It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ziggystrange
OP, with all due respect, OWS is not an Obama reelection ploy. It's consensus Democracy aimed at the system and the inequity in finance, government and the destruction of the economy by the top 1%.
Originally posted by ziggystrange
I wish it was a reelect Obama ploy, that would please me as he is the only one willing to bring about change "the right way", but...
Originally posted by ziggystrange
OWS is not owned by anyone. It will probably decide who is elected next year, but they have yet to unite behind anyone.
Originally posted by ziggystrange
Lots of Ron Paul people there, and lots of independents. Yes they are probably mostly progressives but they are a wildcard. Republicans and right wingers are driving the independents toward the left by vilifying OWS. I hope they keep up the good work.
Cheers
Ziggy
Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by MrXYZ
Or maybe they're just pissed off that tax payer money and regular bank saving account holders are now guaranteeing $75 TRILLION (!!!) in risky derivates investments made by the a single bank alone (BoA) at Wall Street.
I was floored when I saw that number, although I heard it was $55T. But two things:
1. It was only revealed recently, so that's not why OWS was organized, and
2. They are barking up the wrong tree. Obama made the rules, why aren't they after him? Makes no sense.
And just think about it...Obama has come out in support of OWS, because he knows he is responsible. But he wants to keep OWS from realizing he is responsible, so he's acting like their bud.
Or maybe it's because the guys at Wall Street only pay a 15% tax on their main source of income (capital gains) which is about as much as someone making no more than $32k.
That's the capital gains tax rate for everyone, isn't it? So, Wall St. is getting no preferential treatment. Once again, it's the govt who is in charge of rates..why not blame them?
Or maybe it's because WS is responsible for this economic crisis but never had to fear any repercusions.
Once again, you are letting the real crooks off the hook.
But yeah, I'm sure it's all just a "communist-socialist-nazi-progressive-Obamalover" conspiracy...riiiight
You don't deny that there are lots of those scumbags there, do you?
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by MrXYZ
What Capitalism are you talking about?... It was the left, and PROGRESSIVE Democrats who created the corpocracy that has existed for almost 100 years...
It seems obvious that you are one of those people who has no idea who created the problems and are now, AGAIN, claiming they can bring a solution if they are given more power "for the people and the world"...
Oh and btw, people can protest, but staying for weeks in one area causes a lot of sanitary problems, and trash accumulates all over.
Perhaps the protesters should go to their homes at night and allow for the clean up of all the mess they leave behind?
Naaa....
edit on 28-10-2011 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by The_Zomar
Fox news zombies still trying to say that the OWS are Obama supporters?
Turn off fox news, go to an occupation in your area and let me know how many Obama supporters you find.
I've been to different occupations, I'm not spouting some fluff like the majority of people here.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Still believing in the whole "left vs right" paradigm?
U.S. Constitution - Article 4 Section 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 4 - The States
Section 4 - Republican Government
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
...
Originally posted by MrXYZ
For crying out loud, it doesn't matter who's in power...they're ALL BOUGHT! Politics are just like gladiator games, they're sole goal is to distract the masses to they don't realize what's really going on. Kinda like a football game where both parties suck yet the fans still cheer based on old glory or some other nonsense reason
Originally posted by MrXYZ
And it's a FACT that Wall Street is pulling the strings, because it's a FACT that it was them who created the bailout plans. Getting them passed was obviously easy given all politicians are bought. But without a doubt, it was Wall Street who came up with the plan
Democratising Global Governance:
The Challenges of the World Social Forum
by
Francesca Beausang
ABSTRACT
This paper sums up the debate that took place during the two round tables organized by UNESCO within the first World Social Forum in Porto Alegre (25/30 January 2001). It starts with a discussion of national processes, by examining democracy and then governance at the national level. It first states a case for a "joint" governance based on a combination of stakeholder theory, which is derived from corporate governance, and of UNESCO's priorities in the field of governance. As an example, the paper investigates how governance can deviate from democracy in the East Asian model. Subsequently, the global dimension of the debate on democracy and governance is examined, first by identification of the characteristics and agents of democracy in the global setting, and then by allusion to the difficulties of transposing governance to the global level.
...
The governments of Europe, the United States, and Japan are unlikely to negotiate a social-democratic pattern of globalization – unless their hands are forced by a popular movement or a catastrophe, such as another Great Depression or ecological disaster
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by MrXYZ
What Capitalism are you talking about?... It was the left, and PROGRESSIVE Democrats who created the corpocracy that has existed for almost 100 years...
It seems obvious that you are one of those people who has no idea who created the problems and are now, AGAIN, claiming they can bring a solution if they are given more power "for the people and the world"...
Oh and btw, people can protest, but staying for weeks in one area causes a lot of sanitary problems, and trash accumulates all over.
Perhaps the protesters should go to their homes at night and allow for the clean up of all the mess they leave behind?
Naaa....
edit on 28-10-2011 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by MrXYZ
I take it you've never studied economics, right?
Corporatism was started by REAGAN because he was the first one to hire a ton of Wall Street "advisors". That's a FACT and not even up for debate. However, since then, pretty much every single president and congress has supported what he started...which explains why the people are now largely screwed. Hell, the bottom 99% saw their income grow by 8.9% since Reagan, the top 1%'s income grew by 275%! And people wonder why the protestors are outraged
Why? Because you, or some leftwinger professor claims so?...
I also heard a very leftwinger professor in college claim socialism is the best socio-economic system in the world... But like always neither he, nor the mayority of those who claim this have EVER lived through such a system.
