Occupy Atlanta

[More Cowbell]

I hope the speaker from Occupy Atlanta can come to Cincinnati to organize the protests.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZlp3eGMNI

[LazelleDurden]

I hope the speaker from Occupy Atlanta can come to Cincinnati to organize the protests.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZlp3eGMNI

They should just tear gas all those Liberal Hippies

[X Factor]

That was creepy. Why was everyone repeating what the dude talking with the megaphone was saying? Speak, repeat, speak, repeat...

These people crack me up..."we demand all debt be forgiven!"

[Kahns Krazy]

I still don't get the point of what they are "protesting". I'm not sure they do either

Some of the pictures of the Occupy Cincinnati "protesters" are hilarious. Little hipsters camping out with their iPhones and AirMacs , wearing Patagonia coats and camping out in LL Bean tents, protesting Wall Street.

[Kahns Krazy]

There is a post on Cincinnati.com referrring to the Occupy movement as "The Flea Party". I thought that was pretty funny.

[Jumpy]

We use hand signals instead of clapping to ensure that everyone is heard. Gay.

[Ledgewood]

"I'm against protesting, but I don't know how to show it."

Mitch Hedberg was hilarious.

[spazzrico]

That was creepy. Why was everyone repeating what the dude talking with the megaphone was saying? Speak, repeat, speak, repeat...


It's called the human megaphone. Just a way of making sure everyone is heard.

[spazzrico]

I still don't get the point of what they are "protesting". I'm not sure they do either

Some of the pictures of the Occupy Cincinnati "protesters" are hilarious. Little hipsters camping out with their iPhones and AirMacs , wearing Patagonia coats and camping out in LL Bean tents, protesting Wall Street.

The overarching thing they are protesting is the extreme influence of the corporate world on our politics and economic lives and the increasing polarization of wealth. Because the is so all encompassing it gives the movement less coherence, but that is the general principle. It is like the Tea Party movement that had one dominant message (growth of gov't and spending is bad) that invited in a ton of ancillary things. So the main thing is there and valid but is surrounded by a lot of nutcaseness (like calling for the cancellation of all debt).

[pizza delivery]

So, why does the douche with the megaphone not share? This event sets public speaking, and democracy, back about 5,000 years.

[Kahns Krazy]

I sort of get that they are upset that corporations have influence in politics. I haven't heard any really articulate why this is overall a bad thing, or what benefit removing it would have. Moreover, I don't understand how breaking laws during their demonstrations is achieving anything.

Maybe it will all still come together, but generalizing from the pictures I've seen of these "protests", I'm guessing not.

I also think it's a bit odd that this "movement" comes about now, after we elected a president who raised a record amount of small, private contributions. It seems to me that Wall Street's influence in politics is diminishing, not increasing.

Contrast that to the Tea Party movement that was in response to the "stimulus" spending and record deficits.

[BBC 08]

It seems to me that Wall Street's influence in politics is diminishing, not increasing.

Citizens United might disagree with you on that. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission)

[Kahns Krazy]

Citizens United might disagree with you on that. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission)

So the Occupy Wall Street movement is anti-constitution?

[GoMuskies]

I sort of get that they are upset that corporations have influence in politics. I haven't heard any really articulate why this is overall a bad thing, or what benefit removing it would have.

I don't think most of these folks even know what influence corporations actually have in politics. It just sounds like a really important thing to say that must be a really bad thing. 'Cause corporations are EVIL!

[bobbiemcgee]

They should just tear gas all those Liberal Hippies

They did that many times in the sixties, guess you missed out on the fun. I dunno what the hell they want, but don't like to see Americans badmouthing Americans either. Wanna protest something, anything, go ahead, have a good time.

[Mrs. Garrett]

Contrast that to the Tea Party movement that was in response to the "stimulus" spending and record deficits.[/QUOTE]


Actually, I think the Occupy group and the Tea Party movement have this in common. It's basically the Tea Party without the racism.

[More Cowbell]

Contrast that to the Tea Party movement that was in response to the "stimulus" spending and record deficits.

Actually, I think the Occupy group and the Tea Party movement have this in common. It's basically the Tea Party without the racism.

I'm not sure what the Tea Party said was racist, but I agree that neither of them want any more bailouts.

[GoMuskies]

This is high comedy. From a WSJ account:

And the group remains wary of establishment figures, even those who are sympathetic.
When U.S. Rep. John Lewis, a Democrat who was a central figure in the civil rights movement, showed up at a general assembly meeting in Atlanta, his desire to speak was initially greeted by the wiggling of fingers—a signal of enthusiasm.
Then one man stood up and crossed his arms over his head, signaling that he was strongly opposed. The group couldn't reach a consensus, so Mr. Lewis left without speaking.

[BBC 08]

This is high comedy. From a WSJ account:

And the group remains wary of establishment figures, even those who are sympathetic.
When U.S. Rep. John Lewis, a Democrat who was a central figure in the civil rights movement, showed up at a general assembly meeting in Atlanta, his desire to speak was initially greeted by the wiggling of fingers—a signal of enthusiasm.
Then one man stood up and crossed his arms over his head, signaling that he was strongly opposed. The group couldn't reach a consensus, so Mr. Lewis left without speaking.

Oh god damn it. This is why I don't want to get involved. The protests in Nashville are no more than two blocks from my apartment but it is that bullshit that keeps me away.

[GoMuskies]

Alan Donhoff would be down promptly to whip your ass if you participated. (Of course, he was just AD in your time. He was the enforcer when I was at St. X)

[BBC 08]

Alan Donhoff would be down promptly to whip your ass if you participated. (Of course, he was just AD in your time. He was the enforcer when I was at St. X)

My freshman year we had Drury and the Silver Fox (I sadly forget his name. Do remember that he was a Xaverian Brother). I still think Donhoff would whip my ass as AD if I joined in.

[DC Muskie]

It seems to me that Wall Street's influence in politics is diminishing, not increasing.

I'm interested to understand your assessment on this.

The firms got bailed out, that seems to be a pretty bipartisan partnership. That's pretty big influence in my opinion.

As for Obama, he still needs Wall Street. Which is interesting considering how much time he spends slamming them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/politics/13donor.html?pagewanted=all

Wall Street seems to me to be doing quite well. They are making their money.

[Benxman]

WASHINGTON — "A few weeks before announcing his re-election campaign, President Obama convened two dozen Wall Street executives, many of them longtime donors, in the White House’s Blue Room." Quote from New York Times article linked in previous post.

Two things: 1)Since when can you believe anything you read in the New York Times (voice of liberalism/socialism)?
2) When did Obama stop campaigning. As far as I can see, he has not stopped since his election to the Presidency.

--And to the poster who referenced Tea Party racism, that is just plain ignorance. The Tea Party is a grass roots movement that has absolutely nothing to do with racism. The accusations of racism have come out of the liberal biased media and the Democratic Party in an attempt to denigrate them and thus minimize their influence. It has not worked.
By the way, I have attended several Tea Party gatherings in the Greater Cincinnati Area and have seen no, repeat no evidence of racism at any of them.

People who insert that type of vitrial into a public discussion get in the way of having a civilized conversation.

I'm out of here!

GO MUSKIES!

:sword:

[DC Muskie]

Two things: 1)Since when can you believe anything you read in the New York Times (voice of liberalism/socialism)?


People who insert that type of vitrial into a public discussion get in the way of having a civilized conversation.


The accusations of racism have come out of the liberal biased media and the Democratic Party in an attempt to denigrate them and thus minimize their influence.


People who insert that type of vitrial into a public discussion get in the way of having a civilized conversation.


I'm out of here!

Good work!

[stophorseabuse]

I attended one tea party gathering WAAAAAAYYYYY Back when they were just starting. It was in Valdosta, Ga. I am pretty sure that stating, "That N----- Muslim", hundreds of times, is racist. Paticularly when it comes from a 1/2 dozen different speakers. The leaders worked on toning down the speakers spewing that crap, but the signs from attending members in the future were still pretty damn inflammatory.

I admit, I am VERY bitter that corporations were bailed out. Why can't they fail like everyone else?

It is impossible to find a presidential candidate that is actually in touch with the American people.

[BlueGuy]

I hope the speaker from Occupy Atlanta can come to Cincinnati to organize the protests.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZlp3eGMNI

Just watched this... How do these people expect to be taken serious? That display was like a skit out of SNL. Hilarious.

[DC Muskie]

Just watched this... How do these people expect to be taken serious? That display was like a skit out of SNL. Hilarious.


Or maybe something like this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylVWhbklqbM&noredirect=1

Now that is pretty funny.

[xeus]

Just watched this... How do these people expect to be taken serious? That display was like a skit out of SNL. Hilarious.

I'll never get those 10 minutes back, but that was priceless.

John Lewis is one patient man.

[Snipe]

Actually, I think the Occupy group and the Tea Party movement have this in common. It's basically the Tea Party without the racism.

Maybe it is like the Tea Party with out personal hygiene. I think the answer to everything is "Racism" now days. Kind of liberating actually that it has come to mean silly nonsense. Oppose Obama? Racism. Oppose Obamacare? Racism. Socialist? Simply racist code words.

I am a Tea Party Patriot loud and proud. I went to Washington with hundreds of thousands on the National Mall. When we left you couldn't find a piece of litter. Look at the filth piling up in New York City. You can tell a lot about people by what they leave behind, and those people are animals. I didn't see any used condoms out on the mall.

The Liberals called the Tea Party racists, but in the end you can see they were just jealous. All they really ever wanted was their own Tea Party. Now they are throwing it and nobody is showing up. 350,000 people showed up in over 300 locations on Tax Day in 2009. I was among thousands marching to City Hall downtown. What did the Flea Party turn out in the Queen City? 300? Suck on that.

Also, the Occupy Crowd is not a haven for diversity. That used to be proof of racism at Tea Party events, until the left does it. Put a bunch of pasty white liberals together to eat the granola and it is all about dissent being the highest form of patriotism.

Please. Get those people some soap and hot water and move on. Lefty rallies are for young people to find drugs and hook up with one another for a cause. If you aren't looking to get high or laid at these things and you are not in your 20's you are a stone cold loser.

[bobbiemcgee]

....getting high and laid? Where do I sign up? :D

[chico]

Is this why we haven't heard from ATL Muskie for so long - he's using hand signals now?

[Jumpy]

Or maybe something like this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylVWhbklqbM&noredirect=1

Now that is pretty funny.

Nah, that guy just comes off as a douche.

[DC Muskie]

Nah, that guy just comes off as a douche.

Which one? The guy dressed up like he was an actor from Williamsburg? Or the guy holding up the sign who told the reporter to read about why 1773 revolt against Britain has anything to do with 21st century America?

Because I agree, both of this guys, and the other one with the glasses, were pretty douchey.

[Snipe]

I attended one tea party gathering WAAAAAAYYYYY Back when they were just starting. It was in Valdosta, Ga. I am pretty sure that stating, "That N----- Muslim", hundreds of times, is racist. Paticularly when it comes from a 1/2 dozen different speakers. The leaders worked on toning down the speakers spewing that crap, but the signs from attending members in the future were still pretty damn inflammatory.

I admit, I am VERY bitter that corporations were bailed out. Why can't they fail like everyone else?

It is impossible to find a presidential candidate that is actually in touch with the American people.

Speakers? Someone brought in to speak at the event? I simply don't believe you. I never heard the N word at any of the Tea Party events that I went to, not even once in the crowd, let alone from a speaker. I am calling Bullshyt. Valdosta is a majority minority city. White people are outnumbered by blacks there and I can't imagine they would bring in half a dozen speakers that called Obama "That N----" hundreds of times. The only public place that is acceptable for someone to speak and say "That N-----" hundreds of times is a rap concert. I don't believe it.

I couldn't find it reported. Press were combing these events for anything inflammatory and the racial angle was always looked for.

[Masterofreality]

Is this why we haven't heard from ATL Muskie for so long - he's using hand signals now?

Temporary Thread Hi-jack-

ATL Muskie is alive and well....but no longer, technically, ATL Muskie. He could now have a non de plume of Tennessee Tuxedo Muskie. Losing the Atlanta Thrashers to Winnipeg was the last straw in his Georgia residency.

I will say no more and let the man himself come on here and himself speak to his adoring masses.

We now return you to your irregularly scheduled internet message board....

[DC Muskie]

There are plenty of things that are funny about the Tea Party, one of them that current group of activists named themselves after something that happened in Boston...but in regards to this racism question, the Boston Tea Party took place when white people dressed up as Indians.

That's pretty racists I think.

[Fred Garvin 2.0]

Is this about those flashmob thigamajigs?

[Jumpy]

Which one? The guy dressed up like he was an actor from Williamsburg? Or the guy holding up the sign who told the reporter to read about why 1773 revolt against Britain has anything to do with 21st century America?

Because I agree, both of this guys, and the other one with the glasses, were pretty douchey.

You know exactly who I'm talking about. The jackass that is trying too hard to be Stephen Colbert. Finding the dumbest people he can and then using creative editing to make them sound even dumber.

[Jumpy]

Because I and the other one were pretty douchey.

See how it works?

[spazzrico]

My freshman year we had Drury and the Silver Fox (I sadly forget his name. Do remember that he was a Xaverian Brother). I still think Donhoff would whip my ass as AD if I joined in.

Ahhhh we're talking St. X. Louisville! Me too, Donhoff was the man when I started in 1991 then he moved over to AD or something and what's his nuts....Mr. Stewart....I think took over.....good times.

[spazzrico]

I admit, I am VERY bitter that corporations were bailed out. Why can't they fail like everyone else?

It is impossible to find a presidential candidate that is actually in touch with the American people.

1. Round after round of deregulation (both parties complicit) and allowing banks to get so large through mergers that a threat to one of the large ones threatens the whole economy.

2. Sorry, No. (Which I will add is a huge part of the OWS message).

[spazzrico]

I want to add that I think a large part of the reason that the OWS movement is going on now as opposed to right after the bailouts is that after this long after the recession ended, most people assumed that employment would bounce back. But employers found out they can make more money without hiring, by streamlining, upgrading, leaning, whatever. So now we have a class of kids that are graduating from college with few prospects. That's a lot of creative energy going to waste and a betrayal from their point of view from a society that promised that if they went to school took on debt and worked hard they would find themselves with a career when they finished. And instead they are stuck at home back on the couch. This is literally the first generation since the founding of this country where the younger generation probably isn't going to do as well economically as the previous one, mostly due to crushing student debt loans and declining real wages. I don't think a lot of people who have established careers and stable lives really get that, despite whatever they see around them. So even if you can't agree with OWS, which is fine, it is at least possible to get a sense of what is so frustrating to them. I also think the demands or platform is pretty nebulous, because the problem is pretty nebulous. How does one solve the problem of too much corporate influence in politics, in our lives??? I still think some of the demands I've seen like a debt holiday for everyone are ludicrous and need to be reigned in for fear of no one taking them seriously. Also this movement is not super new, but the the jobs crisis has certainly given it force. Nader was saying a great deal of this stuff about corporate power in the 2000 election and it resonated with quite a few people then.

