Why You Shouldn't Support Occupy Wallstreet

Troshi · Oct 25, 2011

I must say I've watched with humor as OWS has had such an effect on America as well as the internet.

As usual, upset mobs of Americans are dead set on doing the right thing, but have no idea what they are actually doing.

I just finished reading an article by my favorite investor, Alex Green.

For all of you who still believe OWS is doing any good, I hope you read this and see the logic in this.

(this is just a few snips from the full article which you can find here: http://pastebin.com/e7YRbbHi [its worth reading] )

...When a lion escapes from the zoo and injures someone, you don't blame the lion. You blame the lion keeper. Federal regulators had all the tools they needed to protect us - and failed to use them. Now they're blaming it on investment banks and "millionaires and billionaires." And the Occupy Wall Street crowd is buying it.
Aside from aiding and abetting the recent the financial crisis, Congressmen in both political parties have grossly mismanaged the nation's finances, running up trillions in debt and tens of trillions more in unfunded liabilities. (The debt now amounts to more than $1 million per taxpayer.) For a better picture of this fiasco, click here to see the National Debt Clock.

In short, rich people and Wall Street firms aren't responsible for this state of affairs. Free-spending Congressmen are. Someone should tell the Wall Street occupiers to pick up camp and move over to 1st St and East Capitol, the address of the Capitol Building.

Between protests they might also pick up a book by Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek, or Milton Friedman. According to Douglas Shoen, a former pollster for Bill Clinton, surveys of the Occupy Wall Street protesters show they overwhelmingly favor "opposition to free market capitalism and support for radical redistribution of wealth, intense regulation of the private sector and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from going overseas."

This didn't work in the 1930s. And it won't work today.

If voters, out of misguided populist anger, elect representatives who endorse these policies... well, at the very least it won't be good for your stock portfolio.

Next year's elections may well be the most important of your lifetime. Some Americans believe business is responsible for the country's economic woes. Others believe it's government.

I say, "Let's vote."

IamBob · Oct 25, 2011

I've heard that there are OWS protests in other countries as well.

IamNRE · Oct 25, 2011

Stockholm Syndrome.

Getwhatchuwant · Oct 25, 2011

In a way I agree in a way I dont. He is basically saying the abuse of the system came because the Govt did not use the tools in place to monitor and keep in check "big business".

The problem with the analogy is the "lion" in this case basically has the "lion keeper" in his back pocket. The Lion did not escape, he paid his way out.

dizz · Oct 25, 2011

The problem is the inmates run the prison big CEOs run theregulators that oversee the criminals that you call investors the system is corrupt top[ to bottom so what you do is kill the lion and lock up the keeper but you know you are listening to one of the people who is responceable for this mess
Dizz

NoirHat · Oct 25, 2011

So all the banks that did the risky mortgage deals due to greed..had nothing to do with tanking the economy?

on a side note..money does not get destroyed for the most part, it flows around.
The poor have none, the middle class live pay check to paycheck..barely. And I see rich with shop vacs just sucking up money likes mad.

How long before there are Trillionaires? Banks collecting interest with Leverage on fake money created by the fed reserve....
The rich Laugh at 5-7% annual returns that everybody else is stuck with.

Cash is flowing one way, wages aren't moving, prices are skyrocketing and people are getting Really pissed. The system needs correction.

The U.S. gov't is incompetent and/or corrupt. It's a joke

Roparadise · Oct 25, 2011

The reason the United States is having so much problems is because of the high corporate tax rate. Why would anyone want to lose 35% of their profits due to taxes,when just by doing some paperwork they can reduce it to 10% by setting up a company offshore. Currently the amount of "black money" held by U.S. corporations is at $1 trillion,and growing greatly. If that money was brought back to the U.S. for a low tax rate of 5% then there would be massive job growth.

The countries with the most problems are usually the ones with the higher tax rates.

tygrus · Oct 25, 2011

Roparadise said:
The reason the United States is having so much problems is because of the high corporate tax rate. Why would anyone want to lose 35% of their profits due to taxes,when just by doing some paperwork they can reduce it to 10% by setting up a company offshore. Currently the amount of "black money" held by U.S. corporations is at $1 trillion,and growing greatly. If that money was brought back to the U.S. for a low tax rate of 5% then there would be massive job growth.

The countries with the most problems are usually the ones with the higher tax rates.

Thats a bunch of B.S. Even if the tax rate was zero, there would be companies offshoring their operations. Its unbridled greed that drives them, nothing more.

These companies use our public roads, our public health system and a host of other services for the masses while they are earning their profits. There is nothing wrong with having them contribute back to the cause.

Troshi · Oct 25, 2011

Getwhatchuwant said:
In a way I agree in a way I dont. He is basically saying the abuse of the system came because the Govt did not use the tools in place to monitor and keep in check "big business".

The problem with the analogy is the "lion" in this case basically has the "lion keeper" in his back pocket. The Lion did not escape, he paid his way out.

I