What are your views on Occupy Wall Street and other similar protests that have started up around the world?
I hope that some real change can come out of it. OWS has posted a list of grievances with the %1 of wealth holders, although my understanding is that no demands have been made.
We have a local protest here in Dunedin (Occupy Dunedin). I have not personally camped out there, but have visited the site a number of times. My flatmate has been heavily involved.
I think this only the beginning tbh.
The protesters aren’t against capitalism, but the corporatism that led to the bank bail outs and the outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries all to make a profit. The de-industrialization of the west is killing it. You can’t bail out the mega rich then ignore the poor and remain credible.
It CANNOT last. Anyone who thinks it can is living in denial. I think in the UK, people are much more open to talk about these problems, but in the U.S. it’s still dominated by enclave politics.
Thanks to the internet, information can’t be kept from us anymore, or buried.
People are too tempted to beat up the problem rather than actually work to solve it, sadly.
I’m starting to dislike capitalism more and more…Most countries in the world should be able to live self-sufficiently. And the measure of a countries wealth shouldn’t be based on GDP…
I’m no longer into politics. I don’t trust big changes until human greed is dealt with. And regulations are not going to take care of that…
Yeah, although as corporatism is the product of capitalism, it shows that the root of the problem is somewhere in the capitalist system. That’s not to say that capitalism is a complete failure, but I think it’s evident that something needs to be done to tame the invisible hand.
Because these corporations hold so much power, their influence in the government has contributed, perhaps lead, to a lack of regulation. Our environment and the poor have suffered the consequences.
What do you guys think of the potential Robin Hood Tax on financial transactions?
Because we’re still quite far away from a world government (or union) with any significant power, countries will continue to compete economically rather than work together. I do agree that living self-sufficiently is important, partially because of the environmental impact of shipping goods around the world, but also there is less chance of another nation crippling your economy. However, trade with other countries can be a positive thing, as nation states as less likely to war with each other if their economies are intertwined.
I would be in favour of changing our measurement of “wealth” from GDP to a global happiness index.
The problem with America is that we label everything socialist as bad. I have lived and visited countries where it works. (Japan and Canada for a start) I think it is ridiculous that we don’t have universal health care. I believe that health care is a right, not a privilege.
I think it is ridiculous that we spend our social security money on filling gaps in other problems areas of the countries budget, and then you have republicans here stating how Social Security is bankrupting the country. It wasn’t bankrupt until the put their grubby little hands in the pot to pay for other things.
Deregulation is another issue. It hasn’t worked as witnessed by the financial collapse. Canada was much more conservative with their banking practices and they did not suffer the same jolt in housing and financial markets. (Not saying Canada is perfect, but they have done some things right.)
Taxes and spending are another problem child here in America. The real reason we are in such a deficit is that we are spending more and taking in less. The reason we are spending more in my honest opinion is not because Gov’t doesn’t work like some would lead you to believe. The problem is we have a growing population. As the population grows you have to spend more money on health care, education, and infrastructure. What have we done lately…spent less on health care, education, and infrastructure. What we have spent more on is bailing banks and corporate America out and more on military spending. I just don’t understand why these concepts are so hard to accept for conservatives. You have to spend more when there are more people. You also should have more income in the form of taxes on the added population. We need to get rid of the tax exemptions on people and corporations. No more hiding corporate wealth in foreign assets. No more tax breaks for having children. People will have children no matter what tax breaks you give them. The world is already so damn overpopulated, stop giving tax breaks that encourage that. Tax the wealthy at a higher rate. They keep increasing their share of income, therefore they should be liable for more of the taxes. When our country is completely out of debt then I would be for cutting back taxes. No matter what anyone says, you do have to invest to grow. Invest in education, invest infrastructure, invest in health. You then have a smarter, happier, more effient population that will create new sources of income that also will benefit the planet.
As for the OWS movement specifically, I am always for the right for people to protest and bring their message to our dysfunctional congress. They need a wakeup call. This movement really shows you how the media is not to be trusted. How anyone could not see the hypocrisy and bias being displayed not just by FOX news but by most other networks also. It is hard for some people to understand how important it is to stand up for your rights when all you see on the news is criticism and negativity toward a movement like this.
[quote=“Solo”]Yeah, although as corporatism is the product of capitalism, it shows that the root of the problem is somewhere in the capitalist system. That’s not to say that capitalism is a complete failure, but I think it’s evident that something needs to be done to tame the invisible hand.
Because these corporations hold so much power, their influence in the government has contributed, perhaps lead, to a lack of regulation. Our environment and the poor have suffered the consequences.
What do you guys think of the potential Robin Hood Tax on financial transactions?[/quote]
The argument is that if you tax the rich too much, then they will move. And we need the few jobs that they create. It sounds like blackmail to me.