Here is a link (http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/)to some personal stories that might give a sense of why people are out there in the streets in case anyone is interested.

[X-band '01]

Is this about those flashmob thigamajigs?

What's funny about that comment is that flash mobs are much more organized than the Flea Party activists are.

[Mrs. Garrett]

I attended one tea party gathering WAAAAAAYYYYY Back when they were just starting. It was in Valdosta, Ga. I am pretty sure that stating, "That N----- Muslim", hundreds of times, is racist. Paticularly when it comes from a 1/2 dozen different speakers. The leaders worked on toning down the speakers spewing that crap, but the signs from attending members in the future were still pretty damn inflammatory.

I admit, I am VERY bitter that corporations were bailed out. Why can't they fail like everyone else?

It is impossible to find a presidential candidate that is actually in touch with the American people.


Thank you for making my point about the Tea Party. Any group that follows Sarah Palin is suspect in my book.

[muckem muckem]

The only racism I saw while walking in the Tax Day event was the two black women carrying anti TEA Party signs hitting white guys in the back of their heads with their signs trying to get them to react. Cincinnati's finest were notified of this action and the women (turned out to be Cincinnati teachers) were reduced to tears, begging not to be arreste

[Kahns Krazy]

I think I'm finally getting this. The Flea Party is opposed to the fact that succusful business people have gotten together to use their collective power to have an influence in politics that will be beneficial to them to the detriment of others. The Flea Party opposes this, so they are getting together to use their collective power to have an influence in politics that will be beneficial to them to the detriment of others.

Makes perfect sense to me.

[xeus]

The overarching thing they are protesting is the extreme influence of the corporate world on our politics and economic lives

What about the (WHAT ABOUT THE) extreme influence of the unions (EXTREME INFLUENCE OF THE UNIONS) on our politics and economic lives (ON OUR POLITICS AND ECONOMIC LIVES)?

Did the group reach a consensus (DID THE GROUP REACH A CONSENSUS) by use of a finger-wiggle vote (BY USE OF A FINGER-WIGGLE VOTE) on whether the unions (ON WHETHER THE UNIONS) could participate (COULD PARTICIPATE) in the protest (IN THE PROTEST)?

[Kahns Krazy]

I want to add that I think a large part of the reason that the OWS movement is going on now as opposed to right after the bailouts is that after this long after the recession ended, most people assumed that employment would bounce back. But employers found out they can make more money without hiring, by streamlining, upgrading, leaning, whatever. So now we have a class of kids that are graduating from college with few prospects. That's a lot of creative energy going to waste and a betrayal from their point of view from a society that promised that if they went to school took on debt and worked hard they would find themselves with a career when they finished. And instead they are stuck at home back on the couch. This is literally the first generation since the founding of this country where the younger generation probably isn't going to do as well economically as the previous one, mostly due to crushing student debt loans and declining real wages. I don't think a lot of people who have established careers and stable lives really get that, despite whatever they see around them. So even if you can't agree with OWS, which is fine, it is at least possible to get a sense of what is so frustrating to them. I also think the demands or platform is pretty nebulous, because the problem is pretty nebulous. How does one solve the problem of too much corporate influence in politics, in our lives??? I still think some of the demands I've seen like a debt holiday for everyone are ludicrous and need to be reigned in for fear of no one taking them seriously. Also this movement is not super new, but the the jobs crisis has certainly given it force. Nader was saying a great deal of this stuff about corporate power in the 2000 election and it resonated with quite a few people then.

Here is a link (http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/)to some personal stories that might give a sense of why people are out there in the streets in case anyone is interested.


I call bullshit on just about this entire post.

1)Society never "promised" anyone anything, especially not "if they went to school took on debt and worked hard they would find themselves with a career when they finished."

2)There is no creativity going to waste unless the creative person is wasting it.

3) There is no evidence that the current "younger generation" isn't going to do as well economically as the previous one. With advances in healthcare and technology over the next 50 years, it is more likely that an unemployed member of the "younger" generation will have a better standard of living than a successful, middle-class member of the current older generation.


There is a real problem in this country with people not being willing to accept the work that is available. This weekend I read about onion farmers in Colorado who stopped bringing in migrant workers and hired local out of work people to help bring in the harvest. The vast majority of the "American" workers quit the first day and simply said "the work is too hard". These are able bodied, unemployed people who would rather sit at home and get their Obamafits than do an honest day's work.

I call bullshit on the idea that there are not jobs for young people out there. What I am experiencing as a hiring manager is that younger people with zero experience think they deserve something better than an entry level job, and they are pissed off that people with experience keep getting those jobs, so they head back home and sit on their couch. They also don't get why I think typos on their resumes are a big deal. Turns out "OMG lolz wut?" doesn't really translate well to a world where Sarbanes-Oxley is a reality.

[chico]

Did the group reach a consensus (DID THE GROUP REACH A CONSENSUS) by use of a finger-wiggle vote (BY USE OF A FINGER-WIGGLE VOTE) on whether the unions (ON WHETHER THE UNIONS) could participate (COULD PARTICIPATE) in the protest (IN THE PROTEST)?

I bet there are some other hand signals that come to mind when thinking about this group is really doing.

[X-band '01]

What about the (WHAT ABOUT THE) extreme influence of the unions (EXTREME INFLUENCE OF THE UNIONS) on our politics and economic lives (ON OUR POLITICS AND ECONOMIC LIVES)?

Did the group reach a consensus (DID THE GROUP REACH A CONSENSUS) by use of a finger-wiggle vote (BY USE OF A FINGER-WIGGLE VOTE) on whether the unions (ON WHETHER THE UNIONS) could participate (COULD PARTICIPATE) in the protest (IN THE PROTEST)?

Now I get it. The protesters were just reenacting the Blazing Saddles scene where everyone is reciting the loyalty oath to Hedy Lamarr and getting ready to pillage Rock Ridge.

[powerofX]

I want to add that I think a large part of the reason that the OWS movement is going on now as opposed to right after the bailouts is that after this long after the recession ended, most people assumed that employment would bounce back. But employers found out they can make more money without hiring, by streamlining, upgrading, leaning, whatever. So now we have a class of kids that are graduating from college with few prospects. That's a lot of creative energy going to waste and a betrayal from their point of view from a society that promised that if they went to school took on debt and worked hard they would find themselves with a career when they finished. And instead they are stuck at home back on the couch. This is literally the first generation since the founding of this country where the younger generation probably isn't going to do as well economically as the previous one, mostly due to crushing student debt loans and declining real wages. I don't think a lot of people who have established careers and stable lives really get that, despite whatever they see around them. So even if you can't agree with OWS, which is fine, it is at least possible to get a sense of what is so frustrating to them. I also think the demands or platform is pretty nebulous, because the problem is pretty nebulous. How does one solve the problem of too much corporate influence in politics, in our lives??? I still think some of the demands I've seen like a debt holiday for everyone are ludicrous and need to be reigned in for fear of no one taking them seriously. Also this movement is not super new, but the the jobs crisis has certainly given it force. Nader was saying a great deal of this stuff about corporate power in the 2000 election and it resonated with quite a few people then.

Here is a link (http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/)to some personal stories that might give a sense of why people are out there in the streets in case anyone is interested.

Kahns beat me to the bs-o-meter, but here I go anyway:

Bold line 1) What exactly did they study in college? There are so many opennings in computer programming, engineering, applied math like econ analytics, etc. that we are still importing talent for these positions from across the globe. You are not guranteed a job from school, you are assisted in being prepared. Prepare for what is needed...understand supply and demand for talent.

Bold line 2) Define work hard. There are varying levels of this. I don't think that the entitlement culture understands the meaning. Did you have internships? Are you willing to go anywhere and do anything to get a foot in the door? No...then you have nothing to complain about.

Bold line 3) Don't even go there. Do you know what has happened in every other economic downturn? Innovation. It is innovation out of necessity. Folks start new businesses, find efficiencies, do whatever it takes to get ahead. The fact that you admit that these folks are now on the couch speaks volumes.

[spazzrico]

I call bullshit on just about this entire post.

1)Society never "promised" anyone anything, especially not "if they went to school took on debt and worked hard they would find themselves with a career when they finished."

2)There is no creativity going to waste unless the creative person is wasting it.

3) There is no evidence that the current "younger generation" isn't going to do as well economically as the previous one. With advances in healthcare and technology over the next 50 years, it is more likely that an unemployed member of the "younger" generation will have a better standard of living than a successful, middle-class member of the current older generation.


There is a real problem in this country with people not being willing to accept the work that is available. This weekend I read about onion farmers in Colorado who stopped bringing in migrant workers and hired local out of work people to help bring in the harvest. The vast majority of the "American" workers quit the first day and simply said "the work is too hard". These are able bodied, unemployed people who would rather sit at home and get their Obamafits than do an honest day's work.

I call bullshit on the idea that there are not jobs for young people out there. What I am experiencing as a hiring manager is that younger people with zero experience think they deserve something better than an entry level job, and they are pissed off that people with experience keep getting those jobs, so they head back home and sit on their couch. They also don't get why I think typos on their resumes are a big deal. Turns out "OMG lolz wut?" doesn't really translate well to a world where Sarbanes-Oxley is a reality.


I'm not gonna lie, you sound like an old curmudgeon.

While that might be true of some who don't want to work hard, that is a gross overgeneralization. I deal with that too, but that has nothing to do with young people as a whole. And the trend of people not taking shitty farm labor goes well beyond this generation.

You can call bullshit all you want but that doesn't make it reflect the reality on the street and what a great many people are actually upset about. I'm only here to paraphrase and interpret what I think is going on because I don't enjoy people's legitimate concerns being denigrated for being a bunch of hippie nonsense anymore than I think the tea party as a movement is racist in and of itself. The tea party has legitimate concerns with spending just as OWS has real concerns about the influence that money buys you in our system-to the extent that certain corporation and individuals game the system in their favor. And while no specific person may have made a promise to these young people about getting an education, it is disingenuous to suggest that a tsunami of societal pressure over the last thirty years has not suggested to everyone graduating from high school that the path to prosperity is to go to college, get an education, and then get your foot in the door to doing something you were trained to do.

Here's at list a bit of support (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704250104575238692439240552.html) for my position on this generation being worse off. Here's some other people that feel the same way (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/09/fox-news-poll-think-generation-worse/).....from Fox News As for their future earning power, This article (http://www.cssny.org/userimages/downloads/article,%20The%20Atlantic%20-%20How%20a%20New%20Jobless%20Era%20Will%20Transfor m%20America%20March%202010.pdf) has a bit of what I'm talking about (people graduating into this downturn will earn less over the course of their careers even if they began a job during it). And another (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/01/08/the-recession-generation.html). This report on economic mobility shows some disturbing things. (http://www.economicmobility.org/assets/pdfs/EMP%20American%20Dream%20Report.pdf) Like in the U.S. we are less economically mobile than in any industrialize country save the UK. And that for men:

"Indeed, there has been no progress at all for the
youngest generation. As a group, they have on average
12 percent less income than their fathers’ generation
at the same age.14 This suggests the up-escalator that
has historically ensured that each generation would do
better than the last may not be working very well."

So I hope you are right, but I strongly fear you are wrong and of course, we won't know anyway until later. Economists are great at telling us what happened...

And please, stop using words like "Obamafits". What does that even mean? What does Obama have to do with it? Nothing, but you have to inject your partisanship into it, and frankly, it doesn't make you sound like you care to have serious discussion, rather a rant.

So what kind of jobs can't you fill? I'm curious really. Is it really a problem of motivation or one where skills don't align? Everyone knows there are jobs for young people IF they are qualified. High tech jobs are going unfilled or to migrant workers because of this problem.

[BBC 08]

Damn it, Spazz. I want to rep you for that post but the man is holding me down. Public reps to you.

[boozehound]

Somebody explain to me how these "Occupy" people are not just nutjobs.

They don't really seem to have any idea of what they want done. They just are pissed off at Wall Street.

That's cool. I don't like cancer. Cancer sucks. I think that somebody should do something about cancer. I don't know what, but it seems like something that somebody else should be able to solve. I'm going to get together with a bunch of whackos and crap on cop cars and have public intercourse to draw attention to the fact that I don't like cancer.

[spazzrico]

Kahns beat me to the bs-o-meter, but here I go anyway:

Bold line 1) What exactly did they study in college? There are so many opennings in computer programming, engineering, applied math like econ analytics, etc. that we are still importing talent for these positions from across the globe. You are not guranteed a job from school, you are assisted in being prepared. Prepare for what is needed...understand supply and demand for talent.

Bold line 2) Define work hard. There are varying levels of this. I don't think that the entitlement culture understands the meaning. Did you have internships? Are you willing to go anywhere and do anything to get a foot in the door? No...then you have nothing to complain about.

Bold line 3) Don't even go there. Do you know what has happened in every other economic downturn? Innovation. It is innovation out of necessity. Folks start new businesses, find efficiencies, do whatever it takes to get ahead. The fact that you admit that these folks are now on the couch speaks volumes.

1. But everyone didn't got to school for these jobs. The kids graduating now came in 2007-08. What if those are the jobs that they are suited to.

2. Maybe they did all these things. Still no job, then what?

3. said as much already in my post, so yes I do know. Why does that speak volumes? If someone's job is made obsolete by a robot, how can it possibly because they were lazy if that is what you are implying?

[boozehound]

People love to crap on Wall Street. My favorite is when they talk about all the 'wealth' that Wall Street 'destroyed'. The wealth was created by Wall Street to begin with, largely though the same risky actions that led to the collapse. Everybody loved Wall Street when they were making them money.

The average American deserves more blame for their financial situation than the media would have you believe. I worked in the Sub-Prime mortgage industry for about a year right out of college. You would not believe how stupid people were with their money. I'm talking 'eating rocks' stupid. A lot of the people who are losing their homes shouldn't have been able to buy homes in the first place. They are not fiscally responsible individuals. They are 50% of the reason the whole thing collapsed. The other 50% of the blame goes to the morons who thought it would be a good idea to lend them the money, which is ultimately Fannie and Freddie.

I'm not saying that good people don't have bad things happen to them that causes major financial hardship. It happens. My point is simply that, contrary to popular belief, sometimes the blame for financial hardship actually rests with the person who is facing the hardship and not some nebulus concept of "Wall Street" or "Big Corporations" or "The government".

[boozehound]

1. But everyone didn't got to school for these jobs. The kids graduating now came in 2007-08. What if those are the jobs that they are suited to.

2. Maybe they did all these things. Still no job, then what?

3. said as much already in my post, so yes I do know. Why does that speak volumes? If someone's job is made obsolete by a robot, how can it possibly because they were lazy if that is what you are implying?

1. WTF does that mean? Those careers have been in demand for a long time now. Way before 2007.

2. I don't know. Maybe they don't interview well. Maybe they have a crappy resume. Maybe they live a city in which their chosen field isn't in demand and don't want to move. Maybe they smell bad.

3. That is kind of a 'tough luck' situation, I guess. What solution would you propose? Should America just stop trying to increase production efficiency so that we still have factory jobs that pay more than they should because they are union controlled?

