The Cellar
Page 3 of 15 12 3 4567891013 Last »
Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)
-   Current Events (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Wall Street Protests (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=26025)

Trilby 10-13-2011 06:18 AM
Looks like a three-dog night on the tundra.

Lamplighter 10-13-2011 09:00 AM
:D

Lamplighter 10-13-2011 09:03 AM
Sorry, hit the wrong button while composing another post

Lamplighter 10-13-2011 09:53 AM
How is this for an attention-grabbing headline and lead paragraph from a reputable news service ?

REUTERS
By Mark Egan and Michelle Nichols
NEW YORK | Thu Oct 13, 2011 9:50am EDT


Quote:
Who's behind the Wall St. protests?

Lead paragraph:
There has been much speculation over who is financing the disparate protest
which has spread to cities across America and lasted nearly four weeks.
One name that keeps coming up is investor George Soros,
who in September debuted in the top 10 list of wealthiest Americans.
Conservative critics contend the movement is a Trojan horse for a secret Soros agenda.
There follows a description of the non-OWS history of Soros.
Then it turns to what Reuters has found out:

12th paragraph:
Quote:
According to disclosure documents from 2007-2009,
Soros' Open Society gave grants of $3.5 million to the Tides Center,
a San Francisco-based group that acts almost like a clearing house for other donors,
directing their contributions to liberal non-profit groups.
Among others the Tides Center has partnered with are the Ford Foundation and the Gates Foundation.

Disclosure documents also show Tides, which declined comment,
gave Adbusters grants of $185,000 from 2001-2010,
including nearly $26,000 between 2007-2009.

Aides to Soros say any connection is tenuous and that Soros has never heard of Adbusters.
Soros himself declined comment.
No matter, the small $ or the time-frames, let's get to the red meat...

[b]20th paragraph:
Quote:
Lasn [Adbusters co-founder] said Adbusters is 95 percent funded by subscribers paying for the magazine.

"George Soros's ideas are quite good, many of them.
I wish he would give Adbusters some money, we sorely need it,
she said. "He's never given us a penny."
But Reuters won't take no for an answer, and so they bring in another attention-grabbing name.
If the Soros name doesn't stir your blood, then this one certainly will.

22nd paragraph:
Quote:
Other support for Occupy Wall Street has come from online funding website Kickstarter,
where more than $75,000 has been pledged,
deliveries of food and from cash dropped in a bucket at the park.

Liberal film maker Michael Moore has also pledged to donate money.
The article ends at paragraph 32


My congratulations to Mark Egan and Michelle Nichols of Reuters
for their excellent penetrating investigative reporting,
and placing such definitive incriminating facts in the middle of the article.

Great reporting, guys - NOT

Happy Monkey 10-13-2011 11:04 AM
Wow, "keeps coming up" in "much speculation". I didn't ever expect them to come up with something more worthless than "some say" to base "reporting" on.

Pete Zicato 10-13-2011 03:37 PM
1 Attachment(s)
Attachment 34529

SamIam 10-13-2011 05:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter (Post 763381)

Great reporting, guys - NOT
CSNBC wrote a pretty good piece about George Soros and his supposed clandestine support of Occupy Wall Street:

Quote:
Perhaps the most surprising thing about Occupy Wall Street is that it is a financial success. In just four weeks since the protest began, it has raised well over $200,000 and collected far more than that in donated food and clothing.

There has been a lot of speculation who might be financing the protests. One person sometimes signaled out is George Soros, the well-known hedge fund manager who has used his bank-account to fund progressive causes quite a few times.

Soros no doubt supports many of the sentiments of the Occupy Wall Streeters. But there doesn’t seem to be much of direct connection. A Reuters investigation found only the most tenuous connection.
It may have been tenuous, but Reuters certainly made the most of it. :eyebrow:

BigV 10-13-2011 05:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Zicato (Post 763500)
That's 101%.

I'm not quibbling about the general shape of the curve, I have a specific question about the math.

Regarding the green line, the top quintile, does that include the top 1%?

If it does, then that's fine, it probably does. But that means the even the tiny bit of altitude the top quintile enjoys above the mud at the bottom is being provided by the top 1%.

I believe a picture of the top 1%, the next 19%, and then the following four quintiles would look like a solid striped bar at the bottom with the red ribbon of affluence soaring off into the heavens.

I think the graph as shown is just 20-20-20-20-20.

What it shows is that it takes 99 regular people to create one bogglingly rich person. Wait, that math's wrong too. It takes a hell of a lot more than 99.

infinite monkey 10-13-2011 06:29 PM

infinite monkey 10-13-2011 06:30 PM

BigV 10-13-2011 07:26 PM
Meanwhile, back at the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations:

I got this report in my email today.


Quote:
1.5 weeks ago, rather spur of the moment, I decided that I'd take my 16 year old son, A----n, to NYC to participate in and observe the Occupy Wall Street demonstration. He's been quite involved with local community organizing, is doing an independent study for American Government this year, and has been volunteering as an intern for Organizing for America for the past year. I thought this would be a great way for him to see a grassroots movement and also take part in what I believe will be an event written about in history books at some point. So we went.

Drawing numerous raised eyebrows, we made our way to Liberty (aka Zuccoti) Square in the financial district. I must say, we stood out, carrying backpacks complete with sleeping bags attached. We arrived at the square around 4:00 p.m. Friday. Unsure--and, let's be honest here, pretty much small town rubes--of the lay of the land, we staked out an area just large enough for the two of us to sit on as soon as we could. As it turns out, we were ideally located, close to the information table, close to where the teach-ins occurred, close to the entrance to park on Broadway. As I sort of stayed and watched our stuff, A----n went out to search out what was going on. True to form, he immeciately found food;) and asked for information. Meanwhile, as I sat and observed, it was announced that there was a "newcomers meeting," and we happened to miss it. I wish we hadn't, but at that time, I was really feeling unsure about leaving our stuff unattended.

