The list of demands started off kind of doable and then just went off the deep end. Also, the demands are so all over the place that again, it feels more like a disjointed mob than a focused movement. My thoughts:

Demand 1 - Define "living wage". Also, as tempting as it is to talk about fair trade and whatnot, the boat has already sailed. The United States is no longer the sole conduit for the global economy, and the sort of drastic tariffs required would probably destroy what's left of America's export market in retaliatory tariffs. Meanwhile, you'll have Europeans who will fill the void left by the U.S. and the world will go on without us.

Demand 2 - I think this is Doable, but I think they're overly focused on insurance companies. They're part of the problem, but in my opinion, an equal part of the problem is made up by the massive regional health conglomerates that have established monopolies over large parts of the US health care market.

Demand 3 - Again, define "living wage".

Demand 4 - Is this just public or does this include private too? Perhaps they should also ask why tuition is going up at three times the inflation rate and figure out how to bring that under control too.

Demand 5 - Doable but vague.

Demand 6 - Doable, but I hope it's better run than the last set of "shovel ready" projects. Also, we need to be careful because a) can the economy handle such a massive influx of money at once (ie. are there enough qualified people to do the work without us wasting money on conmen) and b) if we're talking "real" infrastructure projects, those sorts of efforts aren't going to provide immediate economic benefits as they take years of planning and preparation.

Demand 7 - Again, is there enough projects and workers to absorb such a project? Also, simply decommissioning nuke plants isn't going to help; most likely, they'll get replaced with coal.

Demand 8 - Eh... doable but questionable in value.

Demand 9 - Completely unrealistic, especially when paired with demands for "living wage". My personal belief is that one reason wages have fallen so rapidly in the US for lower income brackets is because of the influx of cheap labor. If you open the doors, you'll flood the labor market with people from poorer nations who are willing to work harder for less (ie, they come from situations even worse than what our poor face, making them all the more desperate and motivated). Even if you put a floor on wages, its those people, not the existing poor, who will probably benefit more.

Demand 10 - Doable.

Demand 11 - Hahahaha. "All debt on the entire planet period," and I want World PeaceTM and a pony for Christmas. Probably should have done something regarding housing derivatives though. I'm sure the Chinese are more likely to nuke us than forgive our debt obligations.

Demand 12 - Wha...? As long as there is a need to loan money, something else will emerge. Better regulation maybe...

Demand 13 - Anonymous voting is healthy for democracy since it prevents retaliation... unless it involves unions. Then, you must know where a worker stands so you can send people to "convince" them of the error in their thinking.

[Edited on October 4, 2011 at 3:27 PM. Reason : Changed reasonable to "Doable" since I don't necessarily agree with all the demands]

10/4/2011 3:26:12 PM

I thought that they would stick to least common denominators to build a bigger group. Guess I was wrong.

10/4/2011 3:28:24 PM

Jesus fucking christ at their demands. What a bunch of ignorant hippies.

$20 HOUR MINIMUM WAGE
OPEN ALL THE BORDERS
FREE COLLEGE EDUCATION

Yeah, good luck on telling any business that they must pay a non-educated pair of hands $20/hour to clean toilets, or giving some high school turd the same pay to flip burgers.

The "racial and gender equal rights" has absolutely nothing to do with their Wall Street obsession/getting more jobs and everything to do with them being a bunch of ignorant hippies.

[Edited on October 4, 2011 at 3:40 PM. Reason : sdf]

10/4/2011 3:39:59 PM

Quote :

"how come y'all are acting like that is some sort of official statement of demands by the leader of an organized group? it's one post, by one person on an open forum on the internet."

10/4/2011 3:47:50 PM

Hah. So they want to be forgiven for their $80,000 debt on their out-of-state liberal arts degree?

10/4/2011 3:51:22 PM

If by "they," you mean "one person on an open forum on the internet," then yes, he does.

10/4/2011 4:11:50 PM

This is the risk you take by being a faceless, anonymous mob on the internet. Anyone can pipe up on their website and say that its the official demand list, and no one has anything to say that it isn't their official doctrine.