Corporatism was started by the leftwingers in 1913 when they gave power to the rich bankers, and THAT IS A FACT which not you, nor your lies can refute...
When Woodrow Wilson implemented the Feds in 1913 he gave all power over the economy, and all power over the nation to the rich elites, which happen to own the corporations... Or does that fact cannot enter that thick head of yours?
Heck, it was even Woodrow Wilson who implemented the IRS with all it's taxes as it exists today...
Woodrow Wilson implemented the Feds in 1913 he gave all power over the economy, and all power over the nation to the rich elites, which happen to own the corporations... Or does that fact cannot enter that thick head of yours?
Originally posted by MrXYZ
No, because the FACTS say so
Originally a member of the Democratic Party, he began to support Republican Party candidates in the early 1950s and eventually switched to the Republican Party in 1962.
But Reagan had that harder and more exhausting courage, the courage to swim against the tide. And we all forget it now because he changed the tide. Looking back, we forget that the political mood of today, in which he might find himself quite comfortable, is quite different from the political mood the day he walked into politics.
But he had no choice, he couldn't not swim against the tide. In the fifties and sixties all of his thoughts and observations led him to believe that Americans were slowly but surely losing their freedoms.
When he got to Hollywood as a young man in his twenties, he shared and was impressed by the general thinking of the good and sophisticated people of New York and Hollywood with regard to politics. He was a liberal Democrat, as his father was, and he felt a great attachment to the party. He was proud that his father had refused to take him and his brother Moon to the movie, Birth of a Nation, with its racial stereotypes. And he bragged that his father, Jack, a salesman, had, back long ago when Reagan was a kid, once spent the night in his car rather than sleep in a hotel that wouldn't take Jews. Ronald Reagan as a young man was a Roosevelt supporter, he was all for FDR, and when he took part in his first presidential campaign he made speeches for Harry Truman in 1948.
When Reagan changed, it was against the tide. It might be said that the heyday of modern political liberalism, in its American manifestation, was the 1960s, when the Great Society began and the Kennedys were secular saints and the costs of enforced liberalism were not yet apparent. And that is precisely when Reagan came down hard right, all for Goldwater in 1964. This was very much the wrong side of the fashionable argument to be on; it wasn't a way to gain friends in influential quarters, it wasn't exactly a career-enhancing move. But Reagan thought the conservatives were right. So he joined them, at the least advantageous moment, the whole country going this way on a twenty-year experiment, and Reagan going that way, thinking he was right and thinking that sooner or later he and the country were going to meet in a historic rendezvous.
...
Ronald Reagan -[size]= then a liberal Democrat - campaigns on the radio for President Truman in 1948. He also supports Hubert ...
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Again with the socialism?
Protesting against corporations abusing politicians as sock puppets isn't socialism, protesting against banks being bailed out with taxpayer money isn't socialism, protesting against the FACT that income growth over the past 30 years has been a complete and utter joke for 99% of the country isn't socialism, ....
Originally posted by MrXYZ
No, it started when corporations took over the Fed...which was only possible once Reagan (and every president since him) started removing crucial regulations.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Your point is moot as there's plenty of countries with central banks that work just fine....
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Those very taxes made a broad education possible for the population and catapulted the US to the superpower it (still) is today. Why do you think so many foreigners have been coming to the US to study for decades? Why do you think the US has been leading R&D for decades after WW2? Education...paid for in part through taxes. Sadly that's being changed and a good education will soon only be affordable for the elite, the rest will become worker drones.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Those taxes also pay for the fire fighters who come to your aid when you accidentally torched your place. Or the cops who come to your aid when your neighbour stands in front your door with a baseball bat. Or the guys who make sure no idiots with shoe bombs board your plane...and and and. Nothing's for free, and privatisation isn't always the best solution as is evident by the cost of for-profit colleges for example.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
I have to quote that again, because I don't think you realize what you just wrote. Let me get this right:
1) You believe the elite (top 1%) and corporations control the Fed
2) You care a TON about who "started that"
3) You oppose the very people who protest against the elite and corporations taking over the Fed
DO YOU SEE WHY THIS IS BEYOND RIDICULOUS??? You are on the same side as them, you agree with the very core reason why people are outraged enough to protest even if it forces them to sleep on concrete.
The fact that progressive democrats are backing this
The organizers include ACORN
Originally posted by CB328
So, that is supposed to mean that they created it?? Everyone supports movements of one kind or another that they have no control over.
Originally posted by CB328
So?? What's wrong with that? Oh right, they're supposed to be the antichrist because they register minorities to vote, I forgot.
By Eric Shawn- Fox News Published: 3:53 PM 04/06/2011 | Updated: 3:55 PM 04/06/2011
ACORN pleads guilty to voter registration fraud in Nevada
The defunct political advocacy group ACORN has pleaded guilty to one count of an election law violation in Las Vegas, Nevada.
ACORN attorney Lisa Rasmussen told Fox News that a plea agreement was worked out with the state attorney general. The violation was for unlawfully providing compensation for registering voters based on the total number of people registered. Sentencing for the organization is set for August 10th, and the potential fine is a maximum of $5,000.
ACORN itself was named as a criminal defendant for allegedly running an illegal voter registration scheme called “21,” or “Blackjack,” which paid ACORN workers bonuses based on the number of voters they registered in Nevada during the 2008 election. This is the only case in the country in which ACORN itself was named as a felony defendant, and it has since filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy.