Occupy Wall Street PROTESTERS Not Letting Up - Nationwide

[Alan]

What policies? Which ones Alan? Quit the Rush Beck talking points and give us specifics!
You do realize NOTHING has changed in the tax policies since George Bush started us on this spiral down the rabbit hole with his tax breaks for the wealthy. Nothing. Obama hasn't changed a thing, and yet, where are the jobs? Where is all this business confidence and 'job creating' that the lower tax rates were supposed to give us? When did we start to decline? Well, I suppose you could go back to Saint Ronald and his trickle down bs...but recently the deficit started spiraling out of control because of Bush's tax breaks and unfunded wars. Directly related. And now we are supposed to believe only a Republican can ride in and save the day? Really? Do we have stupid tattooed on our foreheads!
And please stop with the incredibly ignorant republican line about how 'the threat of FUTURE taxes and, and, things will make business people stop doing business'. What a load of horse hocky! This is a consumer driven economy. If there is a market, REAL business people will satisfy that market. McDonald's isn't going to close down a successful store because they might have to pay a bit more in taxes. No business person is going to refuse $10,000 because he/she might have to pay $1000 in taxes.
It's this kind of talking point that really makes my blood boil because it assumes we are all just too stupid to figure this one out.
OK, show of hands among the business people here. Yesterday you made 10,000. Today you will make 9,000. Is that going to make you close shop?

Peggy, I mentioned three obstacles to growth, regulation, taxes and mandates.

For your edification, this administration has imposed, or has plans to impose, more regulations onto the free market than any other administration in history. So much so that even the President has admitted that it is necessary to slow down the implementation of some in order to help the market recover. There are currently nearly 2500 proposed regulations on businesses awaiting implementation at a potential cost of nearly a trillion dollars over 10 years.

While many people talk about tax rates being at their lowest point in years, the reality is that we have been promised that those rates are temporary. All businesses forecast their budgets out 3 to 5 years, a period in which it is extremely likely that tax rates on business and individuals will rise. The question is, to what level?

Throw on a few mandates such as the government dictating what levels of health insurance an employer must offer to each employee and the risk of fines for non-compliance and you've put together a perfect storm of job depression.

Oh, and if you look in the mirror and see "diputs" on your forehead, the answer is yes.

[Catwoman]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/08/ny...pagewanted=all

Awesome what they are accomplishing!

[Zoebird]

Catwoman: all conjecture, no evidence.

Iris Lily: as i've said all along (or said several pages ago) the original Tea party (which was Ron Paul supporters and libertarians and anarchists before it got taken over or coopted by the theocon arm of the republican party) were making the SAME grievances as the OWS. You get props for at least giving a source for your conjectures without evidence.

I have no problem with people filtering information through a specific lens that would indicate to them that "this is a bad idea." but that is still their OPINION and not a fact.

Now, here are some facts/evidence:

According to several articles online (this one most succinct and written by Kimberly Amadeo), the cause of the current recession was the bursting of the housing market bubble in 2006.

Obama didn't become president until January 2009.

Amadeo asserts that three elements cause recessions: low interest rates, irrational exuberance on the part of investors (which in this aspect meant a great deal of lending on the part of banks with cheap mortgages), and high interest rates that pop the bubble.

All three of these factors happened on G W Bush's watch, btw, before Obama became president.

Also on G W Bush's watch, there was the bank bail out in October 2008. Obama hadn't even been elected yet.

This bail out established TARP/EESA (wiki, i haven't tracked down all of the information in the references yet to verify it, but it seems accurate thus far) which GWB signed into law.

---

I think it's fair to say -- leaving hte land of fact now for opinion -- that a lot of people in the US, regardless of party affiliation, are really upset by how this hasn't worked. Emotionally speaking, a lot of people see a lot of fraud, a lot of banks still foreclosing even though a large part of this is about trying to keep people in homes, and of course, there is a lot of foreclosure fraud (not necessarily related to or because of TARP).

---

Causes of the Automotive Industry Crisis is another area that I think is of interest, since the bail out was mentioned. According to wiki (again, i haven't run down all of the references), it asserts that the Automotive Industry crisis was part of the global automotive crisis that particularly impacted american automotive industry.

This global crisis was caused by the increase in costs of automotive fuels, which was in turn caused by the "energy crisis of 2003-2008." This particularly affected the american industry as their primary sales were light trucks (SUVs, etc), which had low fuel efficiency.

Please note that I am not making any claim that GWB caused this crisis. But, the three factors in the increase of the price of crude oil were: 1. tensions in the middle east; 2. decline in petroleum reserves and concerns over peak oil; and 3. oil price speculation.

Now, the Automotive Bailout of 2 of the Big 3 American automakers occurred in January of 2009, after they asked for the bailout in Dec 2008, which they asked for and was managed under the EESA -- the law which passed in October of 2008.

---

back to opinion for a moment, I agree that this bailout might have been a bad move. Part of the equation here is that in 2006, when sales of those big vehicles declined, instead of regrouping and investing in more efficient cars that the market demanded (seeing as the increase in priuses on the road), they offered low interest rate loans on expensive cars with expensive fuel.

though, soemtimes, i think the american public is dumb about money -- houses bigger than you need and a mortgage higher than you can afford, needlessly large light trucks that cost a lot to fuel to drive to the starbucks to buy overpriced coffee. I mean, people can be stupid.

but, the automakers really weren't going well on this whole process. .. or really, managing their business properly. And it chafes me that they weren't AND that they got bailed out.

