"Does the Tea Party or the Occupy Movement best represent the interests of social justice and economic recovery in America?"
My opening statement.
I’d like to first point out that both groups see problems within our current system. But it’s not the recognition that is at debate here but the
solutions posed by the groups.
The Tea Party stands for personal responsibility, self-determination, smaller government.
We feel that it is the individual that should be held responsible for their healthcare issues, their educational requirements, and their fiscal
responsibilities.
Occupy does not.
Occupy has issue with corruption in government, business influences. And rightly so. Yet their solutions are not to enable the individual with the
freedom and power of self-determination.
Their solutions stem from replacing a corrupt government body making decisions for the individual to a larger government body to make decisions for
the individual.
In manners of healthcare, education, wealth disparity the rights of the individual are disregarded. The collective, the whole is the basis for
Occupy. The 99% that they speak so much about.
But when they claim support for the 99%, they ignore the individuals, the individuals rights to self-determine that make up the 99%. In effect, they
are sacrificing the individual rights for the collective rights of the group.
True social justice, true economic recovery will not take place with larger government. Government is the antithesis of the free market system.
Government enables itself by necessitating its presence. A return to individualism, self-determination and a government that is smaller and less
intrusive is the answer.
Thank you.
Challenge Match: beezzer vs XPLodER: Tea Party vs Occupy Movement, page 1
reply posted on 9-7-2012 @ 05:27 AM by XPLodER
reply to post by beezzer
"Does the Tea Party or the Occupy Movement best represent the interests of social justice and economic recovery in America?"
i too would like to point out that both groups ultimately wants what's best for america and by proxie the world.
Occupy stands for 1 law for all, and that corporations are not people and money is not free speech,
and that the government no longer represents the will of the people and instead represents the corporations. the principals that america was founded on, all are created equal in life liberty justice and happiness
a government for the people by the people, responsive to the civil society's need for just laws that are applied equally regardless of wealth or status.
as both the tea party and Occupy agree,
the bank bailouts are antithetical to a free market economy and a democracy.
taking tax dollars destined to flow through the larger economy and sending directly to the banks instead is the very worst thing you could do for an economy.
note we do not stand for bigger government, as suggested by beezer,
except for a few key areas, we want more police and better services for veterans and for government to issue money not an unelected private corporation (federal reserve)
no american can succeed financially without other people to conduct commerce with,
the first amendment of the bill of rights states,
so in the very first amendment is the recipe for occupy,
it is my belief that the founders of the constitution knew what would protect liberty and property and they included them as instructions for future generations to use when tyranny showed its ugly head.
it is their idea that when a government becomes odious to the well being of the people,
it is the duty of the population to stand together in unity and peacefully assemble for redress in public where all are free to speak and all are free to come and go as they see fit. where all people are equal regardless of wealth or status.
in matters of health care, it makes no sense to pay insurers over and over again for the same services that could be built and owned by the states forever.
education is the future, as are the children who need it,
every person is an individual, but we live in a society, and without the society no individual could succeed
the idea beezer has about occupy removing individuality is incorrect.
we have managed to get the support from the largest cross section of the population,
every race, every nationality, and nearly every political persuasion has come to call Occupy their own movement.
we see the need for "collective action" but this should not be confused with collectivism
The top 1% of Americans own as much wealth as the bottom 95% percent.
remember capitalism is predicated on capital flows IN the economy and at the point where all the money sits in a bank account, no one has money to use as a medium of exchange.
i have no problem with being successful,
or working hard for what you desire, as this is the basis for capitalism,
but our belief is that corporations only exist to serve us,
not the other way around.
Beezers claim of occupy removing of the individuality of people is redundant thinking,
there are over one hundred different occupy groups worldwide and ALL of them are self determining,
they democratically decide their own way forward.
the bit beezer missed is democracy is by participation, not excluding any one group.
we are truly all equal and ANY individual can offer an idea or direction.
in times of great need unity of spirit and of intent is needed,
Occupy as a movement consists of millions of individuals doing what their direct interest is but under one united banner.
the problem of the tea party is simply are attacking occupy with main street news narratives and buzz words,
like communists or hippies. and i find it hard to reconcile corporate sponsorship to fix the problem of unwanted undue corporate influence on elected officials.
we accept no corporate money,
and still succeed
we believe that banking malfeasance combined with corporate person hood,
means we as an entire movement are being decimated by a structure of greed.
break up the to big to fail banks like the monopoly "standard oil" because no corporation is greater or more important than our big american brother nation.
we have started a revolution in state banking to remove some of the undue influence of the largest banks,
and to directly provide for state infrastructure, whose profits benefit the state they operate in.
xploder
"Does the Tea Party or the Occupy Movement best represent the interests of social justice and economic recovery in America?"
i too would like to point out that both groups ultimately wants what's best for america and by proxie the world.