At what point is a person responsible for their own situation?

[powerofX]

People love to crap on Wall Street. My favorite is when they talk about all the 'wealth' that Wall Street 'destroyed'. The wealth was created by Wall Street to begin with, largely though the same risky actions that led to the collapse. Everybody loved Wall Street when they were making them money.

The average American deserves more blame for their financial situation than the media would have you believe. I worked in the Sub-Prime mortgage industry for about a year right out of college. You would not believe how stupid people were with their money. I'm talking 'eating rocks' stupid. A lot of the people who are losing their homes shouldn't have been able to buy homes in the first place. They are not fiscally responsible individuals. They are 50% of the reason the whole thing collapsed. The other 50% of the blame goes to the morons who thought it would be a good idea to lend them the money, which is ultimately Fannie and Freddie.

I'm not saying that good people don't have bad things happen to them that causes major financial hardship. It happens. My point is simply that, contrary to popular belief, sometimes the blame for financial hardship actually rests with the person who is facing the hardship and not some nebulus concept of "Wall Street" or "Big Corporations" or "The government".

Herman Cain, "If you are not rich, are unemployed, blame yourself." The paradigm shift.

[bobbiemcgee]

Dumb borrowers were certainly to blame, but who created the guidelines for these dummies to get a loan? Common sense would say if you have $500 equity in a 450,000 house, things might not work out so good, but as you said, these folks had no common sense, just a desire for a house and the lenders gave it to them. Why? Big profits and bonuses when they sold the crap to Wall St. and Fanny/Freddie. Everybody was in on the take, Realtors, mortgage brokers, Builders, Bankers, Wall St., Appraisers, Regulators.
I saw homes in my neighborhood go up 25k - 50 k a MONTH! How does an appraiser justify that. Can't. Crooked. How does a Regulator studying a Bank's books OK such a thing? Can't. Crooks.

[waggy]

A lot people have lost a bunch in this debacle (or fraud - depending on how you look at it). People that would have paid there mortgages if the economy hadn't taken a huge dive. Yes, many many were overextended, and then there are many many that probably are okay if not for a recession (depression?). It's a complex issue and one size certainly doesn't fit all.

Deregulation of the banking industry was a bad move. Especially since the only upside to the move benefitted the businesses. The lawmakers that did this I'm sure got a great kickback from the industry.

People who go to college and don't get any smarter, better looking, motivated, engaging, whatever, were wasting their money. Duh. But running this country into the ground begins and ends in Washington DC.

Edit: BTW, it's worth mentioning the sponsors of dereg of banking were all republicans.

[boozehound]

Dumb borrowers were certainly to blame, but who created the guidelines for these dummies to get a loan? Common sense would say if you have $500 equity in a 450,000 house, things might not work out so good, but as you said, these folks had no common sense, just a desire for a house and the lenders gave it to them. Why? Big profits and bonuses when they sold the crap to Wall St. and Fanny/Freddie. Everybody was in on the take, Realtors, mortgage brokers, Builders, Bankers, Wall St., Appraisers, Regulators.
I saw homes in my neighborhood go up 25k - 50 k a MONTH! How does an appraiser justify that. Can't. Crooked. How does a Regulator studying a Bank's books OK such a thing? Can't. Crooks.

It's not illegal for me to chop my own junk off either, but I am smart enough to know that it isn't a good idea. I don't need anybody telling me that.

When my wife and I bought our house a while ago I was astounded at the amount that we could get preapproved for, with only a 5% down payment, AFTER the market had started to collapse and regulations had supposedly tightened! We bought a house that cost half as much as the amount we were preapproved for. We could have afforded the more expensive home, but we wouldn't have had money to put in savings, 401(K)'s, etc. If anything went wrong we would have been screwed. Then my wife lost her job. Fortunately we didn't max ourselves out on what we could afford. Just because somebody is willing to loan you the money doesn't mean you should take it.

I do have a problem with the fact that we bailed out the banks. They should have had to take their lumps for being stupid enough to loan out the money just like the people stupid enough to borrow the money had to face consequences.


A lot people have lost a bunch in this debacle (or fraud - depending on how you look at it). People that would have paid there mortgages if the economy hadn't taken a huge dive. Yes, many many were overextended, and then there are many many that probably are okay if not for a recession (depression?). It's a complex issue and one size certainly doesn't fit all.

Deregulation of the banking industry was a bad move. Especially since the only upside to the move benefitted the businesses. The lawmakers that did this I'm sure got a great kickback from the industry.

People who go to college and don't get any smarter, better looking, motivated, engaging, whatever, were wasting their money. Duh. But running this country into the ground begins and ends in Washington DC.

Edit: BTW, it's worth mentioning the sponsors of dereg of banking were all republicans.

You could also argue that preparing yourself financially for a recession is part of being responsible for your personal finances. Things happen. Expensive emergencies, job losses, etc. That is why you have an emergency fund, which should at least be equal to several months of pay. I get what you are saying, but I think that people ultimately are responsible for preparing themselves for the possibility that bad things will happen financially.

[PM Thor]

Im not into the whole ows movement, but I actually could see protesting corporate personhood.

I HATE dayton.

[waggy]

I get what you are saying

Likewise. Ultimately, financial responsibility lies with the borrower.

OWS seems to be mostly college kids that want their student loans forgiven. That seems to be the largest group. I'm not in favor of that.

I do sympathize with people that had jobs, were paying their mortgage, but lost their job due to economy and then not being able to sell the house because the market took a huge dump. Again, one size doesn't fit all, but I largely lay the blame with Washington here.

[xeus]

Im not into the whole ows movement, but I actually could see protesting corporate personhood.

I HATE dayton.

Do you even know what "corporate personhood" means? I don't want to interrupt you if you are already making a cardboard sign with the catchy phrase about Texas executing a corporation, but at the same time I don't want you to look foolish. (To the extent I can help control that...)

But if you do know what it means (or think you know what it means), I'd love to hear about your issues with corporations existing as unique entities under the law.

[boozehound]

Likewise. Ultimately, financial responsibility lies with the borrower.

OWS seems to be mostly college kids that want their student loans forgiven. That seems to be the largest group. I'm not in favor of that.

I do sympathize with people that had jobs, were paying their mortgage, but lost their job due to economy and then not being able to sell the house because the market took a huge dump. Again, one size doesn't fit all, but I largely lay the blame with Washington here.

Agree. Some people definitely got legitimately screwed. I used to work with a lot of people in California that I felt bad for. People in their late 20's to early 30's who were (and still are) making very good money that bought houses that dropped in value over $100K. That is tough to get out from under no matter how much you are making. I'm pretty sure that none of those guys are in NYC crapping on police cars to 'protest' it though, like the 'Occupy' losers.

[paulxu]

Likewise. Ultimately, financial responsibility lies with the borrower


Wags, I wish that were true. Borrowers can walk away.
Banks that sold the crap and made big bucks off derivatives with false AIG credit default insurance got made whole. (and bonuses)
You and I made it up. We were the ultimate financially responsible party. The taxpayers.

[Kahns Krazy]

I'm not gonna lie, you sound like an old curmudgeon.

And you sound exactly like the younger generation that doesn't want to hear that their dream job is taken, and they should set their expectations a little lower.



Here's at list a bit of support (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704250104575238692439240552.html) for my position on this generation being worse off. .

I clicked your link. The article starts with

"A few weeks ago I ran into one of my son's oldest friends. He had attended an Ivy League school, studying drama and music,"

I started cackling like an old curmudgeon and closed the article. If you're really interested in getting a job after college, it would be a good idea to choose a marketable skill. I'm sorry that your four years of acting and playing guitar didn't land you a VP job at P&G.

[stophorseabuse]

Speakers? Someone brought in to speak at the event? I simply don't believe you. I never heard the N word at any of the Tea Party events that I went to, not even once in the crowd, let alone from a speaker. I am calling Bullshyt. Valdosta is a majority minority city. White people are outnumbered by blacks there and I can't imagine they would bring in half a dozen speakers that called Obama "That N----" hundreds of times. The only public place that is acceptable for someone to speak and say "That N-----" hundreds of times is a rap concert. I don't believe it.

I couldn't find it reported. Press were combing these events for anything inflammatory and the racial angle was always looked for.

The event was held on a campground/flea market it the far south part of the county. It was an open to speak event (concerns of citizens). This was before the Tea Party was being taken super seriously. I had not even really heard of them--hence--why I would attend and check it out. I am NOT saying this is what the Tea Party stands for, but you can bet, especially in the south, there is PLENTY of race hate to go around. The group is way more organized than it was then, and with the media presence, I am sure they know to watch it.

If you don't believe that hundreds of white southerners in a secluded area in the deep south will throw the N word out without hesitation, well then you are just naive. I really think you know that Snipe. I think you also know that local press knows what NOT to cover.

[BBC 08]

This was before the Tea Party was being taken super seriously.

The Tea Party is super serious, guys.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQlZ0MC9Mn_sjUeHsNx4U3Mrwaz1VfUr ADnw8vt6NWV-87c3EbFQ6yvR1bd

[BBC 08]

Super.

Serious.

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4E2SXbJ8WzvM2MqVAXHJNI1YjKZG7a QacCS6Blf3O6SZKUsFRJFiUAZVKrg

[stophorseabuse]

A lot people have lost a bunch in this debacle (or fraud - depending on how you look at it). People that would have paid there mortgages if the economy hadn't taken a huge dive. Yes, many many were overextended, and then there are many many that probably are okay if not for a recession (depression?). It's a complex issue and one size certainly doesn't fit all.

Deregulation of the banking industry was a bad move. Especially since the only upside to the move benefitted the businesses. The lawmakers that did this I'm sure got a great kickback from the industry.

People who go to college and don't get any smarter, better looking, motivated, engaging, whatever, were wasting their money. Duh. But running this country into the ground begins and ends in Washington DC.

Edit: BTW, it's worth mentioning the sponsors of dereg of banking were all republicans.

Winner!

[stophorseabuse]

The Tea Party is super serious, guys.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQlZ0MC9Mn_sjUeHsNx4U3Mrwaz1VfUr ADnw8vt6NWV-87c3EbFQ6yvR1bd

Dont you mean, super cereal?

[PM Thor]

Do you even know what "corporate personhood" means? I don't want to interrupt you if you are already making a cardboard sign with the catchy phrase about Texas executing a corporation, but at the same time I don't want you to look foolish. (To the extent I can help control that...)

But if you do know what it means (or think you know what it means), I'd love to hear about your issues with corporations existing as unique entities under the law.

If I was Sarah Palin I would accuse you of gotcha journalism Xeus.

I HATE dayton.

[DC Muskie]

You could also argue that preparing yourself financially for a recession is part of being responsible for your personal finances. Things happen. Expensive emergencies, job losses, etc. That is why you have an emergency fund, which should at least be equal to several months of pay. I get what you are saying, but I think that people ultimately are responsible for preparing themselves for the possibility that bad things will happen financially.

So if you prepare your finances for a few months without a job, and then you are still without a job when the recession goes a little longer and jobs become fewer, what do you do?

At some point even with the best preparation, you run out of money. Energy costs are high, food costs are high, your purchasing power is lower.

I think when someone says what I quoted sort of misses the reality of what people are living in. In my last job, the combined wage for what was considered "working poor" family of four was $54,000. How do you save enough to ready yourself for a recession, emergencies on $54,000 in which two people are working at least three jobs?

Bad things happen, no doubt. You need to do your best. But there a point when things are out of your control.

[pizza delivery]

"Where there is no moral framework, no ethical sensibility, the market ends
up devouring all other sectors, and then devours itself."--Adam Smith



"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public
expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in
that proportion." - Adam Smith


"If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - Alexander Hamilton

Don't let the super rich whine too loud, you might get used to it.

[Kahns Krazy]

In my last job, the combined wage for what was considered "working poor" family of four was $54,000. How do you save enough to ready yourself for a recession, emergencies on $54,000 in which two people are working at least three jobs? .

If you meant to hit the sarcasm font, I think you missed it. It really seems like you might be serious here.

[nuts4xu]

LEGALIZE IT!! Oops, wrong thread.

[XULucho27]

A lot people have lost a bunch in this debacle (or fraud - depending on how you look at it). People that would have paid there mortgages if the economy hadn't taken a huge dive. Yes, many many were overextended, and then there are many many that probably are okay if not for a recession (depression?). It's a complex issue and one size certainly doesn't fit all.

Deregulation of the banking industry was a bad move. Especially since the only upside to the move benefitted the businesses. The lawmakers that did this I'm sure got a great kickback from the industry.

People who go to college and don't get any smarter, better looking, motivated, engaging, whatever, were wasting their money. Duh. But running this country into the ground begins and ends in Washington DC.

Edit: BTW, it's worth mentioning the sponsors of dereg of banking were all republicans.


I do sympathize with people that had jobs, were paying their mortgage, but lost their job due to economy and then not being able to sell the house because the market took a huge dump. Again, one size doesn't fit all, but I largely lay the blame with Washington here.

I'm with you 100% on these points. Although both banks and borrowers were incredibly irresponsible in the bubble preceding the recession, they were enabled to do so by deregulation of the markets, which began in the mid 80's with securities deregulation, and culminated in 1999 with the Financial Services Modernization Act and the repeal of Glass-Steagal.

Wall Street simply took advantage of the situation and just started making crazy bets with house money, or specifically, your money. It's as simple as that. The blame lies all around, but begins, in my opinion, with D.C.

Cut the red tape!
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_zlATsacETbU/SaRvn8lmzEI/AAAAAAAAAJs/9KkHQHWA-cw/s400/Cutting+Red+Tape.jpg


Pictured:
Office of Thrift Supervision Director James Gilleran, Jim McLaughlin of the American Bankers Association, Harry Doherty of America's Community Bankers, FDIC Vice Chairman John Reich and Ken Guenther of the Independent Community Bankers of America

[boozehound]

So if you prepare your finances for a few months without a job, and then you are still without a job when the recession goes a little longer and jobs become fewer, what do you do?

At some point even with the best preparation, you run out of money. Energy costs are high, food costs are high, your purchasing power is lower.

I think when someone says what I quoted sort of misses the reality of what people are living in. In my last job, the combined wage for what was considered "working poor" family of four was $54,000. How do you save enough to ready yourself for a recession, emergencies on $54,000 in which two people are working at least three jobs?

Bad things happen, no doubt. You need to do your best. But there a point when things are out of your control.

$55k per year is considered working poor now?

$55K per year with all the associated tax credits that someone with a family of 4 making that kind of money would result in a take home pay of around $4K per month. How is that poor? How many of those 'working poor' families have cell phones, cable, internet, 2 cars? Cut out the cable and save $50 month.

I will say that I do get your point that, to a degree, it is difficult for low income families to save enough to have a legit emegency fund.

[Kahns Krazy]

Here is what the occupy cincinnati protesters say, according to the Enquirer (http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artikkel?NoCache=1&Dato=20111011&Kategori=NEWS01&Lopenr=111011046).


