The "Occupy Wall St" Protest

Now we're getting into some heavy stuff here.

What is "truth"?

It used to be true that the earth was the center of the universe and the stars hung on crystal sphere's until a it wasn't anymore.

It used to be true that the leader of a country was appointed by a divine being.

What do we know today that will be wrong tomorrow?

jpete wrote:What do we know today that will be wrong tomorrow?

Ummmm, Obama?


"A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage -- the political paradise of communism." Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals -- Mentor to the Democrats

Things you won't hear at an Occupy event:

"Wow, America really is the greatest nation, isn't it?"
"I worked so hard to accomplish...."
"Last night I had dinner with my family."
"I'm really skilled in..."
"I really admire the Founding Fathers."
"God bless America!"
"With a little hard work I/you can..."
"You need to get off your rear and..."
"My parents did a good job."
"I teach my children American values."


Support your local FLEA Party .

Freeloading
Liberals
Enticing
Anarchy

Well, it didn't seem too off topic. Just another conundrum. One group wants to take and one group wants to keep but where's it come from?
Kierkegaard did with words what Esher did with the pencil. The rules they want to play by will end up eating them by the tail. By the time they see it coming it's too late.

jpete wrote: ...8<...It used to be true that the leader of a country was appointed by a divine being.

jpete, you got me thinking when you said that. My son said something interesting ... he said maybe they should occupy the Fed, not Wallstreet!

jpete wrote: ...8<...What do we know today that will be wrong tomorrow?

The founders were smarter than we'll ever know. They didn't want us, the voters, populating Congress. They wanted each individual state to decide who represented us at the Federal level.

I don't know how that's true.

Senators were supposed to be chosen by state legislators, but being that we live in a representative republic, where were the representatives supposed to come from if not "the voters"?

True to an extent but it was done indirectly. They were appointed by those elected to govern the state, not sent to the Federal level by popular vote. No primaries. No election. By appointment. Like judiciary terms are decided in many states and the third leg of Federal government, the Supreme Court.

... but we're going off topic...

How dare they foreclose on deadbeats! Houses should be free! How dare they refuse to let an angry mob come in and close their $50 accounts!

Maybe next time around, these people will consider banking with an institution that is based here in the United States OF America. I've heard it mentioned on the FORUM about local credit unions, a concept that I practice. What was it people, did banks like B.O.A. offer you a free toaster? Sorry, but it is a joke, unfortunatly on people like the ones shown in the above video.

These protesters never have their facts straight. I really hate to defend giant corporations but BOA didn't make 10 billion dollars according to their most recent corporate 10-k filed in Feb, 2011 for fiscal 2010. They lost 1.3 billion and paid 933 million in taxes.

To be fair: the prior year they made about 4 Bil and received 1.9 Bil in tax benefits. Unfortunately, all of the tax expense figures cited are meaningless because they represent the sum of all taxes, refunds, deferrals and advance payments occurring during the year in question. They are not necessarily matched to the income or losses. These aggregated transactions include all jurisdictions of all nations. Usually only the income earned in the US is taxed by the IRS. Similarly only the income earned in the UK is taxed only by the crown. The BOA is not required to publicly file detailed data for tax jurisdictions as it not important to the stock holder and his or her investment decisions. This doesn't mean that they didn't pay all that was required of them by the law. There is ample regulation and oversight to insure that they pay the taxes required.

The accusation of corporate tax cheat is an irresponsible charge by irresponsible rabble rousers and certain members of this forum. In general, corporations pay their required taxes. We know this from the aggregate treasury data. It isn't even a debatable issue.

The issue for the protesters is that they have nothing to complain about. They are simply an angry mob because they are spoiled and irresponsible. They need a good spanking and a real depression to wake their dumbasses up.

jpete wrote:Regulation, taxation, and subsidy are the antithesis of capitalism. I laugh when people claim we live in a capitalist country. Nothing could be further from the truth and it's been that way for nearly a century.