I see the online movement taking the same path as LulzSec or whatever that fucking mess was

10/4/2011 4:13:33 PM

lol you guys can have your own country and do this.

i'll take this 'shitty' USA over your unsustainable narnia anyday.

10/4/2011 4:28:01 PM

Quote :

"You have supported the bank bailouts, so you're really not in a position to bitch about any of this."

The fact that you've resorted to this intellectually vacant form of debate tells me that you're no better than aaronburro at this point, and are no longer worth my time. As I mentioned in all my posts on the subject, I supported the bailouts in 2008 due to the specific circumstances that existed at that time, namely the need to avert a global economic meltdown. Now go back to jacking off to videos of Ron Paul talking about gold, and come back when you've developed the critical thinking skills necessary to wrap your head around more than one thought at a time.

Quote :

"ah, the "you make too much money" argument. we should just have the government set wages for all jobs, right?"

Yeah, because that's what I said. Everything I said was in response to calling raising taxes on the rich "unfair" or "class warfare". We live in a modern collaborative society where almost all of the social, economic, and industrial infrastructure is provided by federal, state, and local governments. The only way a society like that can be maintained is if everyone pays their fair share of taxes. The people who make the most, also benefit the most, and should be expected to pay the most. It's as simple as that.

10/4/2011 4:48:31 PM

Quote :

"The fact that you've resorted to this intellectually vacant form of debate tells me that you're no better than aaronburro at this point, and are no longer worth my time. As I mentioned in all my posts on the subject, I supported the bailouts in 2008 due to the specific circumstances that existed at that time, namely the need to avert a global economic meltdown. Now go back to jacking off to videos of Ron Paul talking about gold, and come back when you've developed the critical thinking skills necessary to wrap your head around more than one thought at a time. "

Hahaha. Nah, get out of here with this bullshit. You supported the bailouts. The banks then began turning major profits, which was expected. You believed the politician's lies, and now you're trying to save face. No crisis has been averted; a much worse crisis awaits.

Keep shilling for Goldman Sachs while claiming to be for the "little guy". What a fucking joke.

[Edited on October 4, 2011 at 5:00 PM. Reason : ]

10/4/2011 4:57:22 PM

^^^^
True, but that forum post doesn't even present itself as an official list of demands.

10/4/2011 4:59:55 PM

Quote :

"The people who make the most, also benefit the most, and should be expected to pay the most. It's as simple as that."

They already do. The top whatever percent you want pays the most in taxes.

10/4/2011 5:07:54 PM

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2394071,00.asp#fbid=eUflOYgpKVP

Quote :

"Anonymous Threatens to 'Erase NYSE from the Internet'"

what's the thought on this, and how it could change the flow of things

10/4/2011 5:11:02 PM

Fist of all, it ain't gonna happen. Second, it will never happen.

10/4/2011 5:12:32 PM

haha, my first reaction was "hey we're gonna ddos the webpage durhurr"

10/4/2011 5:13:43 PM

seriously you fucks need to go live in belarus or something if these are the demands you want. it's funny b/c they have like half of them. yet for some odd reason they are all in the total shitter economically. hmm i wonder why the correlation there?

10/4/2011 5:22:12 PM

Quote :

"Jesus fucking christ at their demands. What a bunch of ignorant hippies. "

The worst is the total debt forgiveness followed by the end of the credit score. Well if you somehow forced a total loss to these lending institutions then noone would need a credit score bc there sure as hell wouldnt be anyone lending money anymore.

I would imagine these demands are some sort of joke.

10/4/2011 5:26:57 PM

shrike!

what say you of the demands?!

ye who lead the liberal charge of yore?

10/4/2011 5:36:40 PM

^Some of them are reasonable, some are clearly meant to generate headlines. What do you want me to say? At least they aren't holding up signs calling Obama a black Muslim communist Hitler.

I've said time and time again I support single payer/universal healthcare, free or cheap college education, and massive investments into alternative energy, infrastructure, and protecting the environment. Nothing controversial there.

