One of the main arguments justifying OWS is that income disparity has been increasing rapidly over the past 20 - 30 years. UT's graph shows that while the top 1% more or less steadily gained a higher percentage of income, besides late 80's and early 00's, that the great recession actually hurt the 1% harder in proportion terms.

While it does slightly invalidate OWS's argument, especially against the argument that the top 1% weren't affected by the recession at all, it doesn't predict the future and it doesn't take the sensitivity difference from income loss into account either, your argument that people in the middle and lower class are hurt more from a 10% drop in income than someone in the upper class is from a 20% drop. From the graph, I would guess that the top 1% would continue their increase at some point and eventually pass their previous highest income share percentage.

looking inside the top 1% is an enlightening exercise.
The disparity within that subset is HUGE.

A 40% loss among the 1% is only chump change. Virtually no adverse affect. A 10% loss among the lower 50% is a major financial problem.

The American standard of living and resulting economic power comes from the lower 50%. Who are, BTW, the source of most future jobs. When the 99% got richer, American was more powerful. When income disparity increases, recessions are created. Jobs are lost. And the country recedes economically, militarily, and becomes politically less stable.

One reason why American was so desireable to immigrants. The little people are the source of American wealth, innovation, and power. A diminishing reality since America has lately and slowly started to become more like other less desireable countries. Where the rich get wealthy at the expense of all others.

You missed the next part:

See tw's user title.

Keep forgetting that.

;)

Yep, like I said, the weight loss analogy.

Thanks tw!

I didn't miss any part. My post exactly replies to that. Which part did you not understand?

Who's responsibility is it that these opportunities occur?

It is the government's job to ensure that the economic system we work under remains vibrant. To that end, they should and do have the power to do things like break up monopolies, prosecute cases of fraud or exploitation, shut down the stock market for periods of time when hysteria rather than rationality is ruling the trading floor, and otherwise perform checks on the system to keep it within a general middle ground.

Generally I would agree on principle. None of those powers are given to the Federal Government in the Constitution. But that does not extend to bailouts and spending of taxpayer dollars on failed programs.

And how does the first paragraph assign responsibility to ensure this opportunity. The Federal government does not have the power to do this.

The 1996 Federal Communication Act gave all an opportunity to become profitable internet providers. Large numbers of companies were founded because 1) the incumbent providers refused to provide broadband internet access, and 2) the American people were being denied technology that should have been available 15 years earlier.

Because of that Federal law, DSL (a 1981 technology) finally was implemented after 1996. Internet on cable and fiber optics quickly followed.

Then Michael Powell, et al took over the FCC. Subverted the 1996 Federal Communication Act to destroy all but the two 'chosen' providers in any region. As a result, innovative companies (ie Covad, Dieca Communications, NorthPoint Communications, Rhythms NetConnections, PSInet) were bankrupted. America has dropped from an internet world leader to somewhere below 20. Jobs, increased productivity, free market competition, and commercial opportunities all lost when a political agenda was intentionally implemented to protect the 'chosen' two.

Comcast then intentionally tried to subvert network neutrality by attacking Skype, Google, BitTorrent, and others. All because free market competition was subverted by a political agenda during the Michael Powell reign.

1996 Federal law made opportunity possible by destroying protected monopolies that refused to innovate. Refused for 15 years to install current technologies. Threatening companies such as Bell Atlantic and Time Warner by forcing them to innovate; due to laws that made possible and encouraged free market competition. Laws that stopped them from subverting packet switching to protect their obsolete technology circuit switched hardware.

Today, the 'chosen' companies no longer need to innovate. Laws restored so that free market competition can no longer survive. The duopoly is again doing only what is in their own interest - at the expense of customers and the nation. Protected by laws to enrich them at the expense of innovators and consumers.

It's true that the power is not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. But many laws have been added since then, as the founders did intend, including the powers listed above to break up monopolies, etc. Whether those laws should ever be repealed is also something the authors intended for us to always have the power to consider. Personally, I think the laws are still relevant and important to our society, and if anything the Federal government should be working harder to apply them more thoroughly.

How about preventing insider trading by our lawmakers? How about preventing lawmakers from actively voting on laws from which they personally will benefit? How about remove corporate financing of campaigns? It's quite simple really.

