder why?
They're "tailgating" ..... most of them probably don't even know what they are doing there, but hey ..... "a party ... ... I'm there!!!"
I'll bring the beer and you bring the BBQ. We're in Nashville, somebody sing to us. Preferably one of those party songs like being good at drinking beer or something. We wouldn't want to listen to something deep.
Slow news day, yawn
I bet those ows patriots parents are gop ass-clown card carrying pizza-sauce is a vegetable members of the insane,loony-bin rino-primary over the cliff clown car hypocrites-I GOT MINE,THANK-YOU FOR HELPING ME GET TO THE 1% NOW I WILL CUT THE ROPE FOR YOU FIX-NOISE low-info ditto heads................Obama/Biden 2012
flea-bag-yes
Tea-bag-not, I'd like to see a study done on the OWS parents. I suspect that many of them are working or retired and wonder what the hell is wrong with the kids, lol. Incidentally, I use Ragu "Garden variety" sauce and for all purposes, it IS a vegetable, just like ketchup is a vegetable.
..............................OWS.........................................................Thank you for speaking out!!.........................
holy cow......I thought it was a talking snake?...........wasn't that the golden cow in the movie "the ten commandments?"...............................Obama/Biden 2012
They are only able to "afford" to do this because mommy and daddy bought them their tent, their laptop, their clothes, and probably still give them an allowance. If there truly was a danger of going hungry, they'd find some kind of work, no matter what it is.
no,
mommy and daddy left them all their Wal Mart shares.
now they sit on the money, fight to make sure no union gets in, and become the wealthiest bunch of parasites in the USA...
what did THEY do to deserve such wealth ? tell them to get a job !!
If my son was unable to find work (he has a job, because he chose a field with relatively high employment rates - Carpentry) I would certainly support his efforts if he chose to join the Occupy Movement! It wouldn't cost more than having him at home on the sofa, and would probably be good for him in forming networking relationships! The "Occupiers" have my full support, as they are calling attention to the glaring unfairness of American society, and the gross manipulation of the job market by the corporations! This has been coming on for thirty years, and will not be stopped in the long run! The corporations need to address this now before it turns into a true Socialist movement, with state ownership of the means of production!
unfairness ??? ---- we live in a country where everyone has the opportunity to do just about anything they set as a goal. ----- however, it's not the fault of those who have been successful if your goals happen to be unrealistic, or if you do not properly prepare yourself to achieve those goals by first attaining the appropriate skill sets required.
ronpal
Is there an equal oppoutunity? Yes.
Are all people equal? No.
Basically you are saying that people who aren't good enough at math to become an engineer shouldn't be able to work at any job ever....
There hasn't been "equal opportunity" in this country for years. Those who think it exists have blinders on and cannot see what has happened all around them. If you're going to live in a cocoon then you're going to believe this kind of nonsense. Money creates equality in this country and if you do not have that resource then you will never have "equal opportunity". Not that it should be that way, but that is what you get when people just sit back a figure that someone else will handle solving life's little inequities. They build up and soon there is not really any equity at all.
Speaking as a successful executive, I know there are inequalities and challenges. But money does not resolve all o them- in fact, money resolves relatively few.
Money doesn't remove your race. And while money can technically change your gender, doing so opens up a whole other box of challenges as well. Money can send you to school, but it can't make you learn. Money and connections may get you a job, but only competence lets you keep it.
Money helps, sure. But it does not rule. At the end of the day, this country was founded WITHOUT any money. We had to go to the French to finance our own war. Yes- we founded this country on credit.
We need to reach within ourselves and be the creative individuals that have always worked around challenges. That's how we will get past this brutal economy (and a few policies to make things a bit more business friendly around here, like incentives to keep jobs here, wouldn't suck).
And before anyone flames me, I am successful- just not successful enough to be in the 1%. Yet.
And I paid for my own college.
And I pay for my children's tuitions- no grants here.
And I pay all the taxes I am supposed to pay.
And I stepped on no one to get where I am today, but my family and I made joint sacrifices of time and togetherness. It was not easy for them or me- but no taxpayer can say that they funded my success.
And yes, I am a woman.
So I don't want to here about money making things viable. At best, money only opens a possibility faster than you could open it yourself. But it delivers nothing. That is still on you.
Right on Tambo, and, bottom line is that you can look back and say to yourself; "I did it, me myself and I."
Tambo and mellowfell - See Jessica's well - written post above. There are plenty of people who have done all the "right" things just as you have that are without jobs now. Of course you worked hard but there is also some amount of luck. Hardworking people are laid off every day.
I am also a female executive supporting a family of four on my own but I do not believe that it is entirely do to my own hard work and skill. If I had made just one decision differently in the past 20 years or had just been unlucky, I could have joined ranks of the numerous unemployed or underemployed that exist out there. And you are crazy if you don't think money doesn't resolve most problems. Food, shelter, education, among other many things, all get better with more money.
Reasonable - you know exactly of what you speak. It's rare that someone in your position actually acknowledges their success is predicated on a number of factors dependent on fate. Most successful people will say they did it all on their own.