Quote :

"Hahaha. Nah, get out of here with this bullshit. You supported the bailouts. The banks then began turning major profits, which was expected. You believed the politician's lies, and now you're trying to save face. No crisis has been averted; a much worse crisis awaits."

K, so you've given up debating and are just projecting your misconceptions of reality on me. Please do come back when you're graduated from high school.

[Edited on October 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM. Reason : :]

10/4/2011 5:53:11 PM

Quote :

"The people who make the most, also benefit the most, and should be expected to pay the most. "

Amazing. Elizabeth Warren states it and it's as if every progressive everywhere is now programmed to echo it.

How about try with some numbers to attempt to quantify this? Is money really the only metric we're using to determine how much someone benefited from something?

Steve Jobs spearheads the invention of a gadget that brings a better standard of living to over 100 million people and we're going to say he collectively benefited more than all of those people combined because his bank account went up the most? Your math doesn't add up.

You progressives need to stop living in fantasy land and at least attempt to use real numbers to form the basis for an argument.

10/4/2011 5:58:23 PM

I'm confused as to why there is still discussion regarding the merits of demands that are not the group's actual demands.

[Edited on October 4, 2011 at 6:10 PM. Reason : still]

10/4/2011 6:10:17 PM

^^Progressives have been saying it since......forever. Where have you been? And I have nothing against Steve Jobs, or most of the CEOs of Silicon Valley. Unlike Wall Street, their income is directly tied to the performance of their company, and how much they actually create and innovate. Hell, Steve Jobs had a salary of $1/year, and made all his money from his shares of AAPL, which went up because the man was good at what he did. I do have a problem with the salaries Wall Street investment bank CEOs. Banks that were directly responsible for the subprime mortgage crisis. Namely the ones who collected 7-8 figure severance packages as their banks either tanked or were forced to take billions of tax payer dollars to stay afloat. Also, here are some real numbers:

Quote :

"As the ongoing occupation of Wall Street by hundreds of protesters enters its third week — and as protests spread to other cities such as Boston and Los Angeles — demonstrators have endorsed a new slogan: “We are the 99 percent.” This slogan refers an economic struggle between 99 percent of Americans and the richest one percent of Americans, who are increasingly accumulating a greater share of the national wealth to the detriment of the middle class. 1. The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Owns 40 Percent Of The Nation’s Wealth: As Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz points out, the richest 1 percent of Americans now own 40 percent of the nation’s wealth. Sociologist William Domhoff illustrates this wealth disparity using 2007 figures where the top 1 percent owned 42 percent of the country’s financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one’s home). How much does the bottom 80 percent own? Only 7 percent: As Stiglitz notes, this disparity is much worse than it was in the past, as just 25 years ago the top 1 percent owned 33 percent of national wealth. 2. The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Take Home 24 Percent Of National Income: While the richest 1 percent of Americans take home almost a quarter of national income today, in 1976 they took home just 9 percent — meaning their share of the national income pool has nearly tripled in roughly three decades. 3.. The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Own Half Of The Country’s Stocks, Bonds, And Mutual Funds: The Institute for Policy Studies illustrates this massive disparity in financial investment ownership, noting that the bottom 50 percent of Americans own only .5 percent of these investments: 4. The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Have Only 5 Percent Of The Nation’s Personal Debt: Using 2007 figures, sociologist William Domhoff points out that the top 1 percent have 5 percent of the nation’s personal debt while the bottom 90 percent have 73 percent of total debt: 5.. The Top 1 Percent Are Taking In More Of The Nation’s Income Than At Any Other Time Since The 1920s: Not only are the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans taking home a tremendous portion of the national income, but their share of this income is greater than at any other time since the Great Depression, as the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities illustrates in this chart using 2007 data: "

[Edited on October 4, 2011 at 6:12 PM. Reason : :]

10/4/2011 6:12:27 PM

Quote :

"K, so you've given up debating and are just projecting your misconceptions of reality on me. Please do come back when you're graduated from high school."