How about making the political process more about ALL of the people these representatives are supposed to represent, and not just the ones that can do them a favor? Eliminate the deck-stacking in favor of the top echelons and start paying attention to what will benefit the MOST members of one's constituency...

I'm not in favor of handouts. But I think our political system is heavily skewed and the lower/middle classes are getting screwed as a result.

STOCK Act passes in House
CBS

I'm aware of that. It's a baby step in the right direction, IF it gets passed and signed without a million loopholes and exceptions being tacked on.

Thats a big IF :yelsick:

Come join in the fun in beautiful downtown Lake Oswego, OR

Attachment 37899

Portland Tribune
By Kara Hansen Murphey
The Lake Oswego Review, Mar 8, 2012,

Will Oswego Lake be occupied?
Occupy group may try to go onto Oswego Lake March 22
.

Like spouses, kids, and large breasted secretaries.

I'm surprised the access rights are so poorly defined. Does that mean whatever limits the owners have on power boats etc... would also be voided? Are the hippie canoe occupiers somewhat ironically opening the flood gates to jet skis and all manner of noxious activity?

This will happen if public access is granted. My family has a cottage on a formerly private lake. The state opened up a boat launch on this tiny lake before I was born, and the character of the place was changed forever. Special rules apply to the lake (hours of operation of motor boats, etc.) but there is still a lot of tension between motorboaters and people who want to have some quiet.

^^^^ what Glatt said.

But, in Oregon, the other side of such issues is this.
Property boundaries can extend into the middle of a stream or river,
and some property owners try to keep people off their "water".
Then, some fishing clubs have bought property on both sides of the stream in valleys,
so they end up controlling access to ALL the property upstream of their own.
For fishermen, this is an outrage and viscously contentious
... charges of trespass vs all levels of physical fights.

It's in the courts and gradually changing over. Since 2005,
the rights of property owners have been reduced on "navigable" waterways,
so anyone can boat on the water and can walk along the shore up to the high-water boundary.

The issues on non-navigable streams and ponds is coming soon,
either as a result of something like the Occupy movement, or some sort of ridiculous tragedy.

Back in the 70's, Governor Tom McCall pushed through legislation
that all Oregon ocean beaches are State (public) property,
so property owners can not put fences from the road down into the surf.
There are some negatives effects of this too, but it's better than what was happening in some places.

I feel that, for Lake Oswego, the best route would be to have a legal decision that the water is public,
and then to have the City government work with the State Marine Board to hold public hearing and sset rules of conduct.
This has been done elsewhere and works out well, for the most part.
Of course, the wealthy L.O. property owners will not have their isolation.

They went and cancelled the afternoon TV soap operas,
but Lake Oswego is much better entertainment.

When these folk say "Keep out of our lake",
they mean it and will do whatever is necessary. ;)

The Lake Oswego Review
By Kara Hansen Murphey
Mar 22, 2012
Occupation on hold
Lake Corp. considers lowering lake,
cordoning off Lakewood Bay to foil protestors
Stay tuned... we'll be here for another two weeks :D

Wow! A scorched water policy.;)

Hmmmm .... evil plans brewing

Crocodiles!

Few hundred gallons of fuel oil and a lighted match ....

Sharks - with lasers on their heads!

Oooohhhh ... blue-green algae that produces toxins that makes any contact with the water hazardous...

Brain-eating amoeba ...

Damn, I'm good at this. WTF?

Nonsense. That is simply the usual hazards in Australia.

In that case, I forgot...

Drunken yobbos roaring about in speedboats.

Protestors dump human waste into businesses, well done! idiots.

The latest thing to annoy rich white college kids ... immigration detainees.

I wonder if it has occurred to any of their organizers that they might end up occupying the prison in a manner other than which they intend?

This could actually be bad, and get worse. Apparently there is some kind of national occupy get-to-gether in Philadelphia next week.

Wtf....guys? guys? Where are ya guys? Oh....Officer...no, no, I was just having a look around...

I'll let you know how it goes.

Of course, this sort of thing thrives on news coverage, which may be limited because of the amount of coverage that's being given to the obamacare decision by the supremes.