Here are some snapshots of a few of the Occupy Cincinnati protesters at downtown’s Piatt Park:

Ross Mole
Age: 21


Community: Clifton


Occupation: Pizza delivery person; Cincinnati State student


What are you protesting?
“Government has been infested with special-interest groups and lobbyists. It’s time to take back the power and the responsibility.”


What would have to happen for you to end your protest?
"I don’t believe I can answer that. I would have to think about it more. At the very least, I hope this protest raises awareness.”

Holly Curtis
Age: 22


Community: Clifton


Occupation: Cook


What are you protesting?
“I completely disagree with the big banks and big corporations being in control in this country.”


What would have to happen for you to end the protest?
“I don’t know. I’m not really sure.”

Aaron Roco
Age: 33


Community: Clifton


Occupation: Self-employed hospitality consultant


What are you protesting?
"The suffering I’ve seen among family, friends and my community. Everybody knows somebody who’s lost their job or their home and is saddled with all kinds of debt.”


What would have to happen for you to end the protest?
“I’d like to have some public space we could occupy in the central business district 24 hours a day, seven days a week.”

Carol Sauer
Age: 59


Community: Kenwood


Occupation: Retired teacher


What are you protesting?
“Nothing is happening in terms of economic recovery.”


What would have to happen for you to end the protest?
“Congress voting yes on the Jobs Bill.”

Ellil Aila
Age: 33


Community: Northside


Occupation: Seamstress and homemaker for husband and three children


What are you protesting?
“I have been waiting for years for people to unite on the basis of seeking equality and demanding accountability from government representatives.”


What would have to happen for you to end the protest?
“I would have to see them return public spaces to the public. We should be able to sleep in public spaces at all times.



There you have it. This group has rallied around not being able to sleep in public places. Only one of the 5 people interviewed had a single concrete outcome in mind for his protest.

[GoMuskies]

Why would a non-homeless person want to sleep in a public space?

[Kahns Krazy]

Here's at list a bit of support (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704250104575238692439240552.html) for my position on this generation being worse off. Here's some other people that feel the same way (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/09/fox-news-poll-think-generation-worse/).....from Fox News As for their future earning power, This article (http://www.cssny.org/userimages/downloads/article,%20The%20Atlantic%20-%20How%20a%20New%20Jobless%20Era%20Will%20Transfor m%20America%20March%202010.pdf) has a bit of what I'm talking about (people graduating into this downturn will earn less over the course of their careers even if they began a job during it). And another (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/01/08/the-recession-generation.html). This report on economic mobility shows some disturbing things. (http://www.economicmobility.org/assets/pdfs/EMP%20American%20Dream%20Report.pdf) Like in the U.S. we are less economically mobile than in any industrialize country save the UK. And that for men:

"Indeed, there has been no progress at all for the
youngest generation. As a group, they have on average
12 percent less income than their fathers’ generation
at the same age.14 This suggests the up-escalator that
has historically ensured that each generation would do
better than the last may not be working very well."

So I hope you are right, but I strongly fear you are wrong and of course, we won't know anyway until later. Economists are great at telling us what happened...

And please, stop using words like "Obamafits". What does that even mean? What does Obama have to do with it? Nothing, but you have to inject your partisanship into it, and frankly, it doesn't make you sound like you care to have serious discussion, rather a rant.
blem.


I clicked on your links. The mobility study wouldn't open for me.

What you see as a cause, I see as an effect. You say young people are disenfranchised because of high unemployment, and I say young people are less employable because of their attitudes toward employment. In your first article, the anecdote is about how an Ivy League education in Music and Theater doesn't yield a high paying job. No kidding. That's always been the case. Nobody promised anyone anything different.

Your second article includes this story:


―I‘M DEFINITELY SEEING a lot of the older generation saying, ‗Oh, this [recession] is so awful,‘‖ Robert Sherman, a 2009 graduate of Syracuse University, told The New York Times in July. ―But my generation isn‘t getting as depressed and uptight.‖ Sherman had recently turned down a $50,000-a-year job at a consulting firm, after careful deliberation with his parents, because he hadn‘t connected well with his potential bosses. Instead he was doing odd jobs and trying to get a couple of tech companies off the ground. ―The economy will rebound,‖ he said.
Over the past two generations, particularly among many college grads, the 20s have become a sort of netherworld between adolescence and adulthood. Job-switching is common, and with it, periods of voluntary, transitional unemployment. And as marriage and parenthood have receded farther into the future, the first years after college have become, arguably, more carefree. In this recession, the term funemployment has gained some currency among single 20-somethings, prompting a small raft of youth-culture stories in the Los Angeles Times and San Francisco Weekly, on Gawker, and in other venues.

This is my experience. The younger generation would rather not work than work for a boss that they didn't "connect" with in an interview. Who promised you that your first job would feature a positive "connection" with your boss?

Your third link is a poll about people "thinking" that the current generation will be worse off than previous ones. Nice work, you backed up your opinion statement by citing an opinion statement. None of it is based on any facts.

The link from the Atlantic that purports to say that today's graduates will make less over their lifetimes is a bit specious. First, it ignores the fact that because of advances in healthcare, today's graduates will have longer working careers and longer retirements. Secondly, it assumes that the generations were equal before they graduated. I'm saying I don't think that's the case. You wouldn't have been caught dead when I graduated (less than a full generation ago, by the way) turning down a $50k job because you didn't feel a "connection" to your boss when the alternative was doing odd jobs. You would have taken the job, gotten your experience, and moved on.

As far as "Obamafits", what I am specifically referring to is the extension of unemployment benefits that I believe has had an adverse impact on the unemployment rate. Of the people I know that have been laid off, all of them have indicated that their job search has been made less urgent by the length of their unemployment benefits. I really don't care how bad the market is, if you can't find a job in substantially less than 79 weeks, either you are not employable at all, or your standards are too high. This is especially true in families with children that require some supervision.

[boozehound]

I agree with Kahns.

You wouldn't have turned down $50K a year out of college when I graduated 6 years ago, and the economy wasn't even in a recession then!

My sister graduated college about 2 years ago. She went to a very mediocore school and had OK grades. She was a finance major. She got a job right away upon graduation with a pretty good company.

My other sister, still in college and a psychology major, will probably have a tougher time because you can't do much with a psychology undergrad degree.

I wonder what all these college graduates who can't get jobs majored in? I don't have any friends with college degrees who can't find jobs. My friends were mostly business majors which probably helps.

[X-band '01]

Maybe the protesters should move their party down to the Job and Family Services building instead:

Cincinnati Enquirer - County workers, family, friends indicted in alleged $135,000 fraud (http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20111012/NEWS0108/110130302/County-workers-family-friends-indicted-alleged-135-000-fraud)

It's amazing - if only these ex-employees would put half the energy into their jobs that they did to launch their fraudulent schemes. This isn't going to help the anti-Senate Bill 5 crowd, either - I don't want to hear the "bad apple" excuse since the county as a whole (and employers who pay into the JFS fund) are taking one in the ass right now.

[coasterville95]

Turning back to Cincinnati - it appears they are pleading non guilty to their trespassing tickets for staying in piat park after hours. I hear it is to bog down the judicial system.

[STL_XUfan]

I wonder what all these college graduates who can't get jobs majored in? I don't have any friends with college degrees who can't find jobs.


Law.

[coasterville95]

What's more - one of the people I follow on Twitter has taken to retweeting the occupy Cincinnati tweets. They make for a good laugh.

I thought their premise was "The rich guy is putting down the little guy, the system is biased against the little guy.". They sound like the same crowd that bought into Obamas campaign promises regarding change and wealth redistribution and are now impatient and indignant that the promised change is not forthcoming.

Now, they are all about unlimited access to public parks and the notion that somehow their free speech is being curtailed. I see the politicians are quick to jump on that one. It's low hanging fruit. You take a vacant lot in a bad part of town, you designate it as a "freedom of speech" zone and open it up 7/24/365 at little to no expense. Said political types can point to it as "we listened and acted on your demands".

Then they claim people will be joining them from other cities, because they aren't getting the citations every night. What kind of sense does that make? Is it true some are only staying long enough to get their ticket and then go home? At any rate, the city is looking at this wrong, if you have all these guys willing to 'rent' the park at $105 per person per night, call it a new revenue source. $5,000 a night, in 20 nights you just saved a fireman or police officers job.

They also point to the fact they are providing meals to the homeless. Great, channel that energy, rent one of those vacant storefronts in OTR, open a food kitchen, and if they can show a track record of doing it right, that wealthy 1% just might underwrite it!

Then there is the tweet scoffing somebody who opposed them by saying they made a success of themselves with just a public university education. Their beef? Taxes went towards it! Huh, so now the government or non profits providing low cost higher education so that they can acquire the skills to become wealthy is somehow evil? And most colleges have something that is underwritten by those evil rich guys. (who are the same guys kicking lots of money into social services)

Honestly, the more I read, this is all one big pity party of folks who want wealth and prosperity just given to them.

I agree about the $50k job, you would have had to have a pretty strong moral objection to the manager not to take the job if only as a place to hang your hat, stay marketable and current in your field while you looked for an even better job. I didnt make instant friends with the manager, give me a break.

Regarding the cancer analogy - we have those, see the komen walk for example where people get together to bring attention to it, but more importantly raise money that can be directed towards the researchers who are trying to do something about it.

Well anyway. Thanks for sharing my bus ride home with me, and I'm sure Muskie is so happy he installed that tapatalk interface now :).

[xeus]

Turning back to Cincinnati - it appears they are pleading non guilty to their trespassing tickets for staying in piat park after hours. I hear it is to bog down the judicial system.

They are about .00001% of the judicial system, so if that is their objective ... they have failed.

[nuts4xu]

Why would a non-homeless person want to sleep in a public space?

This is usually called "camping", but it is also usually in a more wooded location.

[DC Muskie]

If you meant to hit the sarcasm font, I think you missed it. It really seems like you might be serious here.

I'm dead serious. This is the number for DC at least. Cost of living here is a little more then others.


$55k per year is considered working poor now?

$55K per year with all the associated tax credits that someone with a family of 4 making that kind of money would result in a take home pay of around $4K per month. How is that poor? How many of those 'working poor' families have cell phones, cable, internet, 2 cars? Cut out the cable and save $50 month.

I will say that I do get your point that, to a degree, it is difficult for low income families to save enough to have a legit emegency fund.

I would bet that most people who take this sort of stance...like do they have cell phones, cable, internet and two cars...never actually met, let alone worked with people who are in a situation where they struggle to make ends meet.

I like the tax credit argument. Who exactly is helping them with their taxes? Don't they know that paying almost $1,800 in rent? How much does it take to feed a child? Or two? Or how old they are?

The number is based on making sure they have the basic needs for living. Two cars? Do you think these people have one car? Or do you think they are making two car payments?

There is a guy who lives in my building who takes home $600 every two weeks for pay. He has a car, which he needs to go to his job. He needs to insure that car, keep it running, which includes filling it up with gas.

How does he prepare for a recession? I mean he is working. He is on the edge of not working pretty much all the time. I can't say that I have ever been in that position.

[DC Muskie]

I say young people are less employable because of their attitudes toward employment.

This is my experience. The younger generation would rather not work than work for a boss that they didn't "connect" with in an interview. Who promised you that your first job would feature a positive "connection" with your boss?

I had a recent talk with my boss about this very topic. She stated this exact opinion. I have been stuck working with people who are years older than me, so I don't have any personal experience, but I do know people my age had similar attitudes. She said to wait a few years and try hiring this generation and you will see it is more prominent.


As far as "Obamafits", what I am specifically referring to is the extension of unemployment benefits that I believe has had an adverse impact on the unemployment rate. Of the people I know that have been laid off, all of them have indicated that their job search has been made less urgent by the length of their unemployment benefits. I really don't care how bad the market is, if you can't find a job in substantially less than 79 weeks, either you are not employable at all, or your standards are too high. This is especially true in families with children that require some supervision.

I have to say I completely agree with this. And this is just an extension of abusing a system that was meant to help out while you worked towards finding another job.

Case in point. I laid off a woman last year in her 60's. Great lady, but she sucked as a worker. Complete black hole of production. She took the unemployment, spent the next seven months not only not working, not trying to find a job...I now find out my old job got a grant and brought her back. So she got like seven month paid vacation.

Personally, I hope to never have to go on unemployment. I would hope I would have the pride to find something to support myself.

Just today at my new job I interviewed a lady who hasn't held a full time job in three years. I asked her why she went from being a director of development at a few places to part time work. She explained that she hasn't found a job that gives her a"passion." I was shocked.

I told my colleagues after the interview that I wanted her bank account where she could work part time, live in DC and wait for the right job to come along that supports her passion.

Forgetting the fact that earlier in the interview when I asked what she wanted to do as her career progressed, she told me wanted to be a writer.

Okay. I guess.

[spazzrico]

I clicked on your links. The mobility study wouldn't open for me.

What you see as a cause, I see as an effect. You say young people are disenfranchised because of high unemployment, and I say young people are less employable because of their attitudes toward employment. In your first article, the anecdote is about how an Ivy League education in Music and Theater doesn't yield a high paying job. No kidding. That's always been the case. Nobody promised anyone anything different.

Your second article includes this story:



This is my experience. The younger generation would rather not work than work for a boss that they didn't "connect" with in an interview. Who promised you that your first job would feature a positive "connection" with your boss?

Your third link is a poll about people "thinking" that the current generation will be worse off than previous ones. Nice work, you backed up your opinion statement by citing an opinion statement. None of it is based on any facts.

The link from the Atlantic that purports to say that today's graduates will make less over their lifetimes is a bit specious. First, it ignores the fact that because of advances in healthcare, today's graduates will have longer working careers and longer retirements. Secondly, it assumes that the generations were equal before they graduated. I'm saying I don't think that's the case. You wouldn't have been caught dead when I graduated (less than a full generation ago, by the way) turning down a $50k job because you didn't feel a "connection" to your boss when the alternative was doing odd jobs. You would have taken the job, gotten your experience, and moved on.

As far as "Obamafits", what I am specifically referring to is the extension of unemployment benefits that I believe has had an adverse impact on the unemployment rate. Of the people I know that have been laid off, all of them have indicated that their job search has been made less urgent by the length of their unemployment benefits. I really don't care how bad the market is, if you can't find a job in substantially less than 79 weeks, either you are not employable at all, or your standards are too high. This is especially true in families with children that require some supervision.

Thanks for the clarify on the Obamafits, and your perspective. Incidentally I was just listening to this episode of On Point (http://onpoint.wbur.org/2011/10/03/a-lost-generation) on the way home (Tom Ashbrook is simply the best radio host/moderator to me) and it dovetails perfectly with our debate. A lot of it is arguing what I'm saying, but there a good number of call-ins and e-mails which say basically what you are saying and the gentleman is supplying the facts to go with the opinion you suggest I'm relying on. I guess where i stand overall is that while I get that there are a great many young people who need to sharpen skills, change careers, do whatever it takes to get their asses in the door....the scale of the problem is so huge today (unprecedented in the post WWII era) that it goes beyond the entitlement generation issues to something fundamentaly deeper.

Totally agree on the Music degree thing, that's always a risk and no one should expect a career.....but I wrote it off as his anecdote to start the larger argument.