A----n returned with a snack...I believe it was peanut butter on whole wheat bread, some fruit, and some Twizzlers. Around that time, a spokesperson teaching about the uprisings in Greece began to conduct a teach-in. A----n went to listen to that and I used that time to meet up with the people around us. The guy next to me as unfriendly adn very cold (I later figured out he wasn't a true demonstrator, but rather is mentally unbalanced and living on the streedt). The guys behind me were from Michigan, college students, who had taken the bus to NYC to participate and next to them was a guy from Philly and one from Indiana.

After the teach-in, A----n began to get antsy. He wanted to see what was happening and on the surface, nothing was happening. At one point, he was bored and disillusioned and wanting to leave, only we had no where to go. Our housing for the weekend wasn't available until Saturday. Friday night, we were on out own (and really not able to afford a hotel room in Manhattan). So he meandered over to the volunteer table and volunteered. He ended up passing out info flyers about the next day's meetings and working groups. And then, it was time to eat again. This time, he came back with the most phenomenal ziti with kale and awesome spices, a potato dish, some couscous, and other tasty and healthy options.

By that point, we were feeling comfortable enough to leave our possessions unguarded, so we went for a meander and discovered the People's Library, the kitchen area (complete with gray water system and composting), day care, "comfort" station which provided us with blankets to use under our sleeping bags and a pillow for my old head, and the medical area. As we walked, people all around us were carrying on (loud) conversations about politics, philosophy, hopes, dreams, and frustrations. Everyone had a story. Some were clearly idealists. Some were frustrated by their plight in life. Many were un- or underemployed. Most had done "everything right." Many, many were raised or reached the middle class. There were out of work tradespeople standing shoulder to shoulder with PhDs, one of whom had told me that she'd had tenure, but her school had eliminated the department she taught in and all the full time, tenured profs had been eliminated, to be replaced by adjuncts who only taught part time and online. Another told me she was an adjunct with two Phds....just a huge variety of people there for many reasons.

As darkness fell, A----n jumped at the opportunity to work in the kitchen area, serving food and I went back to stake our our area and figure out exactly how sleeping arrangments worked. As it turned out, it was a good thing I did. Space was at a premium. I nabbed enough bench for me to sleep on and spread out A----n's stuff next to it, and just in time, too. When we awoke in the morning every single inch of ground space around us was being used.

At that time, as people were starting to settle in, a General Assembly was starting, within mere yards of us. These events use specific hand gestures and a type of call and response known as The People's Mic in lieu of amplification. It's quite effective. That night, there were lots of announcements, health warnings, a run down of rules (e.g. no drugs or alcohol, no violence or weapons, share and share alike) a little soap boxing, etc. It went on for over an hour. It was during this that I realized that my benchmate really was more than a little unbalanced. He started yelling back and getting very angry and confrontational. Immediately, a member of the OWS security working group, called a de-escalation member, arrived and talked the guy down, very respectfully, very quietly, very peacefully. The de-escalation guy was huge, ripped, and looked like the consumate bouncer. He did not use an imposing or threatening body language or violent communication. Later the same evening, my benchmate again got violent and aggressive and a different member came over (at this point, A----n knew to whom to turn and was instrumental in heading off what could have been an ugly incident...he also did a good job talking down the woman the unbalanced man was accosting...she was very "new york" and was not going to take his lip....kudos, A----n!). This time, the de-escalation expert talked this guy to sleep.

As we all settled in to sleep, the park quieted down quiet well. It wasn't very dark and it wasn't very warm. I've slept in colder while camping, and I wasn't chilly as long as I kept my head covered (I'd packed a hat, but couldn't find it in the dark in my bag). I was on a marble bench, laying on some cardboard signs and a blanket, in my down sleeping bag. A----n, though, was on the ground, on cardboard and a foil space blanket. However, while my sleeping bag zipper wouldn't stay up, his didn't zip. So, when he'd move, he'd end up off the cardboard and on the chilly concrete, and when he'd try to move back, his bag would come open. The poor kid didn't sleep very well.

Around daybreak, I woke up and carefully picked my way through the sleeping mass to the street where I then made my way to the McDonald's which was allowing us to use their bathrooms. I returned, settled back in, and dozed off until around 6:30 or 7:00 when someone announcing morning yoga. That got people up and going:) A----n again went in search of food and brough back fruit and cereal and whole wheat bagels. There was another set of announcements, requests for help with working groups, a schedcule for the day, requests for assistance at a General Assembly in another park, reminders to be respectful of police and others, and the good news that there had been a donation of storage space to hold items of clothing and bedding, a sign up system for showers and laundry, and a request to help keep the park and McDonald's clean.

Shortly thereafter A----n and I decided to go see some of the city. Not being big city people, we had little we felt compelled to see. We'd seen Times Square. We'd seen the theater district. We'd ridden the subway. So we headed to a place we'd feel more comfortable...historical monuments. And we went off to see the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island. Such stereotypical homeschoolers at heart, I guess. There were some other museums on our list, but the holiday weekend crowds and wonderfully warm, sunny weather had driven hoards of people into the city and we spend hours standing in line; therefore, that's all we did, and that took up four hours.

We then returned to the OWS demonstration and decided that the two of us just aren't cut out for constant noise, hustle, and bustle. We'd accomplished our goals. And, quite frankly, we needed some downtime. We'd driven to Ithaca Wednesday, arriving around 11 pm. We'd spent the first part of Thursday in Ithaca (eating at the Moosewood Restraunt), and then driven to Groton, MA where "the cousins" live, arriving around 9:30. We'd gone to bed late and then gotten up to drive into NYC Friday. And by 4:00 Saturday, we were done in. So as A----n took the remnants of the food we'd brought to the kitchen, I tidied up our bags, gave away our blankets, sleeping bags, and emergency blankets to people who were there for the long haul.