So, it takes a lot more than just hard work. It takes luck, too. It takes knowing the "right" people. It takes being in the right place at the right time - a strictly chance event. It takes socioeconomic background. If you worked your way through college, like I did, it could count against you because you come from a lower income family that could't afford to pay your way, especially when competing against the offspring of wealthy families where their way through college was taken care in full. So, for one to be successful in an institutional setting it takes a lot more than hard work over many years, because the vagaries of the political landscape can be unforgiving. That's why people who climb the corporate ladder may be far from the best available. It's a subjective process, meaning it's an imperfect process.
Then, there are those who are wealthy, extremely wealthy, who inherited their wealth. They didn't earn their wealth at all, they're just babysitting it. The Koch brothers come to mind. The Walmart heirs, the Amway heirs, the DuPont heirs, the list goes on and on. So, this pedestrian notion that rich people deserve to be rich because they earned it. Sometimes this is true. Sometimes it's partially true - in the case of inherited wealth that is built on, that's all good, but heirs to inherited wealth still got a head start.
I don't mean to trivialize in any way the accomplishments of Reasonable22, I laud her for her accomplishments. She successfully navigated the treacherous seas of the institutional culture within which she works. It's just so refreshing to hear of someone who credits more than her own "hard work" and guile and long hours and the like for her success.
tambo, I agree with you, it isn't about money only. But reasonable22 is spot on to note that it's also luck. And I'll add that how one define's success is right up there too.
If I don't want to sacrifice time with family to become a millionaire, does that mean I can't be successful? What if I have a child that is autistic and I feel the need to be there helping him learn to be productive, because I know no one else will do that job like a parent will? What if I'm the disabled one, maybe as a result of an accident or an unexpected illness? What if my award-winning ideas fail to take flight due to a bad economy and/or a bad investment?
My point is, if you're successful, and you did it without stepping on others, you are talented AND lucky. Not everyone is, even after they put everything they have into it. We aren't all born with equal talents and tons of luck. Most people that don't achieve monetary success aren't failures, they aren't lazy, and they deserve a safety net. Those that make it should never believe they did it entirely on their own either. They did it with support, consumers, even an infrastructure to help them get there.
This is great! True to the memory of Myles Horton of the Tennessee Folk School in Monteagle TN, who provided the resources to the Civil Rights Movement in the late 1940's & early 1950's, enabling them to form the movement which subsequently swept the nation! Go Tennessee Occupy Movement!!
Then why is grundy county have no blacks that I know of in the county
These people are the product of a society that has spoiled them to death. They have been given everything by their parents and now expect those that have worked hard to share with them the fruits of their labor. They need to spend some time by theirselves and think thru the process of supporting themselves. Now I don't care if they have to work tables or pick up garbage in the middle of the night. They need to understand that - unless they work - they will starve! There is NO free lunch. Our President should also learn that.
problem is, those with the fruit are exploiting the ones without..
let me sit on the board of directors with a bunch of my buddies and set MY pay for a change
Unfortunately, there are no jobs waiting on tables or picking up garbage in the middle of the night, because people are not eating out as much as they used to, and every municipality has cut their sanitation budget due to falling tax revenues! There is a real crisis out there, bobsopinion, whether you want to believe it or not! Try getting a job at minimum wage when you have a college degree! I have, and it is not possible, because employers know that as soon as things pick up again, you will be gone, and they are not going to spend time and money training you when they can employ some high school dropout for the same money and have a long term employee, even after the economy recovers. The for-profit colleges have fed our young people a line of baloney to get their money, and then left them hanging out to dry!
If you want to sit on a board of directors and have a say in how a business is run, you can.
Go to school and earn an MBA, work hard and make the required sacrifices to succeed in business. Show you are competent and know how to manage and increase growth and profit and get hired to sit on a board.
They are not just going to hand it out for free, you have to work and earn it.....................or
Work hard and save money, invest your savings in a business instead of flat screens and dinners out. Work 20 hour days grwoing and promoting your business and then you will be the boss and have the say,
but it still requires work, they dont just hand it out for free..........
But then once you spend years of your life making something, and thousands upon thousands of your own hard earned dollars to grow a business or yourself, you probably wont like the idea of giving up half of it all just for some one who chose not to work in the interest of "spread the wealth".
Hard work and sacrifice.....you should try it.
Dan, you sure as hell aren't going to find a job sitting around in a park. I know there is a lack of jobs. I also know that these people are a mixture of those without work (see above solutions) and those that have no clue as to why they are there. Our Government has done a terrible job of trying to spend their way out of this problem. We have thrown away a TRILLION dollars in failed solutions and payoffs. I would suggest these OWS people that are for real and not Union and Obama thugs, contact their representatives and OUR PRESIDENT and demand accountability. I doubt you'll get it but you get nothing by having people sleeping in the parks with their laptops and defecating on streets and cars.
Bob, NOT sitting in parks and not defecating on cars and actively searching for jobs, going to interviews, to job fairs, networking etc has resulted in the same amount of jobs as occupying has.
That says something
Poor me.
OK, back to playing on my thousand dollar laptop. After haw many weeks and months these idiots haven't done a thing. Except cause massive overtime costs to the cities that the taxpayers will pay. Great work losers.
