Occupy Wall Street

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dino

Shouldn't these protestors either be working or looking for a job? Just when was it that working hard and making something out of your life is a BAD thing? Maybe we should all bring up our children teaching them that they should be losers who expect other people to take care of them.

there's nothing wrong with working hard. they aren't protesting that. instead, people see wall street making money hand over fist, banks being 'bailed out' while paying millions in bonuses. ceo salaries thru the roof, etc, etc. how have the rich ever garnered so much sympathy? where is the sympathy for people looking for work that can't find it? people who pay into their 401k, only to see their retirement disappear? how many people can't retire because they can't afford it, which means no churn in employment?

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Danzig

there's nothing wrong with working hard. they aren't protesting that. instead, people see wall street making money hand over fist, banks being 'bailed out' while paying millions in bonuses. ceo salaries thru the roof, etc, etc. how have the rich ever garnered so much sympathy? where is the sympathy for people looking for work that can't find it? people who pay into their 401k, only to see their retirement disappear? how many people can't retire because they can't afford it, which means no churn in employment?

Dino has a job for now and everyone that doesn't is a worthless piece of sh*it. And he is quite good at parroting the talking points he hears on Fox News. It also fails to realize that this is the 21st century and you don't pound the pavement to find a job. You apply online, Post to Monster etc and are notified via email or cellphone call if they want to speak further. Sorry to blow is image of all protesters being lazy morons but you can protest and look for a job at the same time.

[dino]

Originally Posted by jms62

Dino has a job for now and everyone that doesn't is a worthless piece of sh*it. And he is quite good at parroting the talking points he hears on Fox News. It also fails to realize that this is the 21st century and you don't pound the pavement to find a job. You apply online, Post to Monster etc and are notified via email or cellphone call if they want to speak further. Sorry to blow is image of all protesters being lazy morons but you can protest and look for a job at the same time.

I must have missed the piece of **** comment that I made. Obviously there are plenty of hard working people out of work. That's a totally different subject that has nothing to do with this point. The protestors we are discussing are actually protesting people that are rich, not just the wall street insiders. They believe that the supposed rich should pay more taxes so that they don't have to pay any taxes like 48% of our country.
If I was unemployed I sure as hell wouldn't expect anyone in this country to pay more taxes to help me and my family. I would be cleaning toilets before asking for a handout, unlike too many people.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dino

I must have missed the piece of **** comment that I made. Obviously there are plenty of hard working people out of work. That's a totally different subject that has nothing to do with this point. The protestors we are discussing are actually protesting people that are rich, not just the wall street insiders. They believe that the supposed rich should pay more taxes so that they don't have to pay any taxes like 48% of our country.
If I was unemployed I sure as hell wouldn't expect anyone in this country to pay more taxes to help me and my family. I would be cleaning toilets before asking for a handout, unlike too many people.

Dino... Really? You think the ENTIRE point of this is about the rich paying more taxes? That is certainly what the rebulicons want you to think, Pit the Working Class vs The unemployed and maybe you wont see that (Fill in the blank here Rebuplicons or Libtards) are changing the rules to enrich myself. This is way more than and important than tax rates and if it were simply tax rates I would be side by side with you.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

there's nothing wrong with working hard. they aren't protesting that. instead, people see wall street making money hand over fist, banks being 'bailed out' while paying millions in bonuses. ceo salaries thru the roof, etc, etc. how have the rich ever garnered so much sympathy? where is the sympathy for people looking for work that can't find it? people who pay into their 401k, only to see their retirement disappear? how many people can't retire because they can't afford it, which means no churn in employment?

The only problem with this is if banks are allowed to fail or go under how many millions of innocent, non-rich American people and businesses will be financially ruined?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The only problem with this is if banks are allowed to fail or go under how many millions of innocent, non-rich American people and businesses will be financially ruined?

oh, i know that part would be bad...but it's hard for folks to understand how banks can pay out tons of money if they just needed a bail out. if the ceo's were doing such a good job, and earned that money, why did they come begging?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

oh, i know that part would be bad...but it's hard for folks to understand how banks can pay out tons of money if they just needed a bail out. if the ceo's were doing such a good job, and earned that money, why did they come begging?

While it may be annoying does it really have any effect on those people? I have no love for banks or bankers but what exactly is the plan here? Is it fair that banks can still hold our money for 2 weeks despite knowing almost instantly that a check is good? Of course not. Do I enjoy the endless fees like charging to take cash deposits or not having overdraft? hell no. But I would rather see these things addressed than worry about what the CEO of the bank is making. It isn't as though if he made less these fees and policies wouldnt still be in effect.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

While it may be annoying does it really have any effect on those people? I have no love for banks or bankers but what exactly is the plan here? Is it fair that banks can still hold our money for 2 weeks despite knowing almost instantly that a check is good? Of course not. Do I enjoy the endless fees like charging to take cash deposits or not having overdraft? hell no. But I would rather see these things addressed than worry about what the CEO of the bank is making. It isn't as though if he made less these fees and policies wouldnt still be in effect.

