|
 Originally Posted by Monty3038
Ok, I still don't have a lot of info, but from what I have heard on the liberal media, Zucoti (spelling?) park is a private park open for public use... that means it is still private property and the owners could request the police remove those who are staying/living there, as it is their property. I don't see how the protestors can be upset over that, and it appears they really weren't.
The technical bits of the park are weird. It was made out of an agreement with the state that the company wanted to build such and such, so they had to build a public park right next to it. It is a public park operated by a private entity, or something like that. Regardless, this still isn't an issue, it's just something the media made up. The park was designated as the area for which the protests were legal. But really, that was representative of the government breaking the law in the first place, as Wall Street itself is where the protests are Constitutionally allowed.
But Wall Street is private property, right? So no protesters allowed. But what happens when Wall Street owns and operates public utility? They then become a Constitutional adherent to the First Amendment, but nobody is recognizing this, as state and federal laws and interpretations do not recognize this.
"Freedom to assemble and redress grievances" means exactly that. "Redressing of grievances" has been obliterated through governmental complexities that keep the redresses from being effective, and the "freedom to assemble" has been obliterated by the government simply stopping assemblies anywhere.
They can't protest Wall Street because that's privately owned (even though it's a private ownership of government itself), and they can't protest in public property due to bullshit like "disruption". NY is not adhering to the First Amendment, and they get away with it because the people in charge want it that way
Ok, I still disagree with you on the auto bailout Wuf, Ford survived just fine... they still aren't hugely profitable (based upon 2010 annual report) but they didn't participate in the government bailout. Why should we coddle the companies, let them fail and then recover... either that, or they should not be allowed to be profitable until their entire debt to the government is repaid... meaning no shareholder dividends until they repay their bailout.
First off, this was primarily an avoidance of catastrophe. Obama wanted to do with manufacturing what Bush made sure he didn't do with finance. The Bush Administration made sure that Lehman collapsed because that was how to scare the entire world and get your bailouts. It also really hurt the economy. Obama isn't completely bought, and thought it would be a good idea to not let that final Jenga brick fall in auto manufacturing
As for the details, I don't really know. Word is that it's working beyond what it was supposed to. Getting paid back will take a while. And I agree with you, I'm not a fan of coddling companies at all. I'm a socialist, and the last thing we like to do is give special interests special benefits. But it harkens back to that old saying along the lines of "when you owe the bank a million dollars, you're in trouble; when you owe the bank a hundred million dollars, they're in trouble". The US economy has been so overly privatized and is so complex without adequate fail safes that if those auto companies were not helped out, we lose millions of jobs, and generally good jobs, at that.
Do you think this is really because of the lobbyists or because we put idiots into congress/senate and they have no idea what an economy is in the first place? How should we hold them accountable? Elections or something?
It's both, but it's still mainly the money. Politicians are effectively hired and fired based on fundraising. Corporate personhood and now the Citizens United ruling have turned Congress into a co-opted private company. It runs really deep. So bad that politicians don't really even know who's lobbying them, or they get corrupted by being offered employment and bonuses after their tenure
Here's bits of a Jack Abromoff interview on the subject. He's about as right as can be. Congress and national politics is an entirely corrupted complex of bribery. Legal bribery at that
Legalized Corruption of Government Exposed by Abramoff - YouTube
The solution: votes still matter. Most of what politicians do is based in the money, but they also still have to get those votes. So what happens is they move based on the money, but will move based on votes if there's enough pressure from voters. Our voting system actually hasn't been that corrupted yet. We do have gerrymandering and a lot of voter suppression and some issues of not counting certain votes, but overall voting has not been corrupted to the point that the guy who gets the votes almost always wins.
And an Amendment repealing corporate personhood. Wolf PAC This is the biggest issue of our time, and stuff will never be fixed if we can't do it. Also, the methodology for fixing the problem is plausible, and could work. It'll just take a lot of damn time
Until we repeal corporate personhood, we will never have a good health care system. It cannot happen because two of the biggest and most entrenched lobbyists in Washington are pharmacies and insurance. Big Pharma is so goddamn powerful that US citizens are forced to pay waaaaaay more for prescriptions than any other modern nation. It is robbery, through and through. And it will not go away until Big Pharma is no longer allowed to co-opt the government
That's just one example, but it goes everywhere. The banks, war mercenaries (they call themselves defense contractors), oil and coal companies, and a handful of other industries/companies have a stranglehold on national politics, and they are the defacto government. People like Boehner and Obama are mainly just their puppets. That said, I want an Occupy Congress movement just as much as Occupy Wall Street
I'm not too sure the toxic assets are going away until you allow them to be punished... by bank failure, ok, maybe not... but somehow they have to be. The market has to reorient itself properly, probably through a continued housing market crash until prices are more realistic and loan officers start writing loans to people who can pay for them.
Yeah there's a plethora of issues here. The best fix, however, involves keeping people in their homes by refinancing and improving employment. Some foreclosures have needed to happen, but a whole bunch of them are still just fraudulent and avoidable.
|