Yeah, I gave up after I realized that you skim over most things I say. You don't talk about the Federal Reserve; you don't talk about the banking system. You don't talk about the fact that when you deposit 100 dollars to the bank, the bank is allowed to loan out 900.

There's more to this than "the rich need to pay more taxes." That's the crux of your argument. The ultra-rich banksters that run our economy don't (and won't) pay high tax rates. They control the money. If your solution is to drain the "good rich" (those that actually give us things that improve our lives) while leaving the atrocious banking infrastructure in place (that's what the bailouts did), then we have nothing to talk about.

10/4/2011 6:15:22 PM

Quote :

" Also, here are some real numbers"

Yeah, I've seen these every time a progressive thinks he is making a point.

Your numbers are mere correlations. No analysis. No root cause. Just brain dead "dur hurr, lookie here, see whut I'm talkin bout? These damn wall streeters takin all eyer monies"

10/4/2011 7:32:34 PM

Intentionally breaking or making threads a pain to read is one of my biggest pet peeves. If you do it again, I'll suspend every user name you have forever. -theDuke866

[Edited on October 4, 2011 at 8:11 PM. Reason : uppitynegronetwork.com? really?]

10/4/2011 8:02:07 PM

So is kdogg(c) just trying to make every page of this thread unreadable for some reason?

I know that theDuke866 stated that he hoped that the earth opens up and swallows the people at this protest,
but I would think that he wouldn't let that interfere with his duties as a moderator.

[Edited on October 4, 2011 at 8:07 PM. Reason : ]

10/4/2011 8:06:21 PM

Man, cut that fucking shit out gaydogg.

[Edited on October 4, 2011 at 8:11 PM. Reason : dag...seconds too late]

10/4/2011 8:11:26 PM

^^ Fixed.

Goddamn, you mind giving me more than 4 minutes to catch stuff like that and fix it before you start whining about it and pointing fingers?

10/4/2011 8:13:21 PM

Sorry. The last time I checked, the picture on page one hadn't been removed.

Also, I wouldn't view it so much as whining and pointing fingers as I would a call to action.

[Edited on October 4, 2011 at 9:06 PM. Reason : ]

10/4/2011 9:05:28 PM

nah, it's whining

this is a call to action mail_compose.aspx?user=7010

10/4/2011 10:21:18 PM

10/5/2011 2:23:02 AM

Is anti-semitism racism?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/279165/dark-side-occupy-wall-street-protests-charles-c-w-cooke

I saw parts of an interview where a guy was asked why he was protesting and, while he was strumming his guitar, he answered "I'm not really sure."

Pathetic.

I wonder if any of these people:
1) Have a job?
2) Had to borrow their parents' car to get to the protests?

10/5/2011 7:31:24 AM

I saw that interview too and it really pissed me off. However, it was a Fox News interview. You know they type of answers they are going to seek out to make the movement seem like a bunch of left wing radicals. As this movement grows, it's going to attract plenty of "rebels without a cause". It needs definition and leaders.

10/5/2011 7:49:23 AM

It has leaders: Big Unions and George Soros.

10/5/2011 8:10:27 AM

^yeah. It might not have started that way but they are sure swooping in on the children. haha

10/5/2011 10:35:53 AM

Quote :

"Yeah, I gave up after I realized that you skim over most things I say. You don't talk about the Federal Reserve; you don't talk about the banking system. You don't talk about the fact that when you deposit 100 dollars to the bank, the bank is allowed to loan out 900."

That's simply not true man. I have talked about all those things. My problem with you is that you don't propose any real solutions. Your solution is something like "free market + gold bars + fairy dust = prosperity". That's called wishful thinking, not a solution. Whereas I talk about imposing common sense regulations on the financial sector so they are no longer encouraged to do things that harm the health of our economy. Dodd-Frank was a good start, but nothing will really change until compensation is targeted.