We then headed out to visit with my friend who lives in Harlem, where A----n got an insider's tour of the neighborhood by my friend's 13 yo son, and we got to eat a traditional New York Pizza Pie at the super traditional Patsey's on 1st. We got up Sunday morning, headed back uptown to meet our ride back to the Boston area, and also then had a nice brunch in Chelsea with some of my brother-in-law's friends. Yum. We then left town.

People keep asking me what my impressions were, what I observed.

Here's what I experienced and observed:
to be continued.

BigV 10-13-2011 07:27 PM
Here is the second and final part of the report from OWS:

Quote:
People keep asking me what my impressions were, what I observed.

Here's what I experienced and observed:

Unlike what much of the popular media is saying, I didn't see any orgies, open sex, drugs, or alcohol use. It wasn't wild. I, small town girl from NWOhio, did not feel unsafe in any way. Yes, there were some street people, probably some junkies, some who were mentally ill....but they were being cared for and welcomed as they were, without judgement or recrminination. they were fed, clothed, and provided with minimal health care if needed.

In essence, the OWS people were doing their best to create a system similar to what they would like to see happen across the nation. People were stepping up and doing what needed to be done, based on their personal strengths and interests. There were people sweeping the park regularly as well as emptying the trash and recycling. There were people working the food line, doing dishes, and sorting clothing. There were people tending children and providing the children with age appropriate activities. There were people cleaning the restrooms in the McDonald's--and doing a better job I might add than the McD's employees. They were even tidying up the seating area of the McD's. In the morning when I got up to use the bathroom there, two homeless men who had been trying to sleep in the McD's were being evicted by a police officer. Three guys from the OWS encampment offered to take the guys over to OWS, get them some food, and find them a safe place to sleep.



I saw very, very different groups of people coming together to make things happen, able to put aside differences to work on arriving at consensus, pure consensus, not just agreeing for the sake of agreement. Arriving at consensus is not easy nor is it a fast process. It's certainly not efficient. But it can be highly effective.

I keep reading and hearing that "they" don't have a clear agenda. I think their agenda is perfectly clear, if not offically worded. It's a movement that wants less discrepency betweent the haves and the have-nots. I saw a group of people who want to fix what is wrong and getting wronger in American society.



I saw the beginnings of a movement, call it a revolution if you will. I'm certain that the Civil Right's movement didn't spring forth with Malcom X and MLK at the helm. It started with groups of people, in many places, saying "this will not do." The revolutionaries of old did not suddenly wake up with a Declaration of Independence. They hammered that document out over a period of months, which followed a period of years. THe American Revolution was a populist movement, much like this one. And it angers me to see relatively bright people saying that nothing is being accomplished. It's been a month, folks. No well thought out movement is full grown in a matter of weeks.



I also saw people from every age group working together and living peacefully. All races. All nationalities. There was another mother with her 16 year old son camped near us. A grandfather and his 13 year old grandson on the other side. Graduate students behind us. A woman at least in her 60s woke up around the time I did. I had to help her off the ground. She was a bit stiff. There was a woman who was in end stage cancer. A yogi. A nurse and a teacher. There was a "red hat brigade" and three women who had signs saying that they'd been retired for 20 years and were angry. One had a sign that said, "I didn't spend 33 years of my life teaching kids to think to have them ignored by their government" and another had a sign that said, "USA, don't make me liar...let them have the opportunities to be whatever they want to be."

I saw young people volunteering to clean toilets. I saw young people sweeping the sidewalks.

Some were dread lock wearing, drumming, incense burning hippies. Some were wearing Hollister. Most would not raise eyebrows on any street.

I saw young people writing, speaking, and reading. People were sharing literature. No one was asking for money. People were sharing.

So, yes, very revolutionary. I saw hundreds (maybe thousands? I have no clue) of people behaving in ways that would make any reasonable mother proud.

I saw a microcosm of what the USA should be like. I saw hope.

BigV 10-13-2011 07:46 PM
1 Attachment(s)
Here's another similar chart from a reliable source, the Congressional Budget Office. Notice these percentages don't add up to more than 100 percent.

Quote:
Cumulative Change in Real After-Tax Average Income
Attachment 34530
Growth in after-tax income has been uneven across the income distribution, with upper-income groups seeing more rapid growth than lower-income groups. Much of that increase reflects the pattern of before-tax income growth

Lamplighter 10-13-2011 07:51 PM
Sorry V, some time back I declined reading through long posts
that were only links or copy/paste postings.

How about a synopsis or some comments, or why you're posting it...

more to come ?

xoxoxoBruce 10-13-2011 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV (Post 763521)
That's 101%.
No, the top 20% also includes the top 1%.

classicman 10-13-2011 08:05 PM
Here ya go Lamp....
There were lots of different, divergent people there. They were mostly nice.

BigV 10-13-2011 08:07 PM
I posted the whole thing because it's genuine. It shows a real person and her son. It is about their experience in traveling from NW Ohio to Wall Street. They found it kind of scary at first, but then settled in. They were taken care of by the others around. It is an account of a vastly disparate group of people, all looking for things to change. Note, not for the same thing, this is not a herd of dittoheads. She says:

Quote:
I keep reading and hearing that "they" don't have a clear agenda. I think their agenda is perfectly clear, if not offically worded. It's a movement that wants less discrepency betweent the haves and the have-nots. I saw a group of people who want to fix what is wrong and getting wronger in American society.
and she saw that happening in person among the people present:
Quote:
In essence, the OWS people were doing their best to create a system similar to what they would like to see happen across the nation. People were stepping up and doing what needed to be done, based on their personal strengths and interests.
She saw lots of very different people and she was left with a sense of hope:

Quote:
I saw young people volunteering to clean toilets. I saw young people sweeping the sidewalks.