Not sure what to think of the unemployment extension situation. My sister and her husband & three kids would have been totally screwed without it and he did manage to at least reorient himself into doing what he actually wants to do by freelancing. It doesn't pay enough though. That said I totally see the disincentives to finding a job. I just wish there was something better other than just cutting them off.

Are you seeing people turning down 50K positions in your line? (I know that number is from the article) I actually did myself, but I was already headed back to grad school in something I was hell bent on doing, not just odd jobs. I lucked out that I made it through the other side in time. Sometimes I reflect on how many years of earning I gave up, and then realize I would have been miserable doing what I did then and love what I do now.

[spazzrico]

She said to wait a few years and try hiring this generation and you will see it is more prominent.

This is a major thing in the education world as well, and I can't completely disagree, but at the same time every older generation says similar things about the one coming up.

[DC Muskie]

This is a major thing in the education world as well, and I can't completely disagree, but at the same time every older generation says similar things about the one coming up.

Which was my point to her as well. We have really smart kids, and of course it's natural that they want better paying jobs and more responsibilities.

But I would never turn down a job in my earlier career. It would never cross my mind.

[BandAid]

The Trees by Rush:


There is unrest in the forest,
There is trouble with the trees,
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their please.

The trouble with the maples,
(And they’re quite convinced they’re right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light.
But the oaks can’t help their feelings
If they like the way they’re made.
And they wonder why the maples
Can’t be happy in their shade.

There is trouble in the forest,
And the creatures all have fled,
As the maples scream “Oppression!”
And the oaks just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights.
“The oaks are just too greedy;
We will make them give us light.”
Now there’s no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.

[PM Thor]

Maybe the protesters should move their party down to the Job and Family Services building instead:

Cincinnati Enquirer - County workers, family, friends indicted in alleged $135,000 fraud (http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20111012/NEWS0108/110130302/County-workers-family-friends-indicted-alleged-135-000-fraud)

It's amazing - if only these ex-employees would put half the energy into their jobs that they did to launch their fraudulent schemes. This isn't going to help the anti-Senate Bill 5 crowd, either - I don't want to hear the "bad apple" excuse since the county as a whole (and employers who pay into the JFS fund) are taking one in the ass right now.

How exactly will any legislative act hinder someone from committing fraud? SB5 has nothing written into it that deals with breaking the law, and limiting collective bargaining has no bearing on what these idiots did. On the surface it doesn't help my anti SB5 crowd, but you have to understand that SB5 and this event are completely non related.

I HATE dayton

[X-band '01]

Thor, I understand that there's no true relation between the two, but when you have these people and Diane Frey making the news right now, that's bad.

My original point was that the indicted employees have the same entitlement sense that a number of these protesters have right now, although they've gone to a far worse place at this point.

[Kahns Krazy]

Not sure what to think of the unemployment extension situation. My sister and her husband & three kids would have been totally screwed without it and he did manage to at least reorient himself into doing what he actually wants to do by freelancing. It doesn't pay enough though. That said I totally see the disincentives to finding a job. I just wish there was something better other than just cutting them off.

Are you seeing people turning down 50K positions in your line? (I know that number is from the article) I actually did myself, but I was already headed back to grad school in something I was hell bent on doing, not just odd jobs. I lucked out that I made it through the other side in time. Sometimes I reflect on how many years of earning I gave up, and then realize I would have been miserable doing what I did then and love what I do now.

Ask a parent with an addict child. Sometimes cutting them off is the best thing. I'm glad that your family was able to use the safety net time to find something to do. Stories like that make me wonder if you were told you had 26 weeks to reorient, would you be able to do it in that time? There's a major component of motivation when someone tells you you have 79 weeks before you benefits run out versus 26.

I have seen it over and over and over in people that have transitioned jobs, and I did the same thing myself when my company was sold in 2001. I had a three month severance package, and I didn't even start looking until the end of the first month. I don't believe that extending benefits from 26 to 79 weeks has done anything for the overall employment situation beside make a huge number of people complacent about unemployment.

And yes, I am having a very hard time finding qualified entry level candidates for a $50k entry level job. (Qualified in my case means business degree, preferably accounting or finance). If there are so many unemployed young people, I can't find them.

[pizza delivery]

The Trees by Rush:


There is unrest in the forest,
There is trouble with the trees,
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their please.

The trouble with the maples,
(And they’re quite convinced they’re right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light.
But the oaks can’t help their feelings
If they like the way they’re made.
And they wonder why the maples
Can’t be happy in their shade.

There is trouble in the forest,
And the creatures all have fled,
As the maples scream “Oppression!”
And the oaks just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights.
“The oaks are just too greedy;
We will make them give us light.”
Now there’s no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.

So, you're saying we're all going to die?

[pizza delivery]

Found this:

How income disparity can lead to unrest (http://3a.17.1243.static.theplanet.com/video/morning-joe-how-income-disparity-can-lead-to-unrest-1312086960) - Former National Security Advisor Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinsk, 7/6/11

The take away is that during great economic times, people wouldn't care so much, but with things doing poorly, people do not like seeing the greatest disparity in income in the world take place without saying something. The point of the protests around the country won't likely have a unified voice on what they want, nor will each protester, Kahns, have their own solution, but it's perfectly reasonable, and within the American vision, to show up some place and start complaining when things aren't right.

Anyway, from a national security perspective, this is all relevant as well. If you read the comments on videos from Wall St. some people are wishing death and bombings on the rich people who are above and laughing and drinking champagne. The scoffing that people are doing in this thread and around the country may have some merit, but we'll see how far things go. If Brzezinski is concerned, from a theoretical standpoint it makes sense to listen, especially as we see this spread. The 2012 election will almost certainly be volatile.

On Oct 4th, Morning Joe followed up on the Income Disparity angle:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/morning-joe-uses-charts-to-explain-income-inequality-thats-fueling-occupy-wall-street/


“1973 was the peak for the average male worker in America if you adjust the numbers and everything,” Scarborough said. “America has been declining in terms of real wages since 1973.”

Scarborough and Sachs point to the influence of money in our politics as a major factor in generating this income inequality, which Sachs’ chart reveals is nearly as high as it was during the Great Depression. “I think the parties have been bought off,” Scarborough says, stating the obvious.

Sachs’ solution, that we need to raise taxes (the “price of civilization” that his book’s title refers to), reveals the fundamental weakness in our politics. Voters are easily seduced by the promise of lower taxes, even when they’re not the ones benefiting from them, and so, have been enlisted in their own demise.

The result is a self-perpetuating cycle that leaves a weakened working class unable to move up from generation to generation. Sachs points out that the only group doing well in today’s economy, educationally speaking, are those with advanced degrees. “If kids come from an affluent family, they can pay the tuition,” he says. “But if you’re coming from working class family, if you’re coming from a poor family, the chance that you’re going to make it all the way through college is very small.”

The crushing pressure that Sachs describes is a big reason why you’re seeing all of those folks Occupying Wall Street, and if the length and breadth of these issues is any indication, why that protest might have surprisingly strong legs.

Does anyone here feel like they noticed a benefit from the Bush tax cuts? Job growth is stagnant, corporations have hordes of cash, we're cutting education while the East is racing miles ahead of us.

[chico]

Found this:

How income disparity can lead to unrest (http://3a.17.1243.static.theplanet.com/video/morning-joe-how-income-disparity-can-lead-to-unrest-1312086960) - Former National Security Advisor Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinsk, 7/6/11

The take away is that during great economic times, people wouldn't care so much, but with things doing poorly, people do not like seeing the greatest disparity in income in the world take place without saying something. The point of the protests around the country won't likely have a unified voice on what they want, nor will each protester, Kahns, have their own solution, but it's perfectly reasonable, and within the American vision, to show up some place and start complaining when things aren't right.

Anyway, from a national security perspective, this is all relevant as well. If you read the comments on videos from Wall St. some people are wishing death and bombings on the rich people who are above and laughing and drinking champagne. The scoffing that people are doing in this thread and around the country may have some merit, but we'll see how far things go. If Brzezinski is concerned, from a theoretical standpoint it makes sense to listen, especially as we see this spread. The 2012 election will almost certainly be volatile.

On Oct 4th, Morning Joe followed up on the Income Disparity angle:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/morning-joe-uses-charts-to-explain-income-inequality-thats-fueling-occupy-wall-street/



Does anyone here feel like they noticed a benefit from the Bush tax cuts? Job growth is stagnant, corporations have hordes of cash, we're cutting education while the East is racing miles ahead of us.

I think that may be part of it but that's kind of a simplistic approach to think the tax rate is the primary reason for things. I enjoy reading The Atlantic because it tries to be more impartial than most publications, and in last month's edition they had a great piece about the decline of the middle class. It's a long read, but well worth it if you want to get a good understanding of what's going on and why.

Here's the link to the online version. (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/09/can-the-middle-class-be-saved/8600/)

[pizza delivery]

I think that may be part of it but that's kind of a simplistic approach to think the tax rate is the primary reason for things. I enjoy reading The Atlantic because it tries to be more impartial than most publications, and in last month's edition they had a great piece about the decline of the middle class. It's a long read, but well worth it if you want to get a good understanding of what's going on and why.

Here's the link to the online version. (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/09/can-the-middle-class-be-saved/8600/)

Some take away from that article:

-Wages for 4 year degrees are flat.
-Wages for post grad degrees are better, not great.
-Blue collar jobs for HS educated males fell off a cliff post-2000.
-Silicon Valley, Boston, Chicago, Seattle are where professional jobs are.
-Women are doing better than ever in an economy that consists of interpersonal skills, teamwork and computers.
-US Multinationals are increasing productivity, but shipping jobs over seas and reducing them in the US.
-Benefits from successful innovation do not last as long due to global competition for jobs.

Some quotes from beyond what's above:


A thinner middle class, in itself, means fewer stepping stones available to people born into low-income families. If the economic and cultural trends under way continue unabated, class mobility will likely decrease in the future, and class divides may eventually grow beyond our ability to bridge them.


Removing bureaucratic obstacles to innovation is as important as pushing more public funds toward it. As Wall Street has amply demonstrated, not every industry was overregulated in the aughts. Nonetheless, the decade did see the accretion of a number of regulatory measures that may have chilled the investment climate (the Sarbanes-Oxley accounting reforms and a proliferation of costly security regulations following the creation of the Department of Homeland Security are two prominent examples).

Regulatory balance is always difficult in practice, but Michael Mandel has suggested a useful rule of thumb: where new and emerging industries are concerned—industries that are at the forefront of the economy and could provide big bursts of growth—our bias should be toward light regulation, allowing creative experimentation and encouraging fast growth. The rapid expansion of the Internet in the 1990s is a good example of the benefit that can come from a light regulatory hand early in an industry’s development; green technology, wireless platforms, and social-networking technologies are perhaps worthy of similar treatment today.


Any serious effort to accelerate innovation would mean taking many other actions as well—from redoubling our commitment to improving U.S. schools, to letting in a much larger number of creative, highly skilled immigrants each year.


Throughout much of the aughts and continuing to the present day, China, in particular, has taken extraordinary measures to keep its currency undervalued relative to the dollar, and this has harmed U.S. industry. We must press China on currency realignment, putting sanctions on the table if necessary.


Career-academy programs should be expanded, as should apprenticeship programs (often affiliated with community colleges) and other, similar programs that are designed to build an ethic of hard work; to allow young people to develop skills and achieve goals outside the traditional classroom as well as inside it; and ultimately to provide more, clearer pathways into real careers.


One of the largest challenges that Americans will face in the coming years will be doing what we can to make the jobs that have traditionally been near the bottom of the economy better, more secure, and more fulfilling—in other words, more like middle-class jobs.

And now the conclusion from the article:


The Limits of Meritocracy

As a society, we should be far more concerned about whether most Americans are getting ahead than about the size of the gains at the top. Yet extreme income inequality causes a cultural separation that is unhealthy on its face and corrosive over time. And the most-powerful economic forces of our times will likely continue to concentrate wealth at the top of society and to put more pressure on the middle. It is hard to imagine an adequate answer to the problems we face that doesn’t involve greater redistribution of wealth.

Soaking the rich would hardly solve all of America’s problems. Holding all else equal, we would need to raise the top two tax rates to roughly 90 percent, then unrealistically assume no change in the work habits of the people in those brackets, merely to bring the deficit in a typical year down to 2 percent of GDP. But even with strong budget discipline and a reduction in the growth of Medicare costs, somewhat higher taxes for most Americans—in one form or another—seem inevitable. If we aim to increase our national investment in innovation, and to provide more assistance to people who are falling out of the middle class (or who can’t step up into it), that’s even more true. The professional middle class in particular should not expect exemption from tax increases.

Over time, the United States has expected less and less of its elite, even as society has oriented itself in a way that is most likely to maximize their income. The top income-tax rate was 91 percent in 1960, 70 percent in 1980, 50 percent in 1986, and 39.6 percent in 2000, and is now 35 percent. Income from investments is taxed at a rate of 15 percent. The estate tax has been gutted.

High earners should pay considerably more in taxes than they do now. Top tax rates of even 50 percent for incomes in the seven-figure range would still be considerably lower than their level throughout the boom years of the post-war era, and should not be out of the question—nor should an estate-tax rate of similar size, for large estates.

The rich have not become that way while living in a vacuum. Technological advance, freer trade, and wider markets—along with the policies that promote them—always benefit some people and harm others. Economic theory is quite clear that the winners gain more than the losers lose, and therefore the people who suffer as a result of these forces can be fully compensated for their losses—society as a whole still gains. This precept has guided U.S. government policy for 30 years. Yet in practice, the losers are seldom compensated, not fully and not for long. And while many of the gains from trade and technological progress are widely spread among consumers, the pressures on wages that result from these same forces have been felt very differently by different classes of Americans.

What’s more, some of the policies that have most benefited the rich have little to do with greater competition or economic efficiency. Fortunes on Wall Street have grown so large in part because of implicit government protection against catastrophic losses, combined with the steady elimination of government measures to limit excessive risk-taking, from the 1980s right on through the crash of 2008.

As America’s winners have been separated more starkly from its losers, the idea of compensating the latter out of the pockets of the former has met stiff resistance: that would run afoul of another economic theory, dulling the winners’ incentives and squashing their entrepreneurial spirit; some, we are reminded, might even leave the country. And so, in a neat and perhaps unconscious two-step, many elites have pushed policies that benefit them, by touting theoretical gains to society—then ruled out measures that would distribute those gains widely.

Even as we continue to strive to perfect the meritocracy, signs that things may be moving in the other direction are proliferating. The increasing segregation of Americans by education and income, and the widening cultural divide between families with college-educated parents and those without them, suggests that built-in advantages and disadvantages may be growing. And the concentration of wealth in relatively few hands opens the possibility that much of the next generation’s elite might achieve their status through inheritance, not hard or innovative work.

America remains a magnet for talent, for reasons that go beyond the tax code; and by international standards, none of the tax changes recommended here would create an excessive tax burden on high earners. If a few financiers choose to decamp for some small island-state in search of the smallest possible tax bill, we should wish them good luck.