Good post, and how do you like your thousand dollar laptop? Jobs are available but these
protesters think they are above these jobs and the world owes them a living. They are losers.--
all of them, and no exception to the rule
Notice that bobsopinion does not attempt to address the issue at hand.
How do we prevent large international corporations from exploiting American Democracy?
Changing the way we finance our elections would help level the political playing field by making votes count more than corporate money.
Other countries have done this with great success (like Singapore and New Zealand).
Opponents of the OWS movement may think that those of us who support the movement want to destroy corporations.
That is not the case with myself or the people that I know who are for the movement.
Corporations and capitalism are very powerful systems that allow groups of people to achieve great things. It is a double edge sword though. The same power that gives society material and intellectual abundance can also be used by unscrupulous people in charge to change a symbiotic relationship with America into a toxic relationship. (See 'credit default swap' 'predatory lending' etc.)
Lets stop the left-right divide nonsense and fix Americas problems
@azrancher: Maybe, just maybe, you should get off the ranch once in a while azr. The vast majority of people without jobs today are not in that situation out of laziness, despite your smug opinions.
There are millions out of work right now who have worked hard and invested in their future, only to be dumped as their skills were sold to the cheapest labor. Those people aren't begging for a damn thing, they're out there to tell politicians and the execs that hold the reigns of power that the days of easy money from cheap solutions and cheap labor are over. This is a train wreck economy that will take years to recover from, so maybe you should ease up on the criticism - it could be headed your way next. You, or maybe one of your kids, could be in the same boat one day. How much misfortune would it take before all of your careful preparations collapsed?
I think it is disgusting that we have so many servicemen and women returning from serving their country and come home to NO JOBS and illegally foreclosed home. This is a shame and as long as SOMEONE is protesting these inequities, I am all for it. Many of the OWS group in my community are veterans, business owners, and nurses. Regular hard working, tax paying, Americans who have been left out in the cold in our new global economy.
last I saw it was about 4500 homeless women veterans.
the republicans should be ashamed, we should all be ashamed..
it's true too that women are STILL paid less than their male counterparts.
why? and many of these are trying to raise children
To CorpShill- Interesting how you Liberals blame Republicans for all of your problems. How about blaming an administration and Dem(en) Congress that has failed to have an effective plan of recovery and a Congress that voted reckless spending of OUR money. Where is Obama with a plan that doesn't just benefit his Unions? Disgusting!
interesting how you republicans blame dems for all the problems. how about blaming a republican machine that wants nothing more than to oust them dems at any cost.
it's real hard to turn a recession around, especially when half the politicians only want to filibuster and sit on their hands. remember their mantra is, the government can't do anything....
and don't even try telling me of the 15 "jobs bills".....they are not jobs bills. they are a handout to big oil to start another round of polluting..........
The Republicans have no interest in stalling an economic recovery. They do, though, have an interest in not raising taxes just to throw good money after bad.
We have spent- and borrowed- TRILLIONS to no effect. None.
Give me a trillion dollars to start my own enterprise and I ASSURE you there will be jobs available.
If you took 90% of every dollar in the 1% bracket for taxes, you would NOT have enough to cover the deficit, the debt and the spending. You simply wouldn't. All it takes is a calculator to figure that out.
We have to curtail our renegade spending. We have to make sacrifices- ALL of us, not just the rich. And if you want to eliminate corporate personhood, fine- but then you can't tax corporations like they are people, either. If you do, then tax unions the same way. Yes, I said it- unions have leaders that make as much as many corporate CEOs, and if anyone says unions don't have a say in government, then please explain the bailout of GM and Chrysler to me.
Republicans aren't blocking jobs. They are blocking debt that- as of this moment- our great-grandchildren will be struggling to deal with as well.
If the Dems have the "magic bullet", why didn't they use it when they had control of Congress and the White House before the mid-term election? Or was the stimulus the magic bullet? Or was it the distraction of Libya? No? Still looking for it? Keep blaming the Republicans then, since your leader is not showing any leadership to bring both sides together. At least Reagan could do that.
I guess ????
that magic bullet would have been, when Bush took office deficits were under control. So, instead of making further corrections to our budgets and keeping surpluses going, they decided to "starve the beast".
you know, cut revenues so that shortfalls and deficits would start to appear. "deficits don't matter."
then, as soon as the next pres takes office they start screaming "national debt," even though they had been stacking debt like crazy.
Reagan wasn't hampered by the Tea Party and a Grover Norquist mentality. Years of spending weren't the only contributors to our situation today. Our economy was wrecked by negligence in the face of corporate corruption (Enron, Haliburton, Worldcomm, Arthur Andersen, Tyco, etc.) that put fear into investors, and unbridled trading in low quality mortgage instruments by investment banks. Those banks sold toxic derivatives under the guise of quality investments, to the tune of trillions. Pension funds and other institutions bought them, as well as many foreign firms. Those trash instruments killed markets, and continue to. No one did a thing to regulate this disaster-in-the-making, instead they told us to let the market work.