Occupy stands for 1 law for all, and that corporations are not people and money is not free speech,
and that the government no longer represents the will of the people and instead represents the corporations. the principals that america was founded on, all are created equal in life liberty justice and happiness
a government for the people by the people, responsive to the civil society's need for just laws that are applied equally regardless of wealth or status.
as both the tea party and Occupy agree,
the bank bailouts are antithetical to a free market economy and a democracy.
taking tax dollars destined to flow through the larger economy and sending directly to the banks instead is the very worst thing you could do for an economy.
note we do not stand for bigger government, as suggested by beezer,
except for a few key areas, we want more police and better services for veterans and for government to issue money not an unelected private corporation (federal reserve)
no american can succeed financially without other people to conduct commerce with,
the first amendment of the bill of rights states,
The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights provides that “Congress shall make no law … abridging … the right of the people peaceably to assemble
so in the very first amendment is the recipe for occupy,
The Bill of Rights is the collective name for the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. These limitations serve to protect the natural rights of liberty and property
it is my belief that the founders of the constitution knew what would protect liberty and property and they included them as instructions for future generations to use when tyranny showed its ugly head.
it is their idea that when a government becomes odious to the well being of the people,
it is the duty of the population to stand together in unity and peacefully assemble for redress in public where all are free to speak and all are free to come and go as they see fit. where all people are equal regardless of wealth or status.
in matters of health care, it makes no sense to pay insurers over and over again for the same services that could be built and owned by the states forever.
education is the future, as are the children who need it,
every person is an individual, but we live in a society, and without the society no individual could succeed
the idea beezer has about occupy removing individuality is incorrect.
we have managed to get the support from the largest cross section of the population,
every race, every nationality, and nearly every political persuasion has come to call Occupy their own movement.
we see the need for "collective action" but this should not be confused with collectivism
The top 1% of Americans own as much wealth as the bottom 95% percent.
remember capitalism is predicated on capital flows IN the economy and at the point where all the money sits in a bank account, no one has money to use as a medium of exchange.
i have no problem with being successful,
or working hard for what you desire, as this is the basis for capitalism,
but our belief is that corporations only exist to serve us,
not the other way around.
Beezers claim of occupy removing of the individuality of people is redundant thinking,
there are over one hundred different occupy groups worldwide and ALL of them are self determining,
they democratically decide their own way forward.
the bit beezer missed is democracy is by participation, not excluding any one group.
we are truly all equal and ANY individual can offer an idea or direction.
in times of great need unity of spirit and of intent is needed,
Occupy as a movement consists of millions of individuals doing what their direct interest is but under one united banner.
the problem of the tea party is simply are attacking occupy with main street news narratives and buzz words,
like communists or hippies. and i find it hard to reconcile corporate sponsorship to fix the problem of unwanted undue corporate influence on elected officials.
we accept no corporate money,
and still succeed
we believe that banking malfeasance combined with corporate person hood,
means we as an entire movement are being decimated by a structure of greed.
break up the to big to fail banks like the monopoly "standard oil" because no corporation is greater or more important than our big american brother nation.
we have started a revolution in state banking to remove some of the undue influence of the largest banks,
and to directly provide for state infrastructure, whose profits benefit the state they operate in.
xploder
reply posted on 9-7-2012 @ 04:55 PM by XPLodER
reply to post by beezzer
both,
OWS encompasses all the Occupy groups,
the 99% is for non occupy affiliated individuals or groups (anyone who is peaceful)
simple, states have the right to create money in the exact same way federal banks do, and in the case of North Dakota, the people profit from money creation by their state bank, and it is payeed to the state to pay for expenses like infrastructure, this removes the need to beg to federal government for infrastructure spending.
this changes the political landscape from the states up.
we started this process with the "move your money campaign"
simply put a system who gives control of a nation through the expansion and contraction of credit is at the whim of those pumping then dumping the system, the to big to fail banks whos only care is private profits. people moved their money to credit unions that serve and benefit their local communities. note public benefit over profit at all costs
yes and no, personally people can do what they want with their money,
but when money is used to pass legislation to benefit a very small people over the general welfare of the nation,
you have fascism. consider A.L.E.C helped pass the stand your ground laws, alot of people will die because of their corporate legislation (fascism)
Thomas Jefferson
the original incorporation was by charter, and for a limited time and for a specific task, like building a bridge,
they had to show their would be public benefit, and without a public benefit no incorporation was allowed.
that has been perverted over time, so that now a corporation can be chartered solely to make profits for private share holders,
incorporation was "designed" to serve the public interests not private profit at any or all costs.
no person can be successful in a capitalist society, without others to trade goods and services with,
Until the late 1970s the United States had a very, very high top income tax rate. From the time of FDR until the 1960s the top rate was 90% plus on very high incomes. From the 60s until the Reagan years it was in the 70%s. Under Reagan it ramped down to 28%.