...have to cut the end out.

Chico, while the current climate was brought about by more than low taxes, the conclusion of this article says what? We need higher taxes and better education. While I enjoyed the article, your response was colored in disagreement and this article absolutely strengthens the argument I presented for higher taxes. In fact it details what and why we should spend more taxes.

[GoMuskies]

Occupy Aspen is up and running!

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/10/13/occupyingaspen/

[BBC 08]

I just realized what OWS's new slogan should be.

"We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances. We guard you while you sleep. Do not... f**k with us."

Reps for who figures out where it is from.

[BandAid]

I just realized what OWS's new slogan should be.

"We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances. We guard you while you sleep. Do not... f**k with us."

Reps for who figures out where it is from.

Fight Club

[chico]

Chico, while the current climate was brought about by more than low taxes, the conclusion of this article says what? We need higher taxes and better education. While I enjoyed the article, your response was colored in disagreement and this article absolutely strengthens the argument I presented for higher taxes. In fact it details what and why we should spend more taxes.

I think I said that the tax rate may be part of the problem. No, I know I said it. I also said, as does the article, that other things are needed as well. I'm not sure where I colored my response in disagreement. My only disagreement was the fact that we need more than just higher taxes, which your various quotes from the article point out as well.

Here's the problem. One side wants to raise taxes but does not want to cut entitlements. The other side wants to cut entitlements but not raise taxes. Both are needed, but the idea of compromise has, somewhere along the way, become a badge of weakness.

[X-band '01]

Occupy Aspen is up and running!

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/10/13/occupyingaspen/

If other Flea Party protesters are getting crap for being pictured with iPhones and other corporate garb, what do you do about protesters who have expensive makeup and diamond rings?

If these protesters really are mostly college grads, I weep for the nation's future.

[Kahns Krazy]

I don't buy into the "real wage" argument. It adjusts for inflation, but doesn't adjust for technology innovations or quality of life.

Between 1974 and now, we've added over 7 years to the average life expectancy of the average person born in this country. Gas prices are up, which is factored into the real wage, but the fact that the average car gets twice as many miles to the gallon is not. Cars cost more, which is factored in, but they last longer, which is not. A 42" flatscreen, adjusted for inflation costs less than a 19" tube tv in 1974. In "real wages" there is no adjustment for the fact that a 42" flatscreen is better than a 19" tube. The ubiquitous cell phone wasn't even an option in 1974. Computers, video games, entertainment and recreation options are not comparable. Food prices are up, but how do you compare food costs from 1974 when your options now include sushi in grocery stores.

Annual earnings don't take into account that many poeple have longer careers. True purchasing is up. Quality of life is up for the poor. That's what bothers me so much about this whole thing. There is no valid reason to complain about an income gap as long as everyone is going up. With the value of social programs available today, the true net income of the poorest of the poor today is higher than it has ever been.

[vee4xu]

Ah, the sweet smell of debate over civil disobedience. It's actually good to see. Forget what the issue is (abortion, war, free speech, taxes or corporate power in politics) the fact that people gather and be heard is what makes our country great and separates it from the others in the world. Hopefully it all stays peaceful.

[Snipe]

I don't know why immigration doesn't come into these debates or for the OWS crowd. "The rich corporations" have been drawing over those illiterate hordes and giving them jobs at substandard wages. This drives down wages of the American working class while increasing unemployment.

People talk about wage stagnation since 1970, but what else have we had since 1970? Hordes of uneducated and unskilled third world labor have been invading our country, driving down wages and putting people out of work. How does anyone think this has affected the black community?

And for people that think that disparities in wealth are bad, why do we continue to import dirt poor Mexicans? And they also breed exceptionally on our welfare, and their children can't speak English well so the school tend to suck Moose. For those of you that like to stress education as a key to the future, we might want to concentrate on a different gene pool of recruits.

http://24ahead.com/images/bls_lfpr_black_men_over20.png

This is the labor force participation rate for black men. Looks like a more long term problem than a short term one. Did one of my amigos get those jobs?

Even on topics where immigration seems directly relevant, nobody ever seems to try and tie it into the debate. It is like it is the topic that must not be named. You are a bad man for bringing it up. Xenophobe. Racist What is OWS's position on immigration? I can only guess it is pro open borders like every other leftist group. I don't know why people who are "for the poor" support policies that drive working class unemployment up and working class wages down. The elites on all sides favor immigration and cheap labor. They like their new servant class. But why does everyone else follow their lead?

[Strange Brew]

http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s320x320/300058_2518899456202_1364732378_2924071_1043074391 _n.jpg

[pizza delivery]

I don't buy into the "real wage" argument. It adjusts for inflation, but doesn't adjust for technology innovations or quality of life.

Between 1974 and now, we've added over 7 years to the average life expectancy of the average person born in this country. Gas prices are up, which is factored into the real wage, but the fact that the average car gets twice as many miles to the gallon is not. Cars cost more, which is factored in, but they last longer, which is not. A 42" flatscreen, adjusted for inflation costs less than a 19" tube tv in 1974. In "real wages" there is no adjustment for the fact that a 42" flatscreen is better than a 19" tube. The ubiquitous cell phone wasn't even an option in 1974. Computers, video games, entertainment and recreation options are not comparable. Food prices are up, but how do you compare food costs from 1974 when your options now include sushi in grocery stores.

Annual earnings don't take into account that many poeple have longer careers. True purchasing is up. Quality of life is up for the poor. That's what bothers me so much about this whole thing. There is no valid reason to complain about an income gap as long as everyone is going up. With the value of social programs available today, the true net income of the poorest of the poor today is higher than it has ever been.

Your point was dealt with in the article at the end:


The rich have not become that way while living in a vacuum. Technological advance, freer trade, and wider markets—along with the policies that promote them—always benefit some people and harm others. Economic theory is quite clear that the winners gain more than the losers lose, and therefore the people who suffer as a result of these forces can be fully compensated for their losses—society as a whole still gains. This precept has guided U.S. government policy for 30 years. Yet in practice, the losers are seldom compensated, not fully and not for long. And while many of the gains from trade and technological progress are widely spread among consumers, the pressures on wages that result from these same forces have been felt very differently by different classes of Americans.

What’s more, some of the policies that have most benefited the rich have little to do with greater competition or economic efficiency. Fortunes on Wall Street have grown so large in part because of implicit government protection against catastrophic losses, combined with the steady elimination of government measures to limit excessive risk-taking, from the 1980s right on through the crash of 2008.

As America’s winners have been separated more starkly from its losers, the idea of compensating the latter out of the pockets of the former has met stiff resistance: that would run afoul of another economic theory, dulling the winners’ incentives and squashing their entrepreneurial spirit; some, we are reminded, might even leave the country. And so, in a neat and perhaps unconscious two-step, many elites have pushed policies that benefit them, by touting theoretical gains to society—then ruled out measures that would distribute those gains widely.

I'm amazed at how so many people defend the super wealthy from higher taxes. We've seen what they do with tax cuts. These "job creators" stick the cash in their pockets. Their not risking their necks by hiring anyone. So there you go, there's your Bush tax cuts. Meanwhile somehow they have convinced millions of Americans that we should be taxing the poor more and the rich less.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

http://dailydish.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451c45669e2014e8c2f674f970d-800wi

[GoMuskies]

Yay, no cleanup! We get to keep living in our own filth!

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-QC620_protes_G_20111014080700.jpg

[Kahns Krazy]

http://dailydish.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451c45669e2014e8c2f674f970d-800wi

What OWS wants to do about it:

"Uhhhh, what now?"
"Sleep outside"
"Raise the minimum wage to $20"

What the Tea Party wants to do about it:
- Lower Taxes
- Return government to those primary functions best managed by a centralized, federal government.
- Elimanate non-core federal spending programs.


I really don't see where these groups overlap.

[Kahns Krazy]

Your point was dealt with in the article at the end:



I'm amazed at how so many people defend the super wealthy from higher taxes. We've seen what they do with tax cuts. These "job creators" stick the cash in their pockets. Their not risking their necks by hiring anyone. So there you go, there's your Bush tax cuts. Meanwhile somehow they have convinced millions of Americans that we should be taxing the poor more and the rich less.

I do not wish to defend the super wealthy from higher taxes. Higher taxes on the wealthy alone is not a solution. We need serious, serious spending cuts and a more reasonable, comprehensive solution that puts a little skin in the game for a family of four with a $50,000 income.

[BBC 08]

Can someone in this thread explain to me what is wrong with the tax rate during the Clinton era? From my simplistic point of view it seems like we should go back to it but I would love to hear why we shouldn't from someone.

[GoMuskies]

Can someone in this thread explain to me what is wrong with the tax rate during the Clinton era? From my simplistic point of view it seems like we should go back to it but I would love to hear why we shouldn't from someone.

I think that's a fine compromise. 39.6% isn't going to kill anyone. But if there was no fight, we might end up with 50%, which is ridiculous.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Can someone in this thread explain to me what is wrong with the tax rate during the Clinton era? From my simplistic point of view it seems like we should go back to it but I would love to hear why we shouldn't from someone.


I think that's a fine compromise. 39.6% isn't going to kill anyone. But if there was no fight, we might end up with 50%, which is ridiculous.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/Content/GIF/toprate_historical.gif

[pizza delivery]

We're in 3 wars and spend a ridiculous amount on them. 9/11 forever changed the spending crisis in America. In some sense, we are being defeated again and again as we bury ourselves in debt. OBL wanted this. There are 100's of billions of dollars spent, added to the budget in the aughts, on Homeland Security. That is a reality that no one takes time to account for. 9/11 is all about mourning the victims and never forgetting, but practically speaking, it's busted our budgets.

I see 9/11 in combo with the rapidly increasing competition from overseas, the changing face of the world, as the two primary "invisible hands" (to borrow a term) that really are the drivers of change in the US. It's not about last weeks soundbite from Boehner or the next budget from Obama. I'll be looking for a candidate with a broad focus in 2012.

[pizza delivery]

I do not wish to defend the super wealthy from higher taxes. Higher taxes on the wealthy alone is not a solution. We need serious, serious spending cuts and a more reasonable, comprehensive solution that puts a little skin in the game for a family of four with a $50,000 income.

The family of 4 with 50,000 income has skin in the game just by virtue of being a family. If you think making them "realize" their money is going to this and that in the gov't, just not that many of them will. Sure, increase their taxes, but what's more important is that they stay together and raise decent adults. It would help if males could obtain and maintain steady jobs like they used to, but now females don't/can't rely on that. If this has to do with Welfare, well that used to be the drum that budget hawks could beat, blame it on all those poor lazy folks. But when your budget is 70% Defense, Health Care, and Pensions, do we really need the poor lazy folks angle as anything more than a red herring?

- Raise taxes in a meaningful way
- Cut Defense significantly
- Skim Health Care, Pensions and Welfare and improve efficiency
- Increase education, double down, even if at the state level
- Pass the Jobs Plan and improve the aging infrastructure

We still need blue collar construction jobs while we improve the education. Lot's of hopelessly under qualified males will need work.

Press on China to stop playing games with their currency.

[Kahns Krazy]

The family of 4 with 50,000 income has skin in the game just by virtue of being a family..

What does this mean?

[pizza delivery]

What does this mean?

They are a stable aspect of society - mom, dad, junior, and peanut. If everyone was living such a charmed life we'd have less problems. Adding financial pressure to this group is a bad idea.

[Kahns Krazy]

They are a stable aspect of society - mom, dad, junior, and peanut. If everyone was living such a charmed life we'd have less problems. Adding financial pressure to this group is a bad idea.

How is that "skin in the game"? I don't get it? What if it is mom, baby (daddy 1), baby (daddy 2) and baby (daddy 3). Should they get the same incentives as your white picket fence example? Should we as taxpayers be subsidizing a lifestyle choice? Active members of Christian churches are stable aspects of society, should we give people an earned income credit for attending church on Sunday?

Why is it a good idea to add financial pressure (taxes) to productive members of society that do not have children? What is the ratio of people on welfare with children and without? It seems like having children increases your liklihood of becoming a burden to society.

I really don't get the unchallenged assumption that receiving awards from society for breeding is proper policy.

[pizza delivery]

How is that "skin in the game"? I don't get it? What if it is mom, baby (daddy 1), baby (daddy 2) and baby (daddy 3). Should they get the same incentives as your white picket fence example? Should we as taxpayers be subsidizing a lifestyle choice? Active members of Christian churches are stable aspects of society, should we give people an earned income credit for attending church on Sunday?

Why is it a good idea to add financial pressure (taxes) to productive members of society that do not have children? What is the ratio of people on welfare with children and without? It seems like having children increases your liklihood of becoming a burden to society.

I really don't get the unchallenged assumption that receiving awards from society for breeding is proper policy.

Yeah, I misunderstood family to mean what I elaborated, not mommy and 3 baby daddies.

As far as "rewarding" breeding, the idea is pretty clear, damage prevention and control. If you raise a bunch of poor, dumb people you pay the price big time. Can the subsidy benefit be fully realized by a woman with 8 kids from 8 dads? Of course not. There can be controls placed on this type of abuse, and that's a bi-partisan agenda. Overall, the specter of the whoring mother of 10 with needles in her arm and fucked up hair is really just a political image to provoke anger among the middle class. The fact is, we need to be investing more in our population, and less in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. If you don't pay for it on the front end, you end up paying for it on the back end. (that's what she said)

[boozehound]

Yay, no cleanup! We get to keep living in our own filth!

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-QC620_protes_G_20111014080700.jpg

Why do I get the feeling that when they aren't 'occupying' Wall Street, or Cincinnati, or Atlanta that most of these people are occupying their parents basements, pissed off that they can't land good job with their Liberal Arts degrees?

[XU 87]

It seems like having children increases your liklihood of becoming a burden to society.



Having children out of wedlock increases your liklihood of being a burden to society. Having children while you're married- not so.

Not getting a high school education- that also increases your chances of being a burden.

So the moral of the story- get educated, don't have children out of wedlock, and you will likely be a productive citizen. In other words, be responsible.

Unfortunately, liberals like to reward irresponsibility and demonize or penalize those who are responsible or successful.

[XULucho27]

Why do I get the feeling that when they aren't 'occupying' Wall Street, or Cincinnati, or Atlanta that most of these people are occupying their parents basements, pissed off that they can't land good job with their Liberal Arts degrees?

So you're telling me majoring in 16th Century English Renaissance Literature was a bad idea?

[Snipe]

We could tax children instead, or pay undesirables not to have them.

Bring back Eugenics!

Future Generations (http://www.eugenics.net/)

[Kahns Krazy]

Having children out of wedlock increases your likelihood of being a burden to society. Having children while you're married- not so.
.

Without looking anything up, I would bet that being married and having children still increases the likelihood of participation in a government assistance program at some point compared to an individual or couple that does not have children.

I'm not saying that society shouldn't support programs that inherently benefit children or families with children. Far from it. I'm a big proponent of a lot of programs that are primarily for the benefit of families. I support programs that take care of children of parents who are ill-equipped to care for their own children. I am strongly opposed to programs that provide benefits, intentional or otherwise, to parents who do not care for their children.