Now we have a serious recession that will take years to repair. And what do conversatives do? They decide we need to concentrate on the deficit now (and getting rid of Obama of course). WHAT ABOUT FIXING THE ECONOMY FIRST, that would certainly make it easier to tackle the deficit, if we had revenue coming in again. Don't tell me the democrats are to blame, like they did this on their own, starting in '06. The democrats have actually made the correct proposals to get things right again, but there is no cooperation from the other side. Democrats to blame? Get real.
"INEQUITIES??" How about poor government??? Unemployment is skyrocketing because there are no jobs.
There are no jobs because of government spending and over regulation. Its not an inequity, its plain poor management on behalf of our elite leadership in washington DC. They should be unemployed.
Cut tax on all business, and remove restrictions on bbusiness so owners can begin to work and expand again.
Get coal and oil production going.
Stop government spending......a strong dollar equals a strong economy.
yea screw the environment THINK ABOUT IT your philosphy is flawed
remove restrictions? what restrictions? the lack of restrictions is the problem in the first place, businesses can and do act as they please and manipulate the system to their advantage with every step.
so your answer is to de-regulate even further, so we can have our ecology destroyed along with our economy? so we can then spend even more in healthcare costs (that we already can't afford due to the behavior of THAT corporate set) when we're all poisoned? And i guess we can expect healthcare costs to decrease and insurance to become more affordable, with that kind of windfall on the horizon? Not likely.
maybe if corporations could act like reasonable human beings (after all, aren't they "people" too?) instead of selfish grasping 4-year olds that have no sense of a larger picture beyond themselves, there wouldn't be a need for more regulation. unfortunately, they can't be trusted to regulate themselves in the spirit of the "free market system" as it was intended. I keep seeing comments from people who are executives or business owners - well sure, maybe you don't pull that crap - obviously there are honest people in the world, but the big businesses with REAL power and influence, you bet your a$$ they do.
certain "tricks" to work the system a bit eventually turned into the standard practice of business. it got entirely out of hand until our "free market system" mutated into a gross corruption of itself. it needs to stop - and if Wall Street and Corporate World didn't learn that after the housing bubble burst and the economy tanked in the first place - if they didn't learn after being bailed out by us taxpayers - why do you think they deserve a THIRD chance?
"square dancing conservatives?! There should be a comma after 'square'.
And, yet, I'm willing to bet you'd be among the first to use the word "bigot" to describe someone who disagrees with you. . .
Come on msnbc this is your top story.
Three goals I fully support !
Good job guys!!!
I'm 100% behind the first two: end corporate personhood and get money out of politics. Definitely!
But, supporting OWS? As yet, I've not heard OWS actually declaring any clearly defined goal other than letting everyone know that they're mad about something and they (incorrectly, in many cases) blame "Wall Street" (whatever that means) for it. So, what does "supporting Occupy Wall Street" even mean?
Miker
Ya wanna know what that means? Here, read and learn:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/30/opinion/etzioni-sec/index.html
Blame Wall Street means (just for one example) 19 Wall Street firms (including Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America) broke anti-fraud laws (51 cases over the past 15 years) they had promised not to break. When faced with these multiple violations, they reach a settlement with the government and make another promise to be good, rather than being brought up on a contempt charge in court.
Furthermore, these settlements do not even require the companies to admit to the charges brought against them. Instead, there is a provision that lets them "neither admit nor deny" the violations, which makes them less vulnerable to investor lawsuits.
I hope I've helped define "Wall Street" for you. See, these banks BROKE THE LAW, cost people MILLIONS and NO ONE WENT TO JAIL. OWS protesters violate a cufew law and end up getting pepper sprayed and hauled off in cuffs. And really, OWS is more a less a petition to the government to hold Wall Street (finacial firms that pull all sorts of shenanigans that result in short term profits but long term financial ruin) accountable for these crimes, rather than let them go with a slap on the wrist. It's just that if they protested in DC, they wouldn't have gotten anywhere near the attention they got by setting up camp in NYC. Protests don't do a lot of good unless you make sure you get people's attention.
First, WH, it's important for me to tell you that an op-ed piece by a sociologist at GWU is not what I consider a persuasive argument for or against anything. So, let's jump to your summary:
Lots of people and institutions break the law every day - including the U.S. Government. And, very few go to jail or pay fines for their crimes. I really don't care if people want to camp out in the park in the rain. I'm not personally in favor of gassing them or arresting them. But, unless they can clearly lay out specifically how the acts of these banks and investment firms - rather than the acts and decisions of individual bank customers (i.e. borrowers) - cost people money, OWS is unlikely to garner any more support than the dwindling numbers they now have. Many of us remain unconvinced that the mortgage "crisis" wasn't caused by people who insisted on buying more house than they could afford. Bear with me a minute.
Were these corporations wrong? Probably. But, you're barking up the wrong tree. Setting up in NYC may get more press, but generally it has been the kind of press that makes OWS look like a bunch of silly hippies who missed their time by 50 years.
What OWS really needs to focus on is the lack of moral and civic responsibility evidenced by all corporate, government, and social leaders as well as regular working individuals in this country. Ironically, the personal greed demonstrated by the banks is the very same kind of greed that led individual home buyers to jump into mortgages that anyone with any sense at all would have know they couldn't repay.