---

Cash for Clunkers can, effectively, be blamed on Obama, seeing as he was in office at that time. And, according to studies by the UNiv of Delaware among others, the program cost more than it created. So yeah, definitely a "bad idea" moment.

----

From here, the question is "what to do about recessions?"

Here is an article that describes what Canada, Japan, and Sweden did with their 1990s recessions -- and what those outcomes were.

Canada -- Massive cuts in government spending plus fiscal tightening by the public keeping taxes from going up, as well as consumers not consuming as much, and also a concerted decrease of interest rates.

Japan -- (commonly used as an example of what not to do) -- fear of inflation meant that the government tried to keep prices low, but banks were also not seen as safe. there was a sales tax increase in 1997, which was seen as a bad move. The whole thing caused a deflation cycle, that Japan still struggles with, even at the time of the article in Oct 2010.

Sweden -- higher taxes plus bank bailouts that guarateed creditors decreased consumer spending, but kept consumer confidence. This program is generally seen as a success. The high taxes and low deficit, though, also helped sweden weather then current recession without as much damage as it's neighbors. "But the Swedish model of economic management relies on a level of co-operation between state, workers and unions not seen here [UK]."

--

It turns out that there are potentially A LOT of ways (not the japanese way! lol) to "solve" the recession. THere is the canadian way -- cutting government, keeping taxes low, and consumers being savvy in spending until things start to recover. There is also the swedish way -- bailing banks, increasing taxes, and decreasing the deficit.

And i would bet, there are 100s of other creative, diverse ways that this process can be undertaken.

---

But the real if -- and this is for you Catwoman and Iris lily et al -- will you join us in a conversation? Rather than "blame obama" and "i hate hippies" language, how about a REAL dialogue about these issues?

We are in a recession. Our world is in a world of hurt. Our government -- whether run by republicans or democrats -- isn't working (I believe in part because corporate interests and money run the policies, and htat is government corruption).

What OWS is about is putting people back into the equation. It is not about republicans or democrates. it's about the people.

truly, it's about the people.

And btw, here is a cool video made at OWS by OWS showing how these dirty hippies are so disorganized.

[Zoebird]

and FWIW, i find the "go live in another country" language to be really really offensive.

it's essentially saying "if you disagree with me, then you don't belong in the US!" but the problem with this statement is that the US is built on dissent. The right of free speech, the right of freedom or religion, the right to assemble, the right to protest. . . all of these things are about our rights to have different ideas and opinions about everything and still speak out for what we feel is right, and coexist with each other.

telling people to leave if they don't agree with you is totalitarianism. it's the antithesis of the american ideal.

and it's ironic that i live in another country, i'm sure. I am an american, and i came here for opportunity, NOT to run away from america, and not because i didn't like the way it was going or what have you.

I am proud to be american and i love the US. I love so much more about it than I even realized while I was living there. I now see myself so much more clearly now that i am living over seas. I see our greatness so much more clearly, and even less our flaws.

But this language of "don't like it, leave" -- it needs to be eschewed. it's truly mean-spirited and unamerican.

[Alan]

.......We are in a recession. Our world is in a world of hurt. Our government -- whether run by republicans or democrats -- isn't working (I believe in part because corporate interests and money run the policies, and htat is government corruption)......

Our government tells us that the recession ended in 2009. Now we're in that area of limited growth which pre-dates a double-dip recession.

[Zoebird]

i don't see how my quote and your statement go together.

[Alan]

They don't. We're either in a recession or we're not. You say we are, our government says that was so a year or so ago.

[Zigzagman]

They don't. We're either in a recession or we're not. You say we are, our government says that was so a year or so ago.

What do you say, Alan? In a recession or not. You can even make up your on definition of recession.

I say we are in a funk - where profit for anything and everything is the "axis of evil".

How do we get out of it - we simply nationalize the banking system that has not served us well at all.

My biggest fear is that we do nothing, or very little, to curb the problems that caused us to get into this situation. I think it is time to "take the fat cats to the woodshed". Working people, retirees, we are all paying for this mindless idea that deregulation is good for America.

If there is a GOD, convince the brainless that greed and profit are not good for America. "How long has this been going on"?

Peace

[Alan]

What do you say, Alan? In a recession or not. You can even make up your on definition of recession.

I think we are. If a recession is a period of negative or stagnant growth, I'd say we're about as stagnant as we could possibly be.

I say we are in a funk - where profit for anything and everything is the "axis of evil".

I agree with the "funk" but profit is certainly not evil. Without profit we'd still be mired in the dark ages.

How do we get out of it - we simply nationalize the banking system that has not served us well at all.

What makes you think the government could do a better job? As Milton Friedman said: "If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand." I've seen no evidence that this sentiment is incorrect.

My biggest fear is that we do nothing, or very little, to curb the problems that caused us to get into this situation. I think it is time to "take the fat cats to the woodshed". Working people, retirees, we are all paying for this mindless idea that deregulation is good for America.

There's a balance between deregulation and excessive regulation. Let's not over-react and completely destroy the economy. I believe we're seeing components of that now.

If there is a GOD, convince the brainless that greed and profit are good for America.

There, I fixed that for ya.

[Lainey]

and in reality, small business owners are *not* blaming regulation (or possible regulation, or threat of regulation, or any other regulation boogie-man) for the business slow-down:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...ns-health-care