Wolf, something is wrong with the link...
I didn't find the above portion of the quote in the article,
and the article "Comments" section appears, but then aborts.

In subsequent posts here you seem upset about the situation,
but I can't tell if it is the contract between ICE and the County for beds,
or the idea that a group of people might want to challenge the situation
(between a County and federal juridiction ?)

Or just the disruption of occupation?

The link is to an article about what they are pissed off about, the quote is from a facebook page announcing the event.

they have a live feed ... looks like about a dozen people at the bottom of the prison driveway. chanting and shouting through bullhorns.

Zero news coverage.

lulz... occupy isn't looking to good. Maybe the rest are working or something.

Jeeeze Classic,
Maybe they need to get a hair cut and take a bath too.
Or maybe they should Love it or Leave it.
I haven't heard such as that since the 60's !

When I read the quote, it sounded more to me like something
from a Hispanic civil rights group, or maybe from a Tea Party rally.

What is the issue here ?

Down boy ... I was going for a parody of an Archie Bunker type.
(note to self - leave the humor to Zen & foot3)

I thought your comment was funny. The live feed is pretty lame, as protests go.

However, they have now decided to "occupy" both traffic lanes of Eagleville Road.

This is a problem.

The live feed has gone down. I'm guessing that the po-po are putting their tactical alert plan into action.

Lamp, my reason for being upset is a little more personal than the issue the protestors are there for ...

OK Wolf, sorry if I overstepped...

A lot of sound and fury, signfying nothing, as the bard said.

Well, not a lot of sound and fury, actually.

I spent the morning watching two news stations and the live feed from the protestor's website. They had a grand total of 14 viewers. That includes me.

I'm assuming that at least a half-dozen or more of the others were local law enforcement.

Oh, and when I say local, I mean local.

The protest started with four people with a bullhorn, and a lot of ranting, some of it in Spanish and Spanglish. It is extraordinarily sad to watch one dude with a bullhorn try to lead the other three early arrivers in a rousing chant.

Didn't rouse much.

Eventually the bus from Philly arrived, and swelled their numbers alarmingly. I think they may have eventually had like ... two dozen or so?

They were on the lawn in front of the county hoosegow.

To start, anyway.

I began to worry when they began to block traffic on Eagleville Road. They marched in a really, really big circle, chanting, "undocumented, un" ... something.

Then, just in time for change of shift at the big house (I'm sure that played into the tactical planning), there was the sound of police sirens and the live webcast went off line.

I did get to see the line of police cars and paddywagons pulling out of the county slammer's driveway. I saw at least 15 different jurisdictions.

Hope the kids enjoy their courtesy body cavity searches.

I have every expectation that they will be back. The National Occupy Convention or convocation or gathering or happening or whatever they call it is in Philadelphia next week.

One of their "leaders" was just on the radio 1/2 hour ago answering calls from the public.
(on the show which replaced Rush)
He refused to denounce any violence and blamed it upon retaliation to the police.
He seemed rather unprepared and stumbled/mumbled through a lot of his responses when taken off message and asked direct questions. :/

So Occupy DC packed it up, cleared out of McPherson Square on K Street, the city re-seeded the grass that was damaged during the occupation and then...

http://wtop.com/109/2623180/Occupy-g...rns-to-DC-park

Yeah, I saw that. But the city isn't as welcoming as it had been. They won't be allowed to sleep there.

This law suit has gone ad extemimus sillimus

http://www.oregonlive.com/lake-osweg...tml OregonLive
Molly Harbarger, The Oregonian
July 10, 2012, 2:50 PM

Jonathan Lee Riches alert: restraining order, appeal filed to warn residents of Oswego Lake volcano, "sue-nami"

The data for 2008-2009 is in today.

http://cellar.org/2012/2009chart.jpg

What is this showing?

It's the graph in this post, updated with 2008 and 2009.

Good morning UT.

Would you please give a cite for your numbers? I would like to follow up on this thread; you quoted me after all. I tried to follow the links backward to no avail.

Congressional Budget Office; click on any of the supplemental tables at the bottom and you download the spreadsheet. Open it, go to the household income sheet, and the data is in the table labeled "Average After-Tax Income (2009 dollars)".

BumpV

just saw this bump...

I'll read and reply. thanks for the bump.