Some were dread lock wearing, drumming, incense burning hippies. Some were wearing Hollister. Most would not raise eyebrows on any street.

I saw young people writing, speaking, and reading. People were sharing literature. No one was asking for money. People were sharing.

So, yes, very revolutionary. I saw hundreds (maybe thousands? I have no clue) of people behaving in ways that would make any reasonable mother proud.

I saw a microcosm of what the USA should be like. I saw hope.

Lamplighter 10-13-2011 08:10 PM
Thanks to both of you... now I'll go read V's posts with a better attitude

BigV 10-13-2011 08:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 763554)
No, the top 20% also includes the top 1%.
Yep, I figured as much. Though I have seen other comments that make the same observation I made (101?? wtf?) and used that as the reason to disregard the whole idea. Those people have already closed their minds, sadly.

xoxoxoBruce 10-13-2011 08:23 PM
When they have no rational argument against the cause, they'll snipe.

Undertoad 10-13-2011 10:11 PM
Quote:
Here's another similar chart from a reliable source
What is the X axis?

BigV 10-13-2011 10:48 PM
Time.

The years from 1979 to 2007.

SamIam 10-14-2011 01:12 AM
I came across the following when I was surfing the net, trying to find concrete solutions from the Right that would solve our economic malaise and unemployment problems. here's what Steve Forbes, CEO of Forbes Inc. and two-time Republican presidential contender had to say:

Quote:
But "it's not enough to say you're against deficits, bloated government and Obamacare. You've got to have something people see as positive."

True to form, Forbes says the GOP's path to the White House is paved with a "Reagan-esque pro-growth message," featuring a simplified tax code and less regulation, as well as a (true) strong dollar policy.

"Those are the kind of themes that will resonate," he says, citing former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty's tax reform plan as a good example.

Last month, Pawlenty proposed cutting the corporate tax rate to 15% from 35% and the top individual income tax rate to 25% from 35% while eliminating taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends and repealing the estate tax.
Well, that would certainly perk up the bank accounts of a few people. Meanwhile, the rest of us are being called upon to sacrifice - foregoing or post poning a college education, accepting that more people will be living on the streets, and more children will be raised by parents at or below the poverty line. And that's just for starters.

Plus, the fairy tale is that the wealthy "producer" class will create more jobs if we just lower their taxes. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but when the W. administration lowered taxes for the wealthy in the previous decade, we saw very little - if any job creation. Oh, the financial and banking people had a blast, largely because the watchdogs were not on the job. But the rest of us have not been so lucky.

So, someone please explain to me how the 'pubs are going to get things running again for anyone besides themselves and their cronies in the legislature. :eyebrow:

TheMercenary 10-14-2011 07:26 AM
Today's NPR report had a bit on college debt. Basically there are protesters who think that their college debt is to much and they can't pay it back so they want some solution for that. Do they think they should be relieved of that debit because they can't find a job with their history degree that will pay back all their debit? Do they think the gobberment should pay it off for them? These people are getting wackier by the day....

Quote:
It may be hard to pin down exactly what the Occupy Wall Street protesters want, [noshit] but one of the sources of their frustration seems clear. Many of the demonstrators are drowning in student debt.
Rose Swidden came to Zuccotti Park in Lower Manhattan from upstate New York, where she is studying agriculture at SUNY Cobleskill. She expects to graduate in May with USD 35,000 in debt, and doesn`t know how she will pay it back.
"We did what we were told to do: go to college, get an education, you`ll get a job, you`ll get a house, you`ll be cool," she said. "And that`s what we did. And now here we are done with it-and now what?" [idiot]
One proposed list of demands for the Occupy Wall Street movement includes "free college tuition" and "immediate across the board forgiveness" of student debt. While neither demand may be very realistic, the student debt problem is very real.
http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/wor...ef_598557.html

These quotes alone show the complete and utter stupidity of these fools. Winter can't come soon enough.

glatt 10-14-2011 08:02 AM
So you have more than one job, and you are criticizing people who are complaining that they can even get one job.:rolleyes:

TheMercenary 10-14-2011 08:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by glatt (Post 763663)
So you have more than one job, and you are criticizing people who are complaining that they can even get one job.:rolleyes:
I am not criticizing people for complaining about not getting a job here, or anywhere, as much as I am laughing at fools who think they should be relieved of college debt because they chose to study and get a degree in History and now think they shouldn't pay back their debt.

How many jobs I have is irrelevant.

Lamplighter 10-14-2011 08:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 763666)
I am not criticizing people for complaining about not getting a job here, or anywhere, as much as I am laughing at fools who think they should be relieved of college debt because they chose to study and get a degree in History and now think they shouldn't pay back their debt.

How many jobs I have is irrelevant.
Jeff Immelt and the other CEO's may be lurking in the group.
They want to have tax holiday so the corps can bring their profit $ back into the US without paying the income taxes they would owe.

Fools - their cash flows are pointing the wrong way.

TheMercenary 10-14-2011 08:13 AM
Sounds just like the WTO protesters....

http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/...s-governments/

TheMercenary 10-14-2011 08:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter (Post 763667)
Jeff Immelt and the other CEO's may be lurking in the group.
They want to have tax holiday so the corps can bring their profit $ back into the US without paying the income taxes they would owe.

Fools - their cash flows are pointing the wrong way.
Eh, I don't consider business owners and investors as fools. Their cash flows are theirs to do with as they like, no matter how many people want to take it from them and give to others.

glatt 10-14-2011 08:16 AM
You're making stuff up. You have no idea what they studied. You invent a scenario in your head to fit your prejudices.