There has been a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency put in place by the Obama administration, over the screaming objections of the Republicans, who blocked the appointment of Elizabeth Warren as it's head months ago, and are currently actively blocking the appointment of the second choice. Rendering the agency virtually non-existent for almost a year.

So some in Washington are desperately trying to "address" exactly what you don't like and are complaining about - but the special interest lobbies in Washington are blocking it completely through the Republican party.

Hence, Occupy Wall Street exists: to take back Washington and our government from the large corporations and special interests owning our government process and manipulating it to their, not our, end. Haven't you had enough of that?

Call Mitch McConnell and tell him to stop blocking the implementation of the CFPA and the appointment of it's head. That is what Occupy Wall Street wants to happen. Get corporate ownership out of our government.

Occupy Wall Street has nothing to do with how much CEO's make. It has everything to do with investment banks crashing our economy, getting bailed out by us, never being investigated for their malfesence, then we stay in the recession while they go on to record profits and bonuses, because Washington is owned by those corporations, and they won't let Washington make any laws that will benefit us, and threaten their profit margin.

[slotdirt]

Originally Posted by Riot

There has been a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency put in place by the Obama administration, over the screaming objections of the Republicans, who blocked the appointment of Elizabeth Warren as it's head months ago, and are currently actively blocking the appointment of the second choice. Rendering the agency virtually non-existent for almost a year.

So some in Washington are desperately trying to "address" exactly what you don't like and are complaining about - but the special interest lobbies in Washington are blocking it completely through the Republican party.

Hence, Occupy Wall Street exists: to take back Washington and our government from the large corporations and special interests owning our government process and manipulating it to their, not our, end. Haven't you had enough of that?

Call Mitch McConnell and tell him to stop blocking the implementation of the CFPA and the appointment of it's head. That is what Occupy Wall Street wants to happen. Get corporate ownership out of our government.

Occupy Wall Street has nothing to do with how much CEO's make. It has everything to do with investment banks crashing our economy, getting bailed out by us, never being investigated for their malfesence, then we stay in the recession while they go on to record profits and bonuses, because Washington is owned by those corporations, and they won't let Washington make any laws that will benefit us, and threaten their profit margin.

Just curious, but if this whole "movement" has nothing to do with CEO income, why did a bunch of protesters meander over to the personal residences of several CEO's the other day? For exercise I guess?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Just curious, but if this whole "movement" has nothing to do with CEO income, why did a bunch of protesters meander over to the personal residences of several CEO's the other day? For exercise I guess?

I guess if you really wanted to know, you'd watch the news. No, that had nothing to do with CEO income, it had to do with an expiring NY tax rate. But it appears you think it more convenient to not know the facts, and just attribute whatever purpose you make up in your mind.

Ignorance is bliss. Damn effing dirty hippies, right? LOL.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

There has been a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency put in place by the Obama administration, over the screaming objections of the Republicans, who blocked the appointment of Elizabeth Warren as it's head months ago, and are currently actively blocking the appointment of the second choice. Rendering the agency virtually non-existent for almost a year.

So some in Washington are desperately trying to "address" exactly what you don't like and are complaining about - but the special interest lobbies in Washington are blocking it completely through the Republican party.

Hence, Occupy Wall Street exists: to take back Washington and our government from the large corporations and special interests owning our government process and manipulating it to their, not our, end. Haven't you had enough of that?

Call Mitch McConnell and tell him to stop blocking the implementation of the CFPA and the appointment of it's head. That is what Occupy Wall Street wants to happen. Get corporate ownership out of our government.

Occupy Wall Street has nothing to do with how much CEO's make. It has everything to do with investment banks crashing our economy, getting bailed out by us, never being investigated for their malfesence, then we stay in the recession while they go on to record profits and bonuses, because Washington is owned by those corporations, and they won't let Washington make any laws that will benefit us, and threaten their profit margin.

Warren isnt fit to be the head of anything in the real world (no Harvard isnt real world) which makes her a fine candidate for Congress. But if Congress hadn't passed the supposed consumer protection credit card reform bill we wouldnt be facing many of these new fees which were created in response to that new law.

Despite how much hand wringing or protesting goes on the reality is money buys power and there is nothing that can be done to change that. And if I recall correctly you were against term limits for Congress which would seem to be a good place to start the reform that you speak of.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Warren isnt fit to be the head of anything in the real world (no Harvard isnt real world) which makes her a fine candidate for Congress. But if Congress hadn't passed the supposed consumer protection credit card reform bill we wouldnt be facing many of these new fees which were created in response to that new law.

Warren is such a threat to "the real world" that the Republican party fell all over themselves attempt to block everything associated with the agencies creation, then her appointment to run it.

Naw, if it were not for Congress, you'd still be facing sudden unannounced 20%+ interest rate hikes with bills arriving 4 days before you due date, and interest accumulating from date of purchase, compounding of interest onto current purchases, etc.

I am repeatedly amazed at your factual ignorance regarding things you discuss here. I can only assume it's deliberate.

You might take a while to think and reflect upon the credit card reform passed, and then what those sudden "new fees" would be if the Republicans would allow the Consumer Financial Protection Agency to ... you know, do something about that gouging attempting to get outside the law, as the agency is intended to.