OWS may have their hearts in the right place, but their message is muddled and misdirected.
I call shenanigans, Miker.
Look, everybody had a role in this disaster, however, the BIG problem here is not the commercial banks that gave out the mortgages OR the borrowers who couldn't pay. It was the INVESTMENT FIRMS that bought the mortgages through LEVERAGE and then diced them up into collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and then took out insurance on them via credit default swaps.
Essentially, the investment banks borrowed TONS and TONS of money to buy mortgages. They mixed and matched them into CDOs and sold them to regular old investors. When the mortgages started to tank, investors stopped buying up the CDOs and then the investment banks couldn't pay off all the money they borrowed to buy them in the first place. They tanked and then asked the government to cover their debts with our tax money. Watch the Crisis of Credit (about 10 minutes of your life) to get a picture perfect understanding of what I'm saying: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oosq3TPgHH0
To make matters worse, insurance companies, like AIG, offered insurance on these CDOs. The problem is, they sold those credit default swaps to ANYONE who wanted them, not just the banks or investors who owned the CDOs. Imagine if everybody in your state was allowed to take out a life insurance policy on you. The insurance company makes a ton of money up front. But then -- to the surprise of everyone (that's sarcasm, by the way)-- you die. Now they gotta pay all those policies out. Uh-oh. Time for that insurance company to file Chapter 11. And that's what happened to AIG. When all those CDOs started going belly-up, they had to pay out to everyone they gave a default swap to and under they went.
Now, if there were regulations to prevent the commercial banks from selling those mortgages to the investment firms and rules that prevented the investment firms from turning them into CDOs and measures in place to stop the willy nilly handing out of default swaps to any yahoo that wanted one, then when borrowers started to defaults, the smaller lending banks would have taken a hit, some of them probably would have gone under, but none of them would have been "too big too fail" and our economy could've weathered the storm.
THIS IS WHERE THE PROBLEM LIES!! So, yeah, borrowers shouldn't have bitten off more than they could chew. Lending banks should have been more diligent. But the INVESTMENT BANKS bit off WAY, WAY more than the borrowers ever could! They gambled with our economy, lost it all, effed us in the process and then had the audacity to come, hat in hand, to US, the taxpayers, to bail them out! And like idiots, we did!
Sure, they're paying us back. Big whoop! They effed us and our economy. They're back on their feet, but we're all still struggling. And when these homeowners, who have most likely lost their jobs, are looking for help so as not to lose their homes, the banks say, "Sorry. You borrowed. Now pay up." Nobody told the investment banks to pay up when they couldn't meet their obligations. Noooo! We shoveled billions (trillions?) to them until they could turn things around! But now we can't do this for homeowners? And now there are yahoos out there (and this isn't directed at you, Miker) who have the audacity to defend these banks at all costs and blame the folks who got victimized the most! Seriously? SERIOUSLY?!
Eff that! Tell the banks they MUST restructure their terms to help out homeowners like the homeowners, via taxes, helped out the banks, even if that means it impacts their bottom line. I'm not saying they shouldn't make a profit, but foreclosures shouldn't happen but in the rarest of instances. Lower payments over five years. Lower the interest on the loan for the next 10 years. Require a payment every other month. I dunno. Something. Anything.
We are ALL at fault, some (like investment banks) more than others. Therefore we should all work together to make sure there are as few losers in this debacle as possible.
You can put as much verbiage around it as you like. The bottom line is that greed caused this problem and you probably won't be able to legislate greed out of humans any more than you can legislate stupidity out of them.
I agree that there need to be some safeguards put into place to prevent the creation of "derivative" investments which have no tangible value. But, for that matter, I also believe commodities traders should have to take physical delivery of goods rather than just playing eBay with our food and fuel prices - and then ducking out at settlement time after running up the bids.
But, my original position remains unchanged. You yourself have presented at least two different messages that you claim to be "the OWS message" (one that the banks should pay for their crimes and two that we have to help out the individual investors who lost money on their bets). I suspect I could get one or two different messages from at least 1 out of 5 OWS occupiers. OWS simply doesn't have a well-defined goal or solution. It still looks and sounds like randomly expressed outrage about everything from investment fraud to income disparity - which is fine. But, it's not accomplishing much.
All I'm saying is that I'm 100% behind the two clearly stated goals of the Nashville movement. They should stick with pushing those goals and leave the vaguely-defined OWS movement behind.
What I stated are just two symptoms of a far bigger issue (for which I offer a possible solutions) that tendrils out into a whole slew of other issues. I'm sorry but it's a huge, complicated problem and it cannot be summed up in one or two easily digested sound bytes. If I had to, I'd sum it up as such: Wall Street banks have messed everything up and we (and our elected representatives) need to fix it so that the banks can't do these sort of things again. All their other gripes kinda tie into this general theme.