How many jobs you have is relevant to your credibility. You have multiple jobs and live a comfortable life and are laughing at the have-nots who only want a chance at the american dream. But the jobs aren't there.

TheMercenary 10-14-2011 08:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by glatt (Post 763671)
You're making stuff up. You have no idea what they studied. You invent a scenario in your head to fit your prejudices.
Ummm, no. Actually it was from the NPR report I heard.

http://www.npr.org/2011/10/14/141343...demonstrations
Quote:
How many jobs you have is relevant to your credibility.
Really? How does that work?

Quote:
You have multiple jobs and live a comfortable life...
Because I made some good choices, worked my ass, made some huge sacrifices, and was lucky. Oh, and I did not want to live in a mobile home ever again, as a kid. Again, really irrelevant.

Quote:
....and are laughing at the have-nots who only want a chance at the american dream. But the jobs aren't there.
Again, no. I was laughing at people who think they should be relieved of their college debt because they can't find a job. So if I go out and buy a Bentley and now I can't afford it should I be relieved of that debt because now I make less money than I did before when I entered into a contract to buy it?

Why the hate and venom?

glatt 10-14-2011 08:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 763673)
Ummm, no. Actually it was from the NPR report I heard.

http://www.npr.org/2011/10/14/141343...demonstrations
OK, I'm not going to bother listening to that, I trust you that it's in there somewhere. I read your quote and followed you original link to the article where there was no mention of what was studied.

I know you work hard for what you have, and I don't begrudge you that. What bugs me about your attitude is that these people only want the same chances that you (and I) got. You routinely refer to all of them as fools, but they have legitimate gripes.

I have more to say, but can't really devote time to it right now.

Aliantha 10-14-2011 08:50 AM
I don't know for certain what the ratio of legitimate gripes is to supposed gripes in this whole protest thing, but it's probably fair to say there's a reasonable number of both.

People who don't want to pay their debts annoy all of us, but there are some pretty serious social issues going on in the US atm, and I think a lot of people have a pretty good reason for protesting about where money is spent etc.

Surely no one can disagree with that?

Undertoad 10-14-2011 08:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV (Post 763605)
Time.

The years from 1979 to 2007.
What is the Y axis?

TheMercenary 10-14-2011 08:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by glatt (Post 763679)
OK, I'm not going to bother listening to that, I trust you that it's in there somewhere. I read your quote and followed you original link to the article where there was no mention of what was studied.
I think NPR posts the morning edition links later in the day or the next day.

Quote:
What bugs me about your attitude is that these people only want the same chances that you (and I) got.
But not everyone will get to be a lawyer or do what I do... Some people are going to flip burgers and be taxi drivers or whatever. That is life. We are just in hard times right now and lots of hard working people are out of work. Wall St. didn't break it, politicians did. They need to be down in front of the the White House and on the Lawn between the Memorials in Washington, D.C.

Quote:
You routinely refer to all of them as fools, but they have legitimate gripes.
Well I can't say that we all don't have legitimate gripes. I think they are fools because their actions are counter intuitive to getting the process changed, IMHO. The only way this BS is going to turn around is for the politicians to get off their asses and come together and fix it. But what they are doing is protesting the obvious, costing tax payers MORE money, and when they start to block roads and bridges they are asking for a confrontation, which I believe many of them want to do. I have absolutely nothing against their Right to protest. It is similar to the WTO protests, protest if you want, but go about it the right way. And when you start to tell me that my tax money has to go to paying off your college debt, you are a god damm fool. Does anyone think these protests are going to get any multi-million dollar Corporation anywhere to suddenly change the way they do business?

Quote:
I have more to say, but can't really devote time to it right now.
Ok, Well I still want to hear it.

TheMercenary 10-14-2011 09:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aliantha (Post 763681)
I don't know for certain what the ratio of legitimate gripes is to supposed gripes in this whole protest thing, but it's probably fair to say there's a reasonable number of both.

People who don't want to pay their debts annoy all of us, but there are some pretty serious social issues going on in the US atm, and I think a lot of people have a pretty good reason for protesting about where money is spent etc.

Surely no one can disagree with that?
I don't. But again I harken back to the WTO protests. It is nothing more than an amalgam of unemployed people (completely legitimate), anarchists, socialists, and disaffected youth, with a huge smattering of aging hippies, with the same anti-capatolistic gripes. No central theme other than people and corps with money are bad, and we want it. Or we want to send it to the gobberment so they can waste it.

Aliantha 10-14-2011 09:06 AM
Well, people do have the right to protest any old thing they want, so I guess lots of different people are protesting lots of different things there.

Personally, I think it's like having three 'sell stuff' parties at the same time. People just don't quite know what to spend their money on, so in the end they go home with nothing.

I believe that in order for protests to be effective, they have to be organised and specific. If no one really knows what your protesting about, how can they really fix the problem.

BigV 10-14-2011 10:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 763684)
What is the Y axis?
The y axis is the multiples of after tax income with 1979 set as 1.

Undertoad 10-14-2011 10:59 AM
Yabbut what does the word "cumulative" mean in that context?

piercehawkeye45 10-14-2011 11:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 763686)
And when you start to tell me that my tax money has to go to paying off your college debt, you are a god damm fool. Does anyone think these protests are going to get any multi-million dollar Corporation anywhere to suddenly change the way they do business?
The protests aren't going to change anything but I'm guessing a lot of the calls for government to pay off student debts has to do with the fact that many large Corporations had their debts paid off by the government for making bad decisions while these students will not. I disagree with the logic, I do believe in personal responsibility, but student debt is going to be a very large problem that has the chance of affecting everyone either directly or indirectly, so it shouldn't just instantly be dismissed. Also, it isn't a 30 year experienced CEO making mistakes, they are kids who can't even legally drink that are being exploited by the Universities to pay for research, which is actually very true. I don't necessarily feel bad for them but I will acknowledge that the entire University system is pretty messed up.