FDR was not a communist and neither are high taxes for those who can afford them. especially when a country is at war, support your troops
questions
you claim that the only way to change the direction america is heading is to effect the political process,
all people should be free to choose what they eat,
when the duly elected tea party members voted in favour of the indefinite detention and for no labelling of GMO foods
question 1
how does voting to keep us in the dark as to what we eat, and in a dark cell, change america to the ideals of liberty and individualism?
when corporations are able to out spend people to gain favour with politicians, and lobbyists can legally bribe law makers,
question 2
what makes you think entering into a corrupt political system would not corrupt you delegates and representatives and how do you guard against them simply selling out to the highest bidder?
knowing the power to create money also holds the power to choke of the money supply and hence the power to create boom and bust,
question 3
why with the obvious power of the creation of money, and its ability to influence political outcomes is this NOT a primary issue of the TEA PARTY?
the media portrayed the TP as racists,(MSM)
question 4
do you really believe that OWS is simply a bunch of non educated hippies who want free stuff?
question 5
without an in-depth knowledge of the economy, the tea party wrongly believes that the problem is big government,
while big government is a major problem, big government is subservient to big money,
how can the TP ignore the role of money in politics?
xploder
:up
Question 1. Does Occupy operate under a single banner, or is it a heterogeneous mix of individuals?
both,
OWS encompasses all the Occupy groups,
the 99% is for non occupy affiliated individuals or groups (anyone who is peaceful)
Question 2. How do you plan on changing the banks and corporations practices if you don’t change the laws that govern said practices?
simple, states have the right to create money in the exact same way federal banks do, and in the case of North Dakota, the people profit from money creation by their state bank, and it is payeed to the state to pay for expenses like infrastructure, this removes the need to beg to federal government for infrastructure spending.
this changes the political landscape from the states up.
we started this process with the "move your money campaign"
simply put a system who gives control of a nation through the expansion and contraction of credit is at the whim of those pumping then dumping the system, the to big to fail banks whos only care is private profits. people moved their money to credit unions that serve and benefit their local communities. note public benefit over profit at all costs
Question 3. If you have no problem with success, then do you think people should have a right to do what they want with their wealth, their capital?
yes and no, personally people can do what they want with their money,
but when money is used to pass legislation to benefit a very small people over the general welfare of the nation,
you have fascism. consider A.L.E.C helped pass the stand your ground laws, alot of people will die because of their corporate legislation (fascism)
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
Thomas Jefferson
Question 4. What exactly do you mean when you say corporations serve us? Please clarify.
the original incorporation was by charter, and for a limited time and for a specific task, like building a bridge,
they had to show their would be public benefit, and without a public benefit no incorporation was allowed.
that has been perverted over time, so that now a corporation can be chartered solely to make profits for private share holders,
incorporation was "designed" to serve the public interests not private profit at any or all costs.
Question 5. If the 1st Amendment is for everyone, then regardless of whether you agree or not, shouldn’t successful people be able to do what they want with what they have, and not have their wealth mandated for social programs?
no person can be successful in a capitalist society, without others to trade goods and services with,
Until the late 1970s the United States had a very, very high top income tax rate. From the time of FDR until the 1960s the top rate was 90% plus on very high incomes. From the 60s until the Reagan years it was in the 70%s. Under Reagan it ramped down to 28%.