And I wasn't really trying to define OWS. I was actually refuting some of your claims, such as :
and:
...which I think I did with posts 19.2 and 19.4 (especially if you watch the video). I named actually financial institutions that comprise "Wall Street" and how they violated anti-fraud laws (yes, it was an opinion piece, but it provided links to support her "51 violations" claim) and I demonstrated that the big time borrowing by Wall Street Investment Firms was a much bigger culprit in bringing down our economy than was the small time borrowing of hopeful home-owners. People default on mortgages all the time, but it was until these huge "too big to fail" institutions started to default on their obligations that the whole thing collapsed.
This all being said, I agree with you on a ton of what you said, Like this:
But, for that matter, I also believe commodities traders should have to take physical delivery of goods rather than just playing eBay with our food and fuel prices - and then ducking out at settlement time after running up the bids.
...but I felt the need to debate your points with which I have contention. Overall, though, I see eye-to-eye with you.
Fair enough. I also agree with a ton of what you say - I think. Or at least I believe a few things which I think, based on what you've said, you would also agree with. For example, that investment firms should neither be allowed to get so big that we cannot let them fail nor allowed to borrow money other than from their own investors/clients. I'm a firm believer that you shouldn't spend or bet money that you don't have. Which is what they sort of did at some level. We should probably be more concerned about separating business and state than church and state. (Which is why I like the clearly stated goals of the Nashville movement.)
Still, going back to your life insurance analogy, you know that the default swaps were based on a presumption that the mortgages made under lax standards would fail because it was so painfully obvious that many of them would fail. That was a GOOD bet. What was wrong with it was that it was contrived. We can argue all day long about who set these mortgages up for failure but at the end of the day individual home buyers are the ones who signed the notes. Had they not borrowed more than they themselves knew or should have known they couldn't repay, none of this could have happened because there would have been no bad mortgages to roll up into derivatives.
I guess in a way I feel like the anti-Wall Street sentiments are a variation of hating the player when what we should focus on are the rules of the game. And, that can get a bit political - especially when we start looking at the policies which encouraged lenders to make sketchy home loans.
Miker-3057253
if you want to know OWS' goals, see
i think it's pretty clear
why can't i get links to post?!?!?! it's so frustrating!
Miker: it's sites.google.com, then backslash, "sites" then backslash "the99percentdeclaration"
And somehow, I agree with both Miker and WarhammerThree. As usual, the truth lies in the middle. You guys are on the right track to finding the solution, not just arguing about cause and effect of the past to present. Lets get some concrete ways of effectively legislating the change needed in America, and put our government on notice. "Pass these laws, or lose your job". Keep going guys. Infect the incoherent masses with this logical problem solving and we'll be back on the right path in no time.
I agree that a lot of individual homebuyers took out loans they couldn't afford, but not only is that a ridiculous generalization, but that was also a result of the housing market being grossly inflated (gee, and who caused that I wonder? maybe wall street and big business and overall greed? oh yeah, that), which resulted in a complete lack of homes at prices that would allow an affordable mortgage. Sure, they bought high, but what choice did they have when that was the only price available? Corporations inflated the prices, business was booming, house prices kept going up - some people bought because at the rate prices were rising, it was either buy now or really never afford a home. When your bank doesn't bother explaining the terms of your loan, and you have no reason or basis to expect that it would be anything but a straightforward loan, when your payment doubles after a year it's a bit hard to adapt.
also, consider the fact that while the first wave of foreclosures may have had to do with people taking out loans they couldn't afford to some extent, after that it was a whole other ball game. the banks were panicking, business started panicking and cutting costs in response, people started losing jobs, THEN the real foreclosure problem began. and the job losses were again due to greed - businesses couldn't try to weather the storm and suffer a loss in their profit margins (since a "loss" is not the same thing as no profit, it's simply less profit), they had to panic and cut jobs. So their greed cost them more in the long run. By cutting jobs, people had less income and spent less, demand went down, sales went down, and more jobs were cut, and on and on it went. if the "1%" weren't so intent on keeping every penny possible, we may not be in this mess. when you have record-setting profits like some companies, how can you possibly justify layoffs and closures (or record-high prices, like gasoline)?
Hey JLS, you need to have a certain number of posts on these boards before you can post a link. I have no idea what that number is, however.
And Miker, it seems like the only thing I disagree with you is where blame lies. I still our economy could have hundled the mortgage defaults if the mortgages stayed in the hands of the original commercial banks. It wasn't until the big money of the investor firms got involved that the risk skyrocketed out of control. And yeah, too big to fail is too big to exist. they should splice up these banks like they did Ma Bell back in 1984.
Great discussion, folks. Probably won't repost as I'm done on the computer for the night.
Later gators.
Sorry to see you go, WH. Rare to have a productive discussion on these boards - usually everything turns to either a big circle jerk or a mudslinging fest! If our only disagreement is where the blame lies, we're doing well because apart from identifying a possible source of future problems I'm not sure it matter where the blame lies. Not as much as how to fix the problem anyway.
@JLS: I take a bit of offense to your assertion that my position is a "ridiculous generalization," especially when most of your supporting points do not line up with my personal experience. I relocated and bought a house smack in the middle of this mess. It was my 6th home purchase and it went down very much like all the rest; I figured out what I was comfortable spending on housing (no more than 25% of my gross income), ran the going interest rates with an estimated insurance and property tax figure, and determined what principle amount I could borrow that would result in an affordable monthly mortgage payment - one I could conceivably continue making even if I lost my job.