[DC Muskie]

Can someone in this thread explain to me what is wrong with the tax rate during the Clinton era? From my simplistic point of view it seems like we should go back to it but I would love to hear why we shouldn't from someone.

You realize that this what basically the reason the country was subjected to Joe The Plumber.

[Strange Brew]

Can someone in this thread explain to me what is wrong with the tax rate during the Clinton era? From my simplistic point of view it seems like we should go back to it but I would love to hear why we shouldn't from someone.

I'll comprimise. You give me Clinton era spending (same total dollar amount, not the same allocations) and I'll give you Clinton era tax rates.

[Blue Blooded-05]

Found this on a college football forum... thought it was pretty funny.

Premise: A lost College Game Day fan attends the Occupy Wall Street rallys:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_lt0686RRfl1r4cih1o1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId =AKIAJ6IHWSU3BX3X7X3Q&Expires=1318797030&Signature=NESJG5Y0%2BjMWOCeZgRKLCnDUpx0%3D

http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_lt06jyFswZ1r4cih1o1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId =AKIAJ6IHWSU3BX3X7X3Q&Expires=1318797111&Signature=Ux3KEFOtgKJ4ot4lLzJoF1qxT3Q%3D

http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_lt2qp8sLom1r4cih1o1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId =AKIAJ6IHWSU3BX3X7X3Q&Expires=1318797009&Signature=8qL0LKa2hSDTHgYf81C%2BTPO2Zts%3D

http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_lt42y1iUMG1r4cih1o1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId =AKIAJ6IHWSU3BX3X7X3Q&Expires=1318797057&Signature=e9uihIxMQ9Xib18VQWOGzQwWqWs%3D

[coasterville95]

Saw the occupy Cincinnati "parade" through fountain square around 4pm. I was at government square and the funny thing was people had to turn away so they could be polite as they were cracking up laughing about the circus coming through town.

[Porkopolis]

I'm personally about as left wing as you will find in these parts. I sympathize with the sentiment of the protestors, I really do. But I have to admit that even I suppressed some chuckles when I walked through Piatt Park. I haven't seen that much yarn and flannel since mid-90s Seattle.

[X-band '01]

THAT AIN'T TRUE!

Mike Gundy is clearly part of the 1%.

So get your facts straight.

[BBC 08]

I'll comprimise. You give me Clinton era spending (same total dollar amount, not the same allocations) and I'll give you Clinton era tax rates.

That's more than fair. First step, get out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

[BBC 08]

You realize that this what basically the reason the country was subjected to Joe The Plumber.

I'm claiming ignorance on this one. Please explain.

[DC Muskie]

I'm claiming ignorance on this one. Please explain.

On October 12, 2008, three days before the final presidential debate, Obama met residents in Wurzelbacher's Ohio neighborhood. Wurzelbacher, who had been playing football with his son in his front yard at the time, asked Obama about his tax plan. Wurzelbacher suggested that Obama's tax plan would be at odds with "the American dream." Wurzelbacher said, "I'm getting ready to buy a company that makes 250 to 280 thousand dollars a year. Your new tax plan's going to tax me more, isn't it?"

Obama responded with an explanation of how his tax plan would affect a small business in this bracket. Obama said, "If you're a small business, which you would qualify, first of all, you would get a 50 percent tax credit so you'd get a cut in taxes for your health care costs. So you would actually get a tax cut on that part. If your revenue is above 250, then from 250 down, your taxes are going to stay the same. It is true that, say for 250 up — from 250 to 300 or so, so for that additional amount, you’d go from 36 to 39 percent, which is what it was under Bill Clinton."

[Kahns Krazy]

The goons in Cincinnati are now suing the city for violations of first amendment rights. I thought this issue had already gone through the supreme court.

I am so tired of this. I think the city and the residents have been more than accommodating. Let's find them a nice vacant piece of city owned land somewhere north of liberty that we can rent to these fools so they can continue their "protest" in peace. Public means public, not yours. it's someone else's turn to use the park.

[SixFig]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/294534_295197243824594_114517875225866_1191016_900 717710_n.jpg

[coasterville95]

This could get interesting. Apparently the Enquirer is reporting that the Occupy circus sideshow has been told it's time to move on

The urgency? The funeral procession for Carl Lindner Jr.

I truly hope they have the decency and common sense not to make a scene during the funeral activities. Talk about the one thing that would make their perception go from circus sideshow to scum of the earth.

[spazzrico]

This could get interesting. Apparently the Enquirer is reporting that the Occupy circus sideshow has been told it's time to move on

The urgency? The funeral procession for Carl Lindner Jr.

I truly hope they have the decency and common sense not to make a scene during the funeral activities. Talk about the one thing that would make their perception go from circus sideshow to scum of the earth.

That would be interesting to say the least. Actually it fits right in with their whole get corporations out of gov't thing. Lindner was the key figure of purchasing political influence with the both parties, but with the Clinton Admin in particular who went to the WTO on behalf of Chiquita to complain of an "unfair" trade advantage that Caribbean banana-growing countries had with Europe. US threatened a trade war with EU, EU backs down.....banana economies of tiny Caribbean islands crushed. Now would I ever picket on that at his funeral....hell no, despite that dark part of his legacy. Yeah that would be a bad plan PR wise.

[coasterville95]

If a recent tweet I saw is legit, they aren't going away quietly...

[THRILLHOUSE]

If a recent tweet I saw is legit, they aren't going away quietly...

I live in an apt building next to piatt park, cops are here and bunch of chanting going on. Can't tell if any arrests are happening. I have no opinion on any of this, I just want to occupy some sleep right now.

[Kahns Krazy]

This could get interesting. Apparently the Enquirer is reporting that the Occupy circus sideshow has been told it's time to move on

The urgency? The funeral procession for Carl Lindner Jr.

I truly hope they have the decency and common sense not to make a scene during the funeral activities. Talk about the one thing that would make their perception go from circus sideshow to scum of the earth.

CHLII has passed away, and he's still getting more sh*t done than City Council. I think that sums up the state of our city nicely.

[DC Muskie]

I really don't see where these groups overlap.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/for-tea-party-and-occupy-wall-street-movements-some-common-ground/2011/10/18/gIQAkIg07L_story.html

[Kahns Krazy]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/for-tea-party-and-occupy-wall-street-movements-some-common-ground/2011/10/18/gIQAkIg07L_story.html

That editorial takes some pretty big liberties with what the Tea Party movement was about. Are there individuals that can sympathize with both causes? I'm sure there are. That doesn't mean the causes themselves overlap. I like Kings Island, and I like sushi. That does not make them the same thing.

FTFA:

No one expects the tea party and Occupy movements to merge forces, but their adherents are discovering that their stories are often strikingly similar: They searched for jobs and came up empty. They found work, but their pay barely covered food and rent, with nothing left over even to buy an old car. They saw their towns empty out as young people moved away in search of money and meaning.

I think you would be hard pressed to find any tea party members that felt that this was why they were getting together. It may be true of them individually, but it is not what the Tea Party is about.

[DC Muskie]

That editorial takes some pretty big liberties with what the Tea Party movement was about. Are there individuals that can sympathize with both causes? I'm sure there are. That doesn't mean the causes themselves overlap. I like Kings Island, and I like sushi. That does not make them the same thing.

Editorial? Huh? Big Liberties? Fischer interviewed actual people and wrote the connections. They don't have to agree on every issue, but man, people in the movement see the overlap. Kings Island and sushi? What does that have anything to do with anything?


I think you would be hard pressed to find any tea party members that felt that this was why they were getting together. It may be true of them individually, but it is not what the Tea Party is about.

There seems to be many different Tea Party groups and I would argue that the basis of them getting together was government was taking more out of their pocket. Wouldn't you agree? The statement you highlighted was a general idea. I would bet their are a significant number of Tea Baggers who joined the rally because they were having a hard time making ends meet. Do you not agree with that concept? If not, then why would people organize like this if it wasn't for their economic situation? It's not like this group came to be during the boom times of the late 90's.

[Kahns Krazy]

Editorial? Huh? Big Liberties? Fischer interviewed actual people and wrote the connections. They don't have to agree on every issue, but man, people in the movement see the overlap. Kings Island and sushi? What does that have anything to do with anything?


There seems to be many different Tea Party groups and I would argue that the basis of them getting together was government was taking more out of their pocket. Wouldn't you agree? The statement you highlighted was a general idea. I would bet their are a significant number of Tea Baggers who joined the rally because they were having a hard time making ends meet. Do you not agree with that concept? If not, then why would people organize like this if it wasn't for their economic situation? It's not like this group came to be during the boom times of the late 90's.

People "in the movement" don't see overlap. People in the movement may have some things in common, but that does not mean the movements overlap. The Tea Party's single biggest opposition is government spending. If anything, the Occupy movement wants more government spending.

As for your statement "I would bet their are a significant number of Tea Baggers who joined the rally because they were having a hard time making ends meet. ", I really don't think you have any clue what the Tea Party movement is really about. People who are having a hard time making ends meet generally want more government spending and benefits, not less. The majority of Tea Party supporters are those that have jobs, are earning income and are tired of watching the federal government spend more than it has, because there's only one place to go when it comes time to pay the bills.

I read recently that convicted serial killers eat dinner. I also read that the President eats dinner. Is that "overlap"?

[Kahns Krazy]

Maybe you just use different terminology. Let's say there are two groups. One of them wants to bulldoze every building on Xavier's campus. The other group wants to double the size of every building on campus. Both groups want to change campus. Would you call that "overlap", because both of them are dissatisfied with the current campus, even though the objectives of each group are directly contradictory to the other?

[BBC 08]

This question kind of deviates from the current discussion but does anyone agree with what happened to the Occupy Oakland crowd last night?

[More Cowbell]

I'm fine with it.

"The crowd started throwing bottles, paints, beer, eggs at myself and the other officers," he said.

Why can't the cops respond accordingly.

[boozehound]

I'm fine with it.


Why can't the cops respond accordingly.

No shit. Rubber bullets and tear gas seem more than appropriate.

[boozehound]

In one of the threads on the "Occupy" topic someone made mention of the fact that these people don't apparently have jobs since they can hang out and protest all day.

It seems that, for at least some of the protesters, hanging out at protests is their job, since they are being paid to protest.

Would it surprise anyone here to find out that Acorn was behind this?

Acorn Engaging in Misleading Fundraising Activities to Support Occupy Wall Street (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/26/exclusive-acorn-playing-behind-scenes-role-in-occupy-movement/)

[XULucho27]

In one of the threads on the "Occupy" topic someone made mention of the fact that these people don't apparently have jobs since they can hang out and protest all day.

It seems that, for at least some of the protesters, hanging out at protests is their job, since they are being paid to protest.

Would it surprise anyone here to find out that Acorn was behind this?

Acorn Engaging in Misleading Fundraising Activities to Support Occupy Wall Street (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/26/exclusive-acorn-playing-behind-scenes-role-in-occupy-movement/)

So, let me get this straight. Basically, the "occupy" movement now has a corporate sponsor?

[boozehound]

It appears so, yes.

The more I hear about Acorn the more I am astounded at how shockingly sleazy that organization is. What a bunch of scumbags.

[GoMuskies]

This question kind of deviates from the current discussion but does anyone agree with what happened to the Occupy Oakland crowd last night?

Were they all beaten severely? If so, yes.

[More Cowbell]

Corporations Raping the World for Money (http://vimeo.com/13504985)

[BlueGuy]

Richard and Sal from the Howard Stern Show interviewed a few people down there.... YouTube (http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=tsJPKMvWDmY)

[Snipe]

I don't see a lot of similarities between the Tea Party and OWS. Yes they are both protest movements, and both are angry. The same could be said of any protest movement, like the Cincinnati Bible riots of the 1800's.

A lot of people are angry in and out of these movements. What is the big deal if both of these groups don't like the bailouts. Here is the question: Who does like the bailouts? Who likes "To Big To Fail!" What a rallying cry that is.

Some people in both movements don't like the Fed. Who likes the Fed? Ever see a protest sign preaching love for the Fed, or wishing to expand the Fed? Ever see a sign giving some love for the bailouts or too big to fail? Me neither.

We all have "overlap". I think that eating a nice breakfast is a great way to start a day. Maybe Stalin did too. Hitler always made sure his dogs were well fed. That isn't bad advice, even coming from Adolf.

While I just evoked the wrath of Godwin's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law), lets take it to more of an extreme: we could look at the National Solicialist Party Platform or the Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto.

Karl Marx's Ten Planks advocated


(2nd Plank) a progressive income tax,

(3rd) inheritance tax, and

(10th) free public schools.

Adolf Hitler's 25 point program advocated


7. We demand that the state be charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens.

8. Any further immigration of non-citizens is to be prevented.

9. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.

10. The first obligation of every citizen must be to work both spiritually and physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the interests of the universality, but must have its result within the framework of the whole for the benefit of all. Consequently we demand:

11. Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of debt (interest)-slavery.

12. In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).

14. We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.

15. We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.

16. We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.

20. The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program, to enable every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education and subsequently introduction into leading positions. The plans of instruction of all educational institutions are to conform with the experiences of practical life. The comprehension of the concept of the State must be striven for by the school [Staatsbuergerkunde] as early as the beginning of understanding. We demand the education at the expense of the State of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without consideration of position or profession.

21. The State is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, by the encouragement of physical fitness, by means of the legal establishment of a gymnastic and sport obligation, by the utmost support of all organizations concerned with the physical instruction of the young.

Many of the things that Marx and Hitler advocated would be popular if you polled Americans today. Adolf loved social security, public schools, national health care, providing people with jobs, abolishing child labor and dividing up the profits of the "Big Corporations" so they could "pay their fair share". Marx loved the progressive income tax, and he wanted to get rid of inheritance. These were bedrock foundations of the Communist manifesto. Today we have a progressive income tax and an inheritance tax, and these things are widely popular. If you don't think so, just see how people are attacked when they advocate getting rid of them.

I do think it is quite telling that both the National Socialists and the Marxists were all for the government controling the schools. Leftists love indoctrinating youth and that is also a quality of the left that is alive and well today in America.

I think every group has overlap.

Most people dislike the bailouts.
Most people dislike "Too Big to Fail".
Most people think the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Most people think our immigration system is broken.
Most people don't like Congress.

I could go on.

Most people can see the problems that we have and agree that they are problems. What we differ on is the solutions to those problems.

The Tea Party and OWS are not similar when it comes to the practical solutions of the problems that we face.

OWS has had over 1,000 people arrested. They have committed violent crimes, including rape and assaulting police. They trash public spaces and defecate and urinate all over the place. NYC's Board of Health considers OWC a health hazard to the public.

How many Tea Partiers were arrested? How many violent confrontations with police? How many rapes? Any reports of drugs and sex at a Tea Party rally? How much trash did they leave behind?

I went to Washington with hundreds of thousands of other people on the National Mall. We left that place spotless. Literally. It was better than we found it. Every event that I have gone to had peace and order, as well as proper permits. Fees were paid and porto-potties were on site. No public health risk there. No drugs, no large contingent of homeless and ex-cons, no dirty hippies with drums, and no casual disregard for personal hygiene that is the calling card of the avaunt-garde left.