Globalisation is the problem, and the failure to compete with outsourcing.
There needs to be more trade protectionism and trading with ourselves again, and most of all, much more exports. The U.S. in particular is in very strong position to still export things that the rest of the world wants. IF this era of controlled markets stops.
The only thing that can happen with regards to taxation is wasteful spending being cut (everywhere), we set up help for the millions of unskilled workers that the last few decades has created, and the mega rich pay more to help that happen. Most importantly of all, you can’t make people dependent on the system. People need help to become more self-sufficient.
As far as I can see, the game is rigged. These forces at work just want more for themselves and less for everyone else. It’s why I think it would have been better if this fraudulent system had just crashed completely in 2008; we would have recovered already.
Their bias is self-evident. I can understand the Conservative bias because of the work ethic they believe in. However, the situation has become so impossible that their vision is delusional at the moment.
Anyone who advocated the banker bail out asked for socialism. Like Glenn Beck who was for the bail outs (not at first but later). He’s a socialist.
The hypocrisy stuns me sometimes. Granted, the banks could pay back, but they made everyone else pay for their screw up. I don’t see why we should feel sorry for multi-billion dollar corporations when someone who can do the job properly could take over.
I’m not sure that this is necessarily true. Consider Norway, for example. Taxes are high, but there are still plenty of productive buisnesses in the country. The society is quite unstratified as a result.
I hear that reason all the time (that they’d move) and it just reeks of another excuse to protect the super rich.
If they want to move, good riddance I say. We don’t need them anyway.
But you’d be amazed by the tax evasion of these people. The greed is so immense that it makes me lose all faith in humanity.
Yeah, and the Robin Hood Tax would only a slightly affect the overall wealth of the rich, but could be used to address numerous environmental and social problems.
[quote=“Geoffrey Duke”]Globalisation is the problem, and the failure to compete with outsourcing.
There needs to be more trade protectionism and trading with ourselves again, and most of all, much more exports. The U.S. in particular is in very strong position to still export things that the rest of the world wants. IF this era of controlled markets stops.[/quote]
We might have to accept globalisation, it seems to be the way things are going: a one world market. I’m not sure what the solution is. Leave the free market to take its natural path, and the outcome is that businesses will search for the cheapest workers, regardless of country.
Ideally, those countries supplying the cheap labor would modernize but their development seems crippled.
The west can adapt to become more self-sufficient and become bigger exporters, but I feel that the repercussions of having too much demand and not enough supply will be calamitous sooner or later. It’s just a matter of time imo. It’s already happening but we don’t hear about it a lot. Even something as simple as clean drinking water can become scarce, as ironic as that seems and sounds.
It’s a shame when things have to break before anyone is willing to fix anything.
I’ll try to be more optimistic though. >:)
From an environmental standpoint, the economy is like a layer on top of the environment. Destroy the environment (e.g. take away clean drinking water) and the economy will eventually be affected.
It really does require some top down leadership from the government, as businesses will just go where the money is until it’s too late. The way I see it, this will require a certain level of government regulation, e.g. socialism, which I know you’re averse to. But I don’t see any other way around it. The environment needs to be treated as a system to be managed by significant regulation so that the economy can survive. What do you think?
I think that it can be profitable to have a cleaner more stable world where we help everyone become self-sufficient (as much as is humanly possible anyway). Less poverty/better healthcare leads to less children born into poverty etc (meaning less need to have so many), and there are solutions out there that will work.
I just think that people are too greedy to let it happen and ultimately we are adapting to someone else’s game.
It actually frustrates me to watch because people act as if it can never change.
[quote=“Geoffrey Duke”]
It actually frustrates me to watch because people act as if it can never change.[/quote]
What they actually tell you is that it costs too much to change. It is greed pure and simple. Why do people need billions of dollars? Do people even really need more than a few million dollars in their life? I am 100% for extreme wealth redistribution in the forms of taxes. If you make a million or more a year, you better never complain that you’re not making enough. I just started making over 50k a year and I have been out of college for 10 years, working odd hours before and now more stable hours with occasionally required Saturdays. What I have found is that I have worked harder and had more knowledge than the owners of my current company and the previous two companies I worked for. What did they do that earned them the right to make millions a year…they inherited their wealth through family business. The owners of two of the companies I have worked for in the past 10 years collect a paycheck, attend a meeting or two, and play golf or swim the rest of their day. We as Americans accept this as okay, the American dream. For people like me who came from a poor as dirt background and really worked hard to make ends meet, I just get so sick of seeing someone else profit off of my hard work. If I had the capital to start my own business I would, and I would do it better. Right now though I have a family to support so I can’t afford to spend my hard earned savings on starting a new business. Banks sure as hell aren’t giving out business loans to guys like me either. I am too much of a risk, never mind my skill, but these other guys have Daddy’s or Grandpa’s money so they have a 1up on me.