Do you know why banks over leverage themselves? It has nothing do with the Fed. It's because if the CEO of that bank wins the bet and it's profits go up, he get a 1000% pay raise. And if he doesn't win that bet and the bank fails, he still gets an 8 figure severance package. Does that make sense to you? Imagine if Vegas worked that way, and every bet carried 1000:1 odds and had a money back guarantee. The incentives are completely out of whack.

The former CEOs of Country Wide, Citigroup, and Merrill all took home severance packages totaling over $100 million within months, if not days, of their banks succumbing to the mortgage crisis. The bankers were already "bailed out" long before TARP went into effect, so how can you say supporting TARP = supporting the bankers. They would have gotten theirs no matter what. I supported the bailout because it saved the rest of us.

Quote :

"Is anti-semitism racism? http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/279165/dark-side-occupy-wall-street-protests-charles-c-w-cooke I saw parts of an interview where a guy was asked why he was protesting and, while he was strumming his guitar, he answered "I'm not really sure." Pathetic. I wonder if any of these people: 1) Have a job? 2) Had to borrow their parents' car to get to the protests?"

Yeah, come back to me when they are holding up signs simultaneously calling a presidential candidate a black supremacist muslim extremist communist nazi.

[Edited on October 5, 2011 at 12:00 PM. Reason : :]

10/5/2011 11:57:28 AM

Quote :

"Your solution is something like "free market + gold bars + fairy dust = prosperity"."

Is this is what you think my solution is, then you clearly have skimmed over what I've said.

Quote :

"Do you know why banks over leverage themselves? It has nothing do with the Fed. It's because if the CEO of that bank wins the bet and it's profits go up, he get a 1000% pay raise. And if he doesn't win that bet and the bank fails, he still gets an 8 figure severance package. Does that make sense to you? Imagine if Vegas worked that way, and every bet carried 1000:1 odds and had a money back guarantee. The incentives are completely out of whack. "

No. Without the Fed, there is no lender of last resort. A bank could be ended overnight by a run on deposits. The fractional reserve banking system is the problem; it allows banks to stack debt on top of debt. We agree on the general aspects of what is wrong, but you're not connecting the dots on why banks are able to do what they do.

Big banks (primary dealers) borrow from the Fed for basically free. The Fed creates the money and gives it to the bank. Additionally, the banks create their own money when they give out loans. So, our system can be described as a cartel of private bank that have complete and total control over the money supply, which has resulted in a severe misallocation of resources, as borrowed money has been used to bid up the price of items/services that could not be funded in a hard money (i.e. real money) economy.

Quote :

"The former CEOs of Country Wide, Citigroup, and Merrill all took home severance packages totaling over $100 million within months, if not days, of their banks succumbing to the mortgage crisis. The bankers were already "bailed out" long before TARP went into effect, so how can you say supporting TARP = supporting the bankers. They would have gotten theirs no matter what. I supported the bailout because it saved the rest of us."

The bailouts only "saved" us for as long as the props remain intact. Once the Euro fails, we aren't far behind.

[Edited on October 5, 2011 at 12:11 PM. Reason : ]

10/5/2011 12:09:47 PM

I really appreciate the protestors and their demands but . . . .

I'd like to see the protest more focused and with a little more attainable goals. I think it would broaden the appeal and protestors have to realize we have to take baby steps before we start running.

1 - Prosecute all cases of mortgage fraud to the fullest extent, if more investigators are needed then hire them. In cases where its obviously the banks fault then just give the house to the "homeowner"

2 - Better sunshine/campaign finance laws

3 - Get new rules like Volcker and Basel implemented and functioning

4 - A financial transaction tax or Bank tax (that somehow takes into account bank size and leverage)

10/5/2011 12:30:39 PM

Quote :

"I'd like to see the protest more focused and with a little more attainable goals. I think it would broaden the appeal and protestors have to realize we have to take baby steps before we start running."