I did not let a realtor or lender tell me what I could afford, and I did not pick a house I liked and then try to figure out what kind of "mortgage product" would enable me to buy it. In other words, I ordered from the right-hand side of the menu, not the left. You cannot tell me that a failure to do this didn't significantly play into the mortgage crisis. There are plenty of neighborhoods all around me where the houses start "from the 300s" and plenty of people buying them (still - which amazes me). They may be able to make their payments this year. What if they lose their jobs? Nobody seems to have been thinking about that possibility 5 years ago, either. But, they should have been, right? Because look where we are today.
I totally agree that the housing market is grossly inflated - even where I live. Maybe especially where I live. . . But, that's not really corporations or Wall Street. That's realtors and developers. And home buyers. If people weren't buying houses "from the 300s" I can assure you builders would not build them and realtors would not list them. But, when you've got a significant portion of the population who absolutely must have a three-car garage, 5 bedrooms, 4-1/2 baths, granite counter tops, and a home theatre room and gym, well, I think that's where you and I see eye to eye. That's a greed problem.
People will buy what's out there and other people will sell it to them. So, trying to figure out who started it is sort of a chicken and egg question. Not sure it really matters, does it? It still boils down to what I said earlier: we have a personal greed problem in our society.
I found this message to address the issue very well, regardless of one's faith or lack thereof: http://hsv1pres.org/wp-content/uploads/Trust-and-Respect.mp3.
A strange story and even stranger comments.
US waged wars based on lies and fraud.
Financial underpinnings of US economy is corrupt.
There is much more, but the American people seem to have a propensity to assail themselves. And the War Profiteers continue to profit.
over regulation? right, give me some good examples.....
under regulation of the money watchers have put us where we are today.
Not really. It hasn't really been cheap labor that drives our industries overseas. Get your butt out to a factory or someplace where "work" means more than shuffling papers and creating PowerPoint slides for meetings and you'll realize that OSHA, EPA, etc. etc. etc. have piled on so many regulations that it's very difficult even for established businesses to conduct business. There's virtually no way someone could start up a new business in this country if that business involves using tools, standing on anything more than 4' tall, chemicals, water, energy consumption. . .
I'm not saying we should just turn industry loose and let them throw used tires in the river, but you can't deny that regulations and the way they have been implemented simply make it more attractive for many industries to take their operations elsewhere.
Supply Side Economics is the root of all of US Economic woes. SSE is reverse capitalism. SSE is a wealth concentrator. SSE is un-American in every sense. SSE has shredded our national dignity, destroyed our innovation, and has made a mockery of US Industrial might.
Until SSE is pushed back into the slime from whence it came, the American Economy can not recover.
@Corporate Shrill: Why the swastika?
i deal with workers' compensation laws, and all the regulations and rules are there for a good reason. that's part of the cost of doing business. and they still try to work it to their advantage and put their employees at risk to maximize profit. of course it's more "attractive" to take their business elsewhere so they can pollute and exploit other struggling countries and their citizens. of course there are fewer regulations, they are either desperate and/or undeveloped - in which case they don't have the luxury of being picky and choosy like we do, so they aren't. and businesses are quick to take advantage, which is not so "attractive."
“This is a place where if people were really going to come together and form that 'purple' (combination of blue and red political affiliations) that everybody lusts for, it’s going to probably happen in this camp.”
Something that these "Occupy People" do not understand, is that main stream America does not "lust" that the blue and red affiliations come together. That is not democracy. Democracy is the successful functioning of two sides with differing opinions coming together (without giving up their "colors") in an effort to reach a workable solution to the countries issues. In that process, there will be winners and loosers (majority rules - as it should be). For the last three years, America has been loosing because of the Democratic Policies that have been rammed down our throats, and the socialist idealogy (under the stealth of democracy) that is invading the mindset of the "purple" crowd. Liberals like the color purple, but that is not the color of true democracy. The colors of true democracy are distinct, give a strong identity, and force respect from our neighbors, rather than feeling as if they are entitled to an apology for who we are. Our colrs are distinct - Red, White, and Blue. Live with it or leave it. And if you do not like us, fine, but don't try to tear us down to bring us to your level
Steve,
"Democracy is the successful functioning of two sides with differing opinions coming together (without giving up their "colors") in an effort to reach a workable solution to the countries issues. In that process, there will be winners and loosers (majority rules - as it should be)"
If that's the case, then we no longer have democracy because the two sides have not been coming together to produce any kind of solution to anything.
The average person is "purple"
Most people aren't pure liberal or pure consrvative.
So no, no one is ramming down purple down anyone's throats. We've just seen crimson (tea party) and navy (OWS) rise up recently
For all of those on both sides arguing about whether or not these people have jobs, if you re-read the article you will realize that a large amount of the nashville protesters are part-time occupiers meaning they are going to work etc and then committing to the cause on their off -time, these are dedicated citizens participating in government protests as is their right.