This steps in to trickle down economics. The evidence exists thanks to time. Republicans have been advocating this since before Reagan. What has been show is that when you deregulate and let the rich “pass” down wealth, they don’t. Higher paying jobs disappear and the jobs that are created are lower paying, lower skilled jobs. They trash the environment and spend their money lobbying to make it okay to do so.
Sometimes I just wish there was a super flu or zombie apocalypse and we could just start over. Maybe that is why I love zombie games or games like Panzer Dragoon. Worlds where work is how you survive and life isn’t handed to you. This may just be my predisposition toward pessimism though.;p
I know that feeling.
If these banksters had their way there would be one ruling class and one impoverished class.
The system is so broken, but it could be so much worse that people are trapped in it. You could have no running water etc.
I don’t believe in punishing success, but corporatism shuts down the competition which goes against the free market ideology. We depend on others so much now that we can’t live without them, which gives them too much power.
There were banks who didn’t screw up as well. Honestly, the west deserved to crash. The bail out only delayed the inevitable when we still can’t produce our way out.
It’s hard for me to be optimistic, and I actually want to be. I’ll just soak up the peace in the eye of the storm.
humanity lives in denial since the beginning of culture and thought, so why should they not continue it in one way or the other ?
Of course everything evolves, and so does corporatism and its opposing forces, as well as the wish to be set free of ignorance does . We will see if “it” goes extinct before humanity does.
Maybe in a whole humanity needs to surpass humanity to overcome its fundamental issues.
Meanwhile, life passes by.
Systems fight systems, and by that, enable an environment of strange symbiosis , predatory, pushed evolution, mimicry.
Of course regular humans cannot consist in a collapsed environment , but lets see if they do not manage to form some sort of corporate human, feeding on corporate food from corporate labs…
Protests can be like a painsignal, it can itch or make an entire system collapse. But you know, the body uses pain as a warning signal and will shut down or take drugs to overcome the issue , if the real source of trouble cant be located or dealt with. The governments will react accordingly. Throw some proxy war among the flock, create fake terrorism, strange deseases… there are countless aggressive tactics, and if that wouldnt be enough, they just form some crisis.
But that is the pessimistic view.
There is a lot of reformation, something which most people dont notice.
Leadership will become more “green” and reinvent the capitalism anyway, you can see traces at bioneers etc. Simply because the green is a powerhouse and moneymaker, and they slowly realise that its also monetarian gain…
oh and I wouldnt be surprised if the longing for apocalypse wasnt neatly planned all along the way . This wouldnt be so much against many old powerparties anyway, dont forget that…
may science save us all D
oh and another thing :
Life is handed down to many beings JUST LIKE THAT.
Many apes just eat shit all day night long, poop, crack nuts, jump into trees if some wild cat says boo. Thats pretty much it, if life gets shitty, a virus will just smash em down and thats it etc.
Oh and getting layed, fighting off other pimps. Uhhh… yeah. D:
That or you are a bonobo and just get laid anyway. D:
I would say we should develop towards bonobo asap.
[quote=“peregrine sprout”]humanity lives in denial since the beginning of culture and thought, so why should they not continue it in one way or the other ?
Of course everything evolves, and so does corporatism and its opposing forces, as well as the wish to be set free of ignorance does . We will see if “it” goes extinct before humanity does.[/quote]
I think we’ve slowly become more enlightened over time. Education plays a key role, plus learning how to think critically. I’m not optimistic that things will improve dramatically, but I don’t see a reason to be fatalistic about it either.
I which I shared your optimism. There’s a lot of money to be made by retaining the status quo. Fossil fuel businesses will try to extract every last drop of oil from the depths of the ocean so long as its profitable. It’s going to take people to put their foot down and governments to step in and regulate to stop the exploitation of the environment. The invisible hand of the free market will not restrain itself so long as the 1% can make a profit off that exploitation.
Also, when the power of government is grown, businesses tend to take it over to shut down their competition, so there’s going to need to be a big shift in public consciousness.
The west will have to change unless it wants to collapse anyway, so hopefully that means we will start selling solutions. Changes are just going to be very slow.
That already happens with the minimally regulated free market we have now in many Western countries. Politicians get into power due to corporate backing, and may deregulate or regulate various markets depending on who is pulling their strings. Growing the government won’t necessarily mean that businesses take it over more since many businesses gain more power by having less government getting in their way.
But a more regulated market has a better chance of looking after the environment than a deregulated one. If there are laws dictating the limits of how much businesses can use resources (perhaps making businesses responsible for full lifecycle of whatever products they produce) then the amount of environmental degradation will decrease. It’s much the same as how we have laws to protect people from murder, rape, etc - regulation is simply extending the law to protect the environment as well (which will ultimately protect people in a less direct way).