FDR was not a communist and neither are high taxes for those who can afford them. especially when a country is at war, support your troops
questions
you claim that the only way to change the direction america is heading is to effect the political process,
all people should be free to choose what they eat,
when the duly elected tea party members voted in favour of the indefinite detention and for no labelling of GMO foods
question 1
how does voting to keep us in the dark as to what we eat, and in a dark cell, change america to the ideals of liberty and individualism?
when corporations are able to out spend people to gain favour with politicians, and lobbyists can legally bribe law makers,
question 2
what makes you think entering into a corrupt political system would not corrupt you delegates and representatives and how do you guard against them simply selling out to the highest bidder?
knowing the power to create money also holds the power to choke of the money supply and hence the power to create boom and bust,
question 3
why with the obvious power of the creation of money, and its ability to influence political outcomes is this NOT a primary issue of the TEA PARTY?
the media portrayed the TP as racists,(MSM)
question 4
do you really believe that OWS is simply a bunch of non educated hippies who want free stuff?
question 5
without an in-depth knowledge of the economy, the tea party wrongly believes that the problem is big government,
while big government is a major problem, big government is subservient to big money,
how can the TP ignore the role of money in politics?
xploder
:up
reply posted on 10-7-2012 @ 04:33 PM by XPLodER
Occupy can’t seem to get their heads around the fact that in order to them (Occupy) to get what they want, the elimination of the free market system must occur.
there was free market BEFORE the federal reserve came into existence.
You advocate government issuing monies without thought that the only way government can issue anything is to take it away from someone else, first.
you have no concept of how money is lent into existence, and how the banks use this power to redistribute wealth from the productive sector to the financial sector,
THIS is the true wealth redistribution you would fear if you cared about keeping what you earned,
ever heard of inflation? its a hidden tax on "wealth" of savers. this distribution dwarfs taxes and entitlements by many factors of size.
i cant let this rest,
It appears that Occupy wants to enable the “middleman” even more to take more, simply because the wealthy have more to take.
in a fed document "modern money mecanics"
The actual process of money creation takes place
primarily in banks.
In the absence of legal reserve requirements, banks
can build up deposits by increasing loans
Transaction deposits are the modem counterpart of
bank notes. It was a small step from printing notes to mak-
ing book entries crediting deposits of borrowers, which the
borrowers in turn could "spend" by writing checks, thereby
"printing" their own money.
pdf source
the system redistributes wealth from workers to banks on a much larger scale than ALL entitlements combined,
i suggest the TEA PARTY reads the federal reserves own literature on the subject
Question 1. Do you see any problem with the entitlement system in place?
yes there is no way off entittlements in a depressed economy,
a state infrastructure project could get people working again if the creation of capital was properly understood by law makers.
if they can print money for banks, they can print money for the productive sector infrastructure projects to get working again.
PEOPLE WANT TO WORK!!!!!!!!!!!
if it is socially acceptable to bail out banks, then it is also socially acceptable to bail out the productive sector to create jobs.
Question 2. What justification do you have for punishing corporations?
The original rules for corporations worked perfectly, over time standard oil used "taxes" to leverage to remove the need to show public good. by moving the business to a state that agreed to allow incorporation without public good, the original intent of corporations that serve people was removed. law makers passed speeding laws with fines to "modify" the behaviour of drivers. i suggest we do the same thing to corporations that pollute, shift profits offshore, or offshore jobs. that is the ONLY punishment i advocate for corporations, except for criminality
Question 3. Do you understand that any capital that the government has (to give away) has to come from individuals first?
if that was the case, where does the money the banks loan out come from?
the bit you miss is, where did the money that exists today come from?
Untill you understand the creation of money, you will not understand how one sided it really is
Question 4. How does Occupy’s stance coincide with the US Constitution?
we look to the constitution and related documents, bill of rights ect to define what we can or cant do,
the constitution of the united states is our template, the founders WARNED us of the private creation of money being a corrupting force to a democratic republic.
"private central banks are more dangerous than standing armies" very wise patriot
Question 5. Imagine Occupy gets everything that it wants tomorrow. What would the United States look like 5 years from now?
no central bank, state infrasrture banks loaning to home owners with the profits being used to pay for hospitals schools highways and veteran rehabilitation. if you want to see how it works in practice,
As the only state-owned bank in the country, Bank of North Dakota garners a great deal of attention. At the end of 2011,
14 states were considering legislation for some form of a state-owned bank. Many of them look to BND as a model.
2011 BND fincial report PDF
north Dakota = highest employment rates in america,
1. how come the state of North Dakota suffered less in the economic down turn?
2.why do you keep pushing the false idea OWS wants to steel your wealth?
3.does the tea party agree that Quntitive easing is socialism for the benifit of the banks?
4. would the Tea Party agree to a face to face debate with OWS over "state banks VS TBTF banks"?
5. will the tea party publically publish their financial records like OWS does?
xplode
edit on Tue 10 Jul 2012 by The Vagabond because: "democratic democracy" changed to "democratic republic" in Socratic Question 4
Answer
I’m sure the Tea
Party has been open and honest, I do know they’ve been audited a number of times. So, yes. 