Boy the conservatives just cant stand the fact that they in fact are not the majority. Not even close. This country is now solid Progressive. Conservative economics have failed miserably and the vast majority know it. The only question is how long will it take for them to take responsibility for this collossal global failure. The occupiers definately are the 99%. The 99% may not agree with their tactics but we certainly agree that conservative economics are the problem.
Yea Pual that why the democrats lost 5 senate seats and 63 house seats in the 2010 election. So Progressive. LMAO
The only TP statewide office was KY for senate. Also progressives didnt turn out in 2010. It will be far different story in2012. Also if voting were mandatory there wouldnt be a republican in public office.
Actually Paul. Voter turn out for the 2010 election was 41.6% just slightly higher than the 41.3% 2006 mid term.
As far as 2012 is concerned "You just keep thinking that and get back to me in December of 2012.
Having grown up in the south, I do love the southern flavor of this group.
To all the morons that pathetically yell "Get a job", QUIT BEING SO STUPID!! These people in these camps are struggling for you as well. They are bravely voicing and acting on everyone's behalf of all the immoral, criminal, greedy and unjustifiable ruining that is happening to this country and it's people from the relentless greed and political maneuvering that allows this to happen. Try giving a helping hand!!
I am perfectly capable of struggling for myself. My struggle involves making myself hirable by improving myself and doing what I have to do to get a job. With a degree in psychology I ended up getting a CDL license and driving a truck. I'm on a local run so I can feed my family and then go to school at night for a trade. With my psychology education and trade training I hope to become a success eventually as a sub contractor. Sure building is down but I have already seen there is room for the best in my area in remodeling and some small construction. I hate driving this truck but it's a job. Greed will help me succeed.
These people can't get a job. All the jobs skill required involve using math or science or actually having skill. These things are not taught in the Liberal Arts colleges.
Aengus - They aren't speaking for me even in the slightest. I support people making as much money as they can. I support those who are smart enough to become extremely rich and successful. I support the folks who have busted their butts and sacrificed their home lives in order to build hugely successful companies. I even support the board of directors and CEOs that can get a big company to give them outrageous deals even when they screw up. I support them because they can and are DOING instead of whining and complaining.
JJ--Agreed. I totally support the rich getting that way on the labor and suffering of the masses. I totally support big business writing laws for our nation. I support all of the countries wealth being consolidated by the few while the poor suffer.
I have no issue with any gaining wealth; I'm trying to do the same - I just do it honestly and with ethics.
JTM, most corporations also do it honestly and with ethics.
Greed is everywhere. It's in the Occupy camps. Greed is what makes them want more than what they deem to be a "trivial" job. Greed is why they hold iPhones and update facebook on their laptops. Greed is why they want everyone to excuse their use of public land (that belongs to all taxpayers, not just the protesters) and why they want people to provide them support.
The photo for the article is classic. I am an Occupy protester. In my tent. In a park. With electricity piped in from somewhere. On a laptop. Using internet from somewhere.
You want to see real struggling people? Try targeting areas of this country in which any wage- not just a defined "living wage" is hard to come by. Those people are poor. Those people need help.
So, if your doing OK, have an iphone, laptop or electricity you shouldn't protest? I've got all that stuff and a good job but I still want an end of corporate government, too big to fail, and corporate welfare.
You can protest all you want. But it does ring a bit hypocritical to protest corporations and then use all their stuff.
There is also a difference in protesting those concepts (and I am with you on the too big to fail, by the way- most on the Right were never in favor of the bailouts) and protesting the rich. I don't hate the rich. I don't hate corporations. I hate that we are stuck in a cycle of lend-and-spend that is doing no one any good.
You can protest all you want. But it does ring a bit hypocritical to protest corporations and then use all their stuff.
There is also a difference in protesting those concepts (and I am with you on the too big to fail, by the way- most on the Right were never in favor of the bailouts) and protesting the rich. I don't hate the rich. I don't hate corporations. I hate that we are stuck in a cycle of lend-and-spend that is doing no one any good.
You can protest all you want. But it does ring a bit hypocritical to protest corporations and then use all their stuff.
There is also a difference in protesting those concepts (and I am with you on the too big to fail, by the way- most on the Right were never in favor of the bailouts) and protesting the rich. I don't hate the rich. I don't hate corporations. I hate that we are stuck in a cycle of lend-and-spend that is doing no one any good.
No one is protesting products or corporations that make products. They are protesting corruption. You should already know this.
You can protest all you want. But it does ring a bit hypocritical to protest corporations and then use all their stuff.
There is also a difference in protesting those concepts (and I am with you on the too big to fail, by the way- most on the Right were never in favor of the bailouts) and protesting the rich. I don't hate the rich. I don't hate corporations. I hate that we are stuck in a cycle of lend-and-spend that is doing no one any good.
JTM - On the suffering of the masses eh? So, anyone who just "works" for a living but isn't rich is being exploited and suffering eh? The alternatives to that of course are that everyone is rich and no one actually works or that no one is rich and there is no incentive to work.
Sorry, I'll take a world where some people can work harder, take more risks, make more sacrifices and get richer than others over either of those fantasy "utopias".