Lamplighter 10-14-2011 03:29 PM
2 Attachment(s)
In my previous post, the REUTERS authors wrote:
Quote:
Lasn [Adbusters co-founder] said
Adbusters is 95 percent funded by subscribers paying for the magazine.

"George Soros's ideas are quite good, many of them.
I wish he would give Adbusters some money, we sorely need it,
she said. "He's never given us a penny."
Apparently, Lasn is a quick sex-change person, or
reporters can't write about someone and keep their gender constant.
Here is the FORBES reporter having a go at it...

FORBES
Investing 10/14/11 @ 3:09 pm

The Brains Behind "Occupy Wall Street"
Meet the second most evilest man in the world (after George Soros).
Quote:
Kalle Lasn, 69, is their quasi leader. He’s the publisher and editor of Adbusters magazine.
It’s a small, non-influential critical and artsy magazine with a decent following
of around 90,000 who call themselves “culture jammers”.
Occupy Wall Street began in the conference rooms at that Vancouver mag.

I spoke with Lasn in July, right after the new edition of Adbusters hit the news stands
with the now famous image of a ballerina balancing on the Wall Street bull. (below)

Above her head read the Twitter hashtag #OccupyWallStreet.
I'm thinking Kalle Lasn looks pretty masculine.

DanaC 10-14-2011 05:02 PM
1 Attachment(s)
Lies and more lies from the Right.

TheMercenary 10-14-2011 05:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45 (Post 763777)
The protests aren't going to change anything but I'm guessing a lot of the calls for government to pay off student debts has to do with the fact that many large Corporations had their debts paid off by the government for making bad decisions while these students will not. I disagree with the logic, I do believe in personal responsibility, but student debt is going to be a very large problem that has the chance of affecting everyone either directly or indirectly, so it shouldn't just instantly be dismissed.
Does not change the fact that these FOOLS think I, a tax payer should pay off THEIR debt. Screw them. I am paying for my own kids to go to college. Don't think for one minute that I am going to pay off their debt, regardless of the reason or some other esoteric bull shit reason.

Quote:
Also, it isn't a 30 year experienced CEO making mistakes, they are kids who can't even legally drink that are being exploited by the Universities to pay for research, which is actually very true. I don't necessarily feel bad for them but I will acknowledge that the entire University system is pretty messed up.
I don't know. Don't the universities exploit their athlete's that they make millions of dollars off of and the athlete gets nothing for their service, other than on some occasions, a scholarship?

TheMercenary 10-14-2011 05:16 PM
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 763887)
Lies and more lies from the Right.
Great pic, but they are small examples. Here is one that is more mainstream...

More shit from the left.

DanaC 10-14-2011 05:25 PM
Right. So the disgruntled and betrayed old veteran is an anomaly, but the bloke shitting on a cop car is mainstream?

ffs.


Look at all the other people behind and around the veteran. They look like a fairly wide mix of people.
Now look at the shitting guy. All alone. The rest of the demonstrators appear to be going along peacefully in the top left of the picture.

TheMercenary 10-14-2011 05:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 763895)
Right. So the disgruntled and betrayed old veteran is an anomaly, but the bloke shitting on a cop car is mainstream?
Actually, no they are probably one offs, but the number of people who would be willing to shit on anything down there that is close to mainstream would far outweigh the vet from WW2 or Korea who is there for some other unknown issue.

piercehawkeye45 10-14-2011 05:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 763890)
Does not change the fact that these FOOLS think I, a tax payer should pay off THEIR debt. Screw them. I am paying for my own kids to go to college. Don't think for one minute that I am going to pay off their debt, regardless of the reason or some other esoteric bull shit reason.
Esoteric? C'mon. It is obvious that the housing bubble was bad for everyone and the recession probably would have been much worse if many of the big finance corporations went under. College graduates make up a large portion of the middle class so it is pretty clear that if many graduates cannot pay off their debt, there are going to large economic issues that will affect everyone.

The question of whether we should do anything about it is a completely topic though.

Quote:
I don't know. Don't the universities exploit their athlete's that they make millions of dollars off of and the athlete gets nothing for their service, other than on some occasions, a scholarship?
Of course they exploit collegiate athletes. They also exploit most of the liberal arts undergraduate students as well. Assuming we are talking about a research university, their reputation depends almost entirely on research and graduate programs. So in order to pay for the research, professors, and graduate programs, along with a lot of other things, a large stream of undergraduates are needed for tuition money. Then they proceed to offer student loans to everyone which can be used for anything the students want.

That is why it is recommended to go to a community college for the first two years, and maybe even a smaller college to finish an undergraduate degree. You basically get the same education for a lot cheaper.

As I said earlier, in general I don't necessarily feel bad for the students with loans that they can't pay off. They should be mature enough at age 18, especially 20, to realize that college is considered an investment and the risks involved with picking a liberal arts major. But, unfortunately, research colleges do not emphasize the practical aspect of picking a major but the "follow your dreams" type argument (which is legitimate but impractical at times).

ZenGum 10-14-2011 05:57 PM
There was talk about clearing out the protestors/occupiers, but that action has been put off.

What I notice is that the media are using the word "evacuate" instead of evict or remove - trying to imply that it is for the protestors' own good.

How many people here know what Neuro-Linguistic Programming is?

DanaC 10-14-2011 06:27 PM
I do. My brother trained as an NLP councillor. He used to fascinate me when he;d come back from a residential course and talk about what he'd learned.

ZenGum 10-14-2011 06:33 PM
I'm thinking less of the personal aspect and more of the public aspect.