Capitalism is an economic system. Throughout history capitalism has been regulated, taxed and subsidized by various political systems. What you propose is capitalism under political anarchy. Anarchy is always a bad idea.

Dann757 wrote:
I see a lot of posts on other forums like:

"3 observations that are quite amusing

1. Union policeman pepper spraying left wing hippies, the fragmentation of the left brought to you by Barrack Ofailure Obama.

2. Protestors using their Iphones (Apple stock symbol AAPL) and AT and T connection (stock symbol T) to send out video to show how they are going to bring down corporations and Wall Street! LMAO, awesome plan!

3. Protestors eating Pizza Hut pizza (Yum brands stock symbol YUM) while drinking Starbucks coffee (stock symbol SBUX)

They'll teach those no good corporate bastards! Buhahahahahaha "

Your post pretty much validates my belief that the extreme luxury enjoyed by everyone in the US that has trickled down from capitalism has led to a belief among the masses that luxury is now a right of the people. This is what happens when less bright people have too much leisure time: they conjure up fantasies and delusions they might not otherwise have time for if they were actually struggling for existence.

Machiavelli wrote concerning the three types of intelligence among men:

The kind that understands things for itself—which is excellent to have. The kind that understands what others can understand—which is good to have. The kind that does not understand for itself, nor through others—which is useless to have.

When you have the third type pontificating, because they have been "educated" and "empowered" by an evil and manipulative ruling class, then ordered society is lost. The truth cannot prevail, classical liberal thought is extinguished, the masses are handily manipulated and readily give up their freedoms. The FF knew this potential under democracy which is why they opted for a republic. What is changing the game in the modern era is the use of communication by the left. As soon as they have conquered the republic, they will totally dominate the communication. See North Korea for examples.

samhill wrote:BS as always. A way with words but talk is cheap.

You are in Machiavelli's third type.

mikeandgerry wrote: Anarchy is always a bad idea.

Not necessarily.

The German philosopher Immanuel Kant defined "Anarchy" in his article about anthropology in the chapter "Freiheit und Gesetz" (http://korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.d ... 7/330.html) as follows:

A Law And Freedom without Violence (Anarchy)
B Law And Violence without Freedom (Despotism)
C Violence without Freedom And Law (Barbarism)
D Violence with Freedom And Law (Republic)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy

And while capitalism may have been somewhat regulated and taxed throughout history, it's always more successful when it is less so. When capitalism is subverted through government intervention such as subsidies or prohibitive tariffs and debasing the currency, then capitalism fails as we have seen.

lsayre wrote:We don't have anything near classical laissez faire capitalism in this country. We have a mixed economy that is closer to one third socialism, one third corpratocracy, and one third militaristic fascism.

Yes, because of politics and a sleeping electorate. The selection of US Senators by state legislatures may have helped to keep the power at the grass roots. Pity.

jpete wrote:

mikeandgerry wrote: Anarchy is always a bad idea.

Not necessarily.

The German philosopher Immanuel Kant defined "Anarchy" in his article about anthropology in the chapter "Freiheit und Gesetz" (http://korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.d ... 7/330.html) as follows:

A Law And Freedom without Violence (Anarchy)
B Law And Violence without Freedom (Despotism)
C Violence without Freedom And Law (Barbarism)
D Violence with Freedom And Law (Republic)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy

And while capitalism may have been somewhat regulated and taxed throughout history, it's always more successful when it is less so. When capitalism is subverted through government intervention such as subsidies or prohibitive tariffs and debasing the currency, then capitalism fails as we have seen.

That's all speculative.

Kant also felt that there is an absolute morality that transcends a divine power. He is quite wrong. Only men in groups, with or without a god, establish morality. Mankind must establish morality because unlike animals, men are cognitive.

Anarchy will never exist among men without violence.

Then by definition, it isn't anarchy.