The Tea Party Patriots that I gathered with were God Fearing, Flag Waving, Country Loving Americans. They are the type of people that get in front of the cart and pull. I think their message was largely "The cart is getting a bit too heavy with everyone piling on back there, some of you need to get out of the cart and get out in front and help us pull". The OWS crowd on the other hand just want a bigger and better cart.

[Kahns Krazy]

Yikes. I read Snipe's entire post, and I agreed with it. Time to take a break for a while.

[DC Muskie]

I didn't read all of what Kahns and Snipe wrote because I see the words "serial killer" "Hitler" and "Stalin."

When you are up against arguments like that, there's really no point in discussing it.

It's also nice to see that the Tea Party has managed to avoid being unemployed. I do agree, I have no idea what the Tea Party is about, but then again the Tea Baggers don't either.

So there you have it.

[Kahns Krazy]

I do agree, I have no idea what the Tea Party is about, but then again the Tea Baggers don't either.


So, to sum it up, you admit your ignorance, then go on to draw faulty conclusions based on your lack of knowledge. That about sums up "99%" of your posts.

So there you have it.

[Jumpy]

I saw this on 700's website. I found it quite hilarious:

http://www.700wlw.com/cc-common/gallery/photos.html?album_id=946#/0/18137798

[TheDanimal]

So the smaller group of Occupy protestors who have put hard work into providing food and other assets for their ventures are upset that the larger group of homeless have not put in any work and are mooching off their efforts... Interesting...

See Also: Irony et seq

[boozehound]

I saw this on 700's website. I found it quite hilarious:

http://www.700wlw.com/cc-common/gallery/photos.html?album_id=946#/0/18137798

One of the funniest things I have ever seen.

[DC Muskie]

So, to sum it up, you admit your ignorance, then go on to draw faulty conclusions based on your lack of knowledge. That about sums up "99%" of your posts.

So there you have it.

Is this where I chime in with some reference of Hitler or roller coasters, since that is all you are capable of understanding?

Here maybe this video will help you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-suabHY3D8

I just think it's funny that you are some expert on a group of people who base their entire movement on bastardizing a patriotic revolutionary action and another group of people who base their entire movement on not having $100,000 jobs lined up for them. Neither group you claim to be apart of...and yet comparing the two sends you into rattling off analogies that make 100% no sense.

All I do is admit my ignorance from time to time. You show it all the time.

And that is an actual editorial since you don't know what that is either.

[boozehound]

Things starting to get violent at Occupy Wall Street? (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/09/rash-sex-attacks-and-violent-crime-breaks-out-at-occupy-protests/)

Ruh Roh! What are these guys protesting again?

[Kahns Krazy]

I walked past the occupy Boston demonstration. It was evening on Saturday. They weren't actively demonstrating. It was pretty quiet.

Also, it stunk. Really, really stunk. I have hung out with some stinky hippies from time to time, and I have never smelled anything like this. It smelled like the circus was in town. I didn't even walk directly through it. I don't understand why those people aren't out protesting for free showers. That's what they really need.

[X-band '01]

That's just it Kahns - they'll protest for what they really want, not what they really need.

[Kahns Krazy]

There is a great piece on the Op/Ed page of the local fishwrap today talking about how true after-tax income and resource allocation has increased dramatically for the "99%" .

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20111114/EDIT02/111140317/Guest-column-All-U-S-classes-better-off-over-past-30-years

[xeus]

Looks like Mayor Bloomberg decided to clean up the park. It's about time. Zuccotti Park was filthy and becoming unsafe.

Taking Out the Trash (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/nypd_raiders_roust_rabble_Dp5jSkaFLwGXYElqsxsWjO)

Was walking by there on Saturday and saw signs ranging from "Legalize Marijuana" to "Flouride in the Water - Hitler did it too!". Good stuff.

[TheDanimal]

Saw a good one on the local news here in scenic Northwest Ohio tonight. The Occupy Toledo movement was granted a meeting with a congressional staffer to discuss the intent of their movement and desired reforms. After one minute, the staffer ended the meeting and kicked the Occupy Toledo folks out because they would not answer questions or have a discussion, but simply continued to chant "Hey hey, ho ho, corporate greed has got to go." When the desire to chant and protest has so clearly surpassed the desire to actually effect change, it's probably time to call it quits...

[bobbiemcgee]

Having lived in Toledo for a brief, painful stint, I would suggest the the Chamber of Commerce and all city leaders get behind the the Occupy Toledo movement. I would see it as a positive step to reverse recent population declines. I would launch a new initiative to please come to Toledo "for any reason.":cool:

[GoMuskies]

I found this kind of amusing.


http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz271/TheDarthRage/the20OWS20legend1.jpg

[Snipe]

Just Like the Tea Party: A List of Occupy Mayhem Sorted by Type (http://www.verumserum.com/?p=33490)
John on November 16, 2011 at 7:04 pm

Rather than just an unordered list, I was thinking it might be helpful to categorize the mayhem by type.

Arson

Occupy Fort Collins – Member arrested, $10 million in damage
Occupy Portland - Member arrested for throwing Molotov Cocktail
Occupy Seattle – Suspicious fire at Bank of America 2.7 miles from camp
Occupy Portland – Three men arrested with homemade grenades


Assault/Threats


Occupy SF – 12 assaults in 24 hours
Occupy LA – 4 assaults including two with knives
Occupy Philly – Man punches woman in the face
Occupy LA – Two assaults including setting someone on fire
Occupy Berkeley – Police respond to three assault calls per night
Occupy Wall Street – Three men threaten the life of a sexual assault victim
Occupy Lawrence – Punch thrown
Occupy Orlando – Knife fight sends man to hospital
Occupy Portland – Multiple assaults within a 24 hr. period
Occupy Toledo – Man assaults police officer after arrest
Occupy San Diego – Woman assaults cameraman
Occupy Victoria – Man dumps urine on city worker
Occupy Vancouver – Two police officers bitten during near riot
Occupy Oakland – Death threats
Occupy Austin – Man in Joker make-up arrested for brandishing knife
Occupy Oakland – Man sets his dog on reporter
Occupy Oakland – Man pulls a knife in camp
Occupy Wall Street – Photographer assaulted


Drugs/Dealing


Occupy Boston – Two drug busts in a week
Occupy Boston – Another drug arrest
Occupy Boston – Heroin dealers busted were living with 6 year old boy directly behind welcome tent
Occupy Portland – First hand account “Drugs. Selling…Heroin. Meth.”
Occupy Portland – Video of open drug use in the camp
Occupy Portland – “I get high“

Fraud

National Lawyer’s Guild member Ari Douglas pretends to be run over by a police scooter


Illness/Death


Occupy Santa Cruz – Ringworm outbreak
Occupy Atlanta – TB outbreak
Occupy Wall Street – Zuccotti lung outbreak
Occupy New Orleans – Man discovered in tent had been dead 2 days
Occupy Portland – Body lice outbreak


Murder


Occupy Oakland – Fatal shooting


Public disturbance


Occupy Dallas – Protesters block bank entrance, 23 arrested
Occupy Vancouver – Mob with bullhorn enters bank
Occupy Wall Street – Protesters block bank entrance, four arrested
Occupier takes a bathroom break in the street
Occupy Vancouver – Occupiers disrupt debate, threaten riot when asked to leave
Occupy Long Beach – Group disrupts city council meeting
Occupy Boston – Three arrested for occupying Burger King
Occupy Oakland – Yelling and nonsense at Burger King
Occupy DC – Group storms AFP event, traps attendees inside


Rape/Sexual Assault


Occupy Philly – Man arrested for alleged rape
Occupy Wall Street – Two sexual assaults unreported to police
Occupy Wall Street – Man arrested for sexual assault, suspect in rape
Occupy Dallas – Sex offender allegedly rapes 14 year old
Occupy Ottawa – Sexual assaults go unreported to police
Occupy Lawrence – Sexual assault reported
Occupy Toronto – Foot sniffer arrested
Occupy Seattle – Man exposes himself to young girls
Occupy Portland – Sexual assault
Occupy Wall Street – Drunk gropes women in Zuccotti Park
Occupy Cleveland – Rape reported after an overnight stay
Occupy Glasgow – Possible gang rape
Occupy Baltimore – Multiple reports of harassment
Occupy Chicago – Man arrested for child porn
Occupy LA – Man charged with exposing himself to a child


Sedition


Occupy DC – Let’s have a coup by taking over the military
Ted Rall wants occupiers to choose the path of violence
Occupy DC – Mike Malloy incites crowd to cheer for President Bush’s execution


Suicide/Overdose


Occupy Burlington – Man kills himself with handgun
Occupy Salt Lake City – Man found dead with syringe in his tent
Occupy Vancouver – Young woman dies of cocaine and heroine overdose
Occupy OKC – Young man with history of drug abuse found dead


Theft


Occupy Portland – Theft is ongoing
Occupy Boston – Store owner suffers 4 break-ins since camp began


Vandalism


Occupy Eureka – Protesters use local bank as a toilet
Occupy Portland – Two banks vandalized, promises of more to come
Occupy Oakland – Bank windows broken, Whole Foods vandalized, broken windows
Occupy Boston – Banks vandalized with anarchist, OWS graffiti
Occupy Portland – Spike in vandalism near camp
Occupy SF: ATMs being smeared with feces
Occupy Santa Fe: Banks vandalized with OWS-themed graffiti
Occupy San Diego – Vendors cart vandalized with bodily fluids
Occupy graffiti found on PA governor’s mansion


I’m leaving some out, but these are the ones we’ve covered on the blog so far.

--------------------------------------------------------

That is an impressive list, and that is just what was covered on one blog. Must be a full time job. And get that this list was a week ago, it isn't even updated. Imagine just what has happened last week.

Thousands of arrests, attacks on police, arson, rape. Those people are animals.

To quote Newt Gingrich:


“Let me take that for a brief moment to describe Occupy Wall Street. All of the Occupy movement starts with the premise that we all owe them everything. They take over a public park they didn’t pay for, to go near by to use bathrooms they didn’t pay for, to beg for food from places they they don’t want to pay for, to obstruct those that are going to work to pay the taxes to sustain the bathrooms and to sustain the park so that they can self-righteously explain that they are the paragons of virtue to which we owe everything.”

He added: “Now, that is a pretty good symptom of how much the left has collapsed as a moral system in this country and why you need to reassert something as simple as saying to them, ‘Go get a job right after you take a bath.’”

Occupy Wall Street is a pretty good example of how much the left has collapsed as a moral system. It is all true.

Who wants their party in charge? It should be a pretty easy decision to make.

[boozehound]

Very interesting post, but not surprising. Also, I find it interesting that Newt Gingrich has the balls to comment on the moral turpitude of any individual or organization. I don't disagree with him, I just don't know that he is qualified to dispense advice about what is and isn't moral based on his history.

[Snipe]

Can you fill the class in on what you are talking about?

[boozehound]

Primarily Gingrich's history of cheating on his wives, particularly his first wife while she was being treated for cancer. His strong moral condemnation of Clinton for the Lewinsky while he was cheating on his second wife with a staffer some 20 years his junior didn't sit well with me either. Not that Clinton didn't deserve it, but I don't think Gingrich was the appropriate person to voice that opinion.

In a broader sense I don't really like it when any political party tries to claim the moral high ground over another party. I don't believe that either party has a clean enough house be able to condem the other on the basis of morality.

[DC Muskie]

I'm not gonna protest.

I'm not gonna protest.




I'm not gonna protest...

[xu95]

Wow, those Occupy Cincinnati people are weaklings. They don't show up on the list anywhere. What is wrong with a good murder every now and then?

xu95

[coasterville95]

Just when you thought we had heard the last of Occupy Cincinnati - they plan to be at it again - this time at the Nativity Scene at Krohn Conservatory.

Writeup on Cincinnati.com - something about how said Nativity Scene is sponsored by Western/Southern and protesting their attempts to shut down that shelter in the Lytle Park area. Oh, and also since they can't let go of the whole "park rules are unfair" thing - why W&S can get a 24 hour park use permit for said Nativity Scene, and they can't for their activiyt.

I'm sure the recent banning of lying down, sleeping, or errecting structures in a park space is probably also part of it.

[Kahns Krazy]

I forgot about this from earlier this month.

I was eating downtown and we went by Piatt park. There were two dudes out there, one holding a sign that said "We are the 99%". They both looked like it was very possible they were homeless. I thought about explaining the mathematical difficulty behind 2 dudes being 99% of anything, but I was laughing to hard to talk.

The guy that wasn't holding the sign had some sort of a ball on a string in each hand, sort of like an unwound yo-yo. He was twirling them about in a most unimpressive fashion, unless you happened to be tripping balls, which I hope he was.

They were both gone by the time I was done with dinner. Occupy! Or at least, Stop By!

[paulxu]

I'd like to be part of the Occupy Atlanta group next year in March.

[Snipe]

Maybe should update on the Occupy Cleveland bridge bombers. They pleaded not guilty in court today, and had 50 occupy protesters there supporting their cause. Imagine if the Tea Party did this...


Bridge bomb suspects plead not guilty; Occupy Cleveland members show up to support suspects (http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/cleveland_metro/bridge-bomb-suspects-plead-not-guilty-occupy-cleveland-members-show-up-to-support-suspects#ixzz1uHmvcGnN)


CLEVELAND - Dozens of members of Occupy Cleveland showed up at a Cleveland courthouse to support the five people charged in connection with an alleged plot to blow up a northeast Ohio bridge.

The five suspects -- 21-year-old Connor Stevens, 24-year-old Joshua Stafford (aka “Skully”), 26-year-old Douglas Wright (aka “Cyco), 20-year-old Brandon Baxter (aka “Skabby”) and 37-year-old Anthony Hayne (aka “Tony” & “Billy”) – pleaded not guilty during their arraignment Monday morning.

The suspects had the charges -- conspiracy and attempted use of explosive material to damage physical property affecting interstate commerce -- read to them in open court.

In all, about 50 members of the Occupy Cleveland group went into courthouse. After the arrests were made, Occupy Cleveland said the five suspects were associated with the group, but they were “in no way representing or acting on behalf of Occupy Cleveland.”


The FBI said the five self-proclaimed anarchists came up with a plan to blow up the Route 82 bridge over the Cuyahoga National Forest in Brecksville. They were arrested after allegedly pushing a button they thought would detonate a C4 bomb placed at the base of the bridge on April 30.

If right wingers were trying to blow up bridges I could only imagine the backlash.

The Tea Party was vilified. If the Tea Party held a rally in your public park, odds are that they left it cleaner than they found it. I was on the National Mall in DC at a rally, and that place was spotless. They actually took pride in that, and I did too. Hundreds of thousands of people, and the next day without a trace of evidence. It is the difference between civilization and barbarians. People don't just say "Dirty stinking hippies" for no reason.

[Kahns Krazy]

You went to the Tea Party rally on the National Mall? Why have you never mentioned this before?

[Snipe]

I don't get out much.