All US politicians and PR firms are into it. Subtle changes in phrasing and emphasis, done often enough and consistently enough, affect how *some* people think. If you're paying close attention and know what to look for you can see through it, but it works a lot.

DanaC 10-14-2011 06:40 PM
Yes, he covered that stuff as well. All about how language works and how words and concepts operate within the brain, and how certain rhythms of speech can be employed to particular effect.

He trained as an NLP councillor, but he also studied NLP as part of that. Trained with Sensory Systems (which I think was set up by Richard Bandler(?) one of the leading names in the early development of NLP).

Aliantha 10-14-2011 07:38 PM
That's what advertising is all about. Don't we all know that? If you hear the same phrase often enough, it's the one that comes to mind when you're in the right circumstance to remember it - hopefully just before the point of sale.

Stormieweather 10-14-2011 08:48 PM
So when Wall Street institutions make bad decisions, take on too much debt or bad investments and are ready to collapse, we (the US) take tax dollars and bail them out, so they can survive and in fact, give themselves big fat bonuses.

Conversely, we have universities preying on students who are young and impressionable (literally - Goldman Sachs-Higher Education) to make yet MORE profit for WALL STREET, leaving these students deeply in debt with no job in sight. And no forgiveness in sight either, since they're nobody (important).

And you wonder why they're resentful and protesting??

Griff 10-15-2011 07:48 AM
Goldman Sachs has supplied some of the smallest minds in finance to governments all over the world. Gotta love them.

Undertoad 10-15-2011 11:33 AM
http://cellar.org/attachment.php?att...0&d=1318553152

Quote:
Yabbut what does the word "cumulative" mean in that context?
BigV, this chart is a :eek: STUNNING :eek: example of misuse of statistics.

A similar graph would be created in almost ANY bell curve, measuring ANY statistic!

This graph is showing us that the top 1% make more money than the lower 99%. (Duh)

The graph is NOT saying is that the top 1% are getting way way richer than everybody else... and it is NOT saying that the top 1% has any greater inequality in 2007 than it did in 1979!

"Cumulative" means that the data point in 1980 is the after-tax income of 1980 PLUS the after-tax income of 1979. And so the 1981 number is 1981+1980+1979. And so forth.

"But wait a minute," I hear you typing, "Isn't it still remarkably unfair that the top 1% accumulate so much more after-tax money than even their buddies in the 99-95% range?"

No -- because the 1% in 1979 are not the SAME 1% in 2007!

The graph wants you to accept the narrative that it's the same guys in 1979, who now are fabulously wealthy as they accumulated truckloads of stuff by 2007.

But what if we graphed the top 1% of home-run hitters in baseball? In 1979, that would be Dave Kingman, Mike Schmidt, Gorman Thomas, Fred Lynn and Jerry Rice. In 2011, that would be Jose Bautista, Curtis Granderson, Matt Kemp, Mark Teixeira and Prince Fielder.

The graph of that top 1% would look very similar to this graph. Each year, the top 1% of home-run hitters would accumulate more home runs than the bottom 99%. Some years, as in the steroid years, they would accumulate it faster. Some years, as in the current years, they would accumulate it slower. But it's not the same guys accumulating! It's just the constant top 1%.

To put it another way? In 1979, Bill Gates ran a tiny software house that offered a version of the BASIC programming language to fellow geeks. He was busy begging them not to pirate it. In 1979, Bill Gates was measured in the bottom line of that graph.

Undertoad 10-15-2011 11:45 AM
(phew)

But does the graph tell us anything interesting?

Yeah, it does so in a back-handed sort of way. Just as the home run graph would rise faster during the steroid era, we see that this graph actually has downturns in the top 1%. From 1986-1988 it saw a drop-off which is actually quite stunning. Since this graph is measuring cumulative numbers, it's telling us that the top 1% made very little during those years, a lot of them probably took a loss; and again from 2000-2003.

The gain from 2003-2007 is rather large, but if we continue this graph from 2007-2011, I assure you the drop-off will be similarly massive.

The economics reason for this is simple:

During good times, everybody gets richer, but the rich get richer at a much faster rate. During bad times, everybody gets poorer, but the rich get poorer at a much faster rate.

So when you want to prove income inequality, it's easy: just start your graph at a point where good times BEGIN, and end your graph at a point where good times END.

piercehawkeye45 10-15-2011 11:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 764034)
But what if we graphed the top 1% of home-run hitters in baseball? In 1979, that would be Dave Kingman, Mike Schmidt, Gorman Thomas, Fred Lynn and Jerry Rice. In 2011, that would be Jose Bautista, Curtis Granderson, Matt Kemp, Mark Teixeira and Prince Fielder.
Jerry Rice?

Undertoad 10-15-2011 12:07 PM
:D JIM Rice. :D

Happy Monkey 10-15-2011 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 763928)
I do. My brother trained as an NLP councillor. He used to fascinate me when he;d come back from a residential course and talk about what he'd learned.
It actually wasn't fascinating, but he used linguistic tricks to make you think it was.

BigV 10-15-2011 12:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 764034)
http://cellar.org/attachment.php?att...0&d=1318553152



BigV, this chart is a :eek: STUNNING :eek: example of misuse of statistics.

A similar graph would be created in almost ANY bell curve, measuring ANY statistic!

This graph is showing us that the top 1% make more money than the lower 99%. (Duh)

The graph is NOT saying is that the top 1% are getting way way richer than everybody else... and it is NOT saying that the top 1% has any greater inequality in 2007 than it did in 1979!

"Cumulative" means that the data point in 1980 is the after-tax income of 1980 PLUS the after-tax income of 1979. And so the 1981 number is 1981+1980+1979. And so forth.