Not really possible. The problem with "flash protests", as opposed to organized events led by a strong individual leader willing to police his/her own protesters, is that probably something on the order of only 25% of the protesters are actually fully invested in the protest and its goals, the rest is composed of people who are either aimlessly angry, professional protesters (the ones that protest for causes only tangentially or even not at all related) and people looking for an excuse to misbehave. Since those people make up the majority of what other see, it's really easy for the protest to lose its way and image. Eventually if a leader of some sort shows up, the protest then follows the agenda of the leader, regardless of whether it was the initial agenda, see the Tea Party vs the tea party for an example. If a leader doesn't show up, eventually the core protesters (the 25%) get disillusioned, frustrated or ousted and leave, and the remaining eventually get bored or arrested and dispersed.

10/5/2011 1:02:50 PM

The real problem is that non-violent protests don't do anything. The banksters will continue what they're doing until 1) Someone (with the reasonable ability to follow through) threatens to use violence against them or 2) The infrastructure that funnels wealth to them collapses

Could #1 be the government? Possibly...if we elected the right people. If I'm being realistic, though, the government will continue doing what it always has done - encouraging the expansion of credit, since it also enables said government to increase spending, i.e. buy votes.

10/5/2011 1:37:58 PM

10/5/2011 2:02:45 PM

You know it's on the front page of CNN.com, right?

10/5/2011 2:05:47 PM

some dumpy bastard put ^that image on FB and i thought it was cool.

no aerial photo on CNN as far as i can tell.

feel free to link it tho- its probably bigger at least.

10/5/2011 2:28:34 PM

this protest was planned to distract from how shitty obama is doing.

OOPS SORRY DIDNT MEAN TO SAY THAT MY BAD.

10/5/2011 2:35:15 PM

Quote :

"The fractional reserve banking system is the problem"

I do not think you eliminate the fractional reserve banking system without drastically reducing the money supply.

I lost some respect after reading the list of demands.

The supposed living wage is way to high and contradicts the demand for open borders for migrant workers.

Then there is a demand about the environment while at the same time demanding the closure of all nuke power plants. Power plants
are the means to supply this countries energy safely and cleanly.

10/5/2011 3:32:16 PM

The debt forgiveness demand is laughable.

The equal college opportunity request is also laughable. We already have more than enough programs and systems in place to make
college avaliable for those who can make basic entrance requirements and show a sincere desire to learn. The tax payer should not be
forced for a C-student to sit in his boxers and play video games all day for four years.

Demand 8 is plain ignorant. This country has gone above and beyond for civil rights and equality. If anything white males are descriminated against
as reprisal of decades of mistreatment. Countless complaining by minority groups only fans the flames of the minimal racial tensions that still exist.

10/5/2011 3:35:30 PM

Quote :

"I do not think you eliminate the fractional reserve banking system without drastically reducing the money supply."

That's correct. The nature of the money supply needs to change.

10/5/2011 3:46:32 PM

Quote :

"The tax payer should not be forced for a C-student to sit in his boxers and play video games all day for four years."

liberals like to pretend this student doesnt exist.

Quote :

"make college avaliable for those who can make basic entrance requirements and show a sincere desire to learn."

liberals like to make this a racist or otherwise discriminatory statement.

Quote :

"If anything white males are discriminated against as reprisal of decades of mistreatment."

for emphasis.

Quote :

"Countless complaining by minority groups only fans the flames of the minimal racial tensions that still exist."

i would add that people like jesse jackson and al sharpton encourage this only to retain power (to the detriment of their supposed "constituents").

10/5/2011 3:46:42 PM

Quote :

"liberals like to pretend this student doesnt exist."

Republicans like to pretend that this student is everybody without a job, except for those goddamn welfare queens, and there's like a billion of them too.

Quote :

"i would add that people like jesse jackson and al sharpton encourage this only to retain power (to the detriment of their supposed "constituents")."

Jesse Jackson is a cunt for the ages and Al Sharpton is a clown. Do you see anybody here defending them?

10/5/2011 7:06:48 PM

As someone who's quick to identify himself as an idealist who doesn't have the stomach for the contentiousness that's so pervasive in politics and political discussions, I agree with the general premises that these people are protesting on.

10/5/2011 7:35:57 PM