"But wait a minute," I hear you typing, "Isn't it still remarkably unfair that the top 1% accumulate so much more after-tax money than even their buddies in the 99-95% range?"

No -- because the 1% in 1979 are not the SAME 1% in 2007!

The graph wants you to accept the narrative that it's the same guys in 1979, who now are fabulously wealthy as they accumulated truckloads of stuff by 2007.

But what if we graphed the top 1% of home-run hitters in baseball? In 1979, that would be Dave Kingman, Mike Schmidt, Gorman Thomas, Fred Lynn and Jerry Rice. In 2011, that would be Jose Bautista, Curtis Granderson, Matt Kemp, Mark Teixeira and Prince Fielder.

The graph of that top 1% would look very similar to this graph. Each year, the top 1% of home-run hitters would accumulate more home runs than the bottom 99%. Some years, as in the steroid years, they would accumulate it faster. Some years, as in the current years, they would accumulate it slower. But it's not the same guys accumulating! It's just the constant top 1%.

To put it another way? In 1979, Bill Gates ran a tiny software house that offered a version of the BASIC programming language to fellow geeks. He was busy begging them not to pirate it. In 1979, Bill Gates was measured in the bottom line of that graph.
That's one theory... or you could be reading it wrong. You are overthinking it.

I'm gonna go with number two. Let's look at the same values in numeric form, shall we? You can do the multiplier math yourself; tell me what you think, ok?

Code:
Key: Year=Yr;
Lowest Quintile=LQ
Second Quintile=SQ
Middle Quintile=MQ
Fourth Quintile=FQ
Highest Quintile =HQ
All Quintiles=AQ
Top 10%=T10
Top 5%=T5
Top 1%=T1
Average After Tax Income (2007 dollars)=Avg$
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Yr      LQ        SQ        MQ      FQ        HQ      AQ      T10        T5        T1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1979  15,300    31,000    44,100  57,700  101,700  49,300  128,700  169,600    346,600
1980  14,800    29,800    42,600  55,800    98,700  47,700  125,400  164,000    339,200
1981  14,300    29,200    41,800  55,600    98,500  47,400  125,300  164,300    351,100
1982  13,900    28,800    41,500  56,000  101,900  48,300  131,600  176,000    388,600
1983  13,300    27,800    41,000  56,000  106,000  48,800  138,700  186,500    424,800
1984  13,500    29,100    42,500  58,100  112,800  50,600  149,300  203,100    464,500
1985  13,700    29,100    43,200  58,700  116,200  51,900  155,300  213,300    507,400
1986  13,800    29,900    44,300  60,800  131,500  55,700  180,700  259,500    674,100
1987  13,600    29,000    44,200  61,100  120,600  53,300  160,100  218,200    503,200
1988  13,900    29,500    44,600  61,500  130,000  55,500  177,100  250,400    647,700
1989  14,500    30,200    45,200  62,300  130,000  56,200  176,300  246,300    609,700
1990  14,800    30,700    45,000  61,400  126,400  55,600  170,200  236,800    586,000
1991  14,800    30,400    44,500  60,900  121,600  54,200  161,700  220,500    520,100
1992  14,600    30,400    44,800  61,700  126,600  55,600  170,400  237,500    583,700
1993  14,900    30,600    45,100  62,200  124,600  55,400  165,200  225,100    529,400
1994  15,100    31,000    45,500  63,100  126,100  56,000  167,800  229,500    535,100
1995  15,900    32,400    46,700  64,000  131,200  57,900  175,300  244,600    586,400
1996  15,700    32,300    47,300  65,200  137,400  59,600  186,700  261,300    648,100
1997  16,100    32,800    48,000  66,300  145,700  61,900  201,600  289,700    755,700
1998  16,900    34,600    49,600  69,000  155,400  65,200  218,100  319,600    868,200
1999  17,300    35,300    50,600  70,700  163,800  67,700  230,900  338,900    943,800
2000  16,500    34,900    50,400  71,300  170,300  68,700  242,600  360,600  1,038,700
2001  16,500    35,700    51,900  71,600  156,800  66,200  216,800  311,100    824,500
2002  16,100    34,900    51,000  70,600  150,400  63,900  204,600  286,700    730,500
2003  15,900    34,900    51,300  72,000  157,700  65,600  216,400  307,600    792,900
2004  16,000    35,600    52,900  74,200  170,300  69,000  238,400  346,400    946,900
2005  16,400    36,000    53,300  74,800  183,200  71,900  262,100  393,200  1,135,900
2006  16,900    36,300    53,500  75,900  189,900  74,000  273,500  412,900  1,230,900
2007  17,700    38,000    55,300  77,700  198,300  76,400  289,300  440,500  1,319,700
The chart is a graphic representation of these numbers, (omitting some subsets, like top 10%, top5%, etc.). But you can easily do the arithmetic and see that for those people in the lowest quintile (NOT A GIVEN INDIVIDUAL like Bill Gates or some poor single mother) the after tax income for that group has grown by a factor of 17,700/15,300 or about 1.25. You can easily see that the after tax income for the group of people in the top 1% (not individuals, but the folks that were in that group, for that year) has grown by a factor of 1,319,700/346,600 or about 3.75. Just like the graph shows.

The increase in afflluence, the "are you better off today than you were four years ago" Reagan=reasoning, the Life is good and keeps getting better, faster, has happened to the group of people in the top 1% at a rate that is so much faster and farther than the, dare I say it, the 99%, that it is :eek: STUNNING :eek:.

:eek: STUNNING :eek: . unconscionable, counterproductive, unhealthy, and unsupportable. We are the 99% and we're down here in the mud, income wise, as these numbers clearly show. You, and others, fail to comprehend or heed them at your peril.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:35 AM.
Page 3 of 15 12 3 4567891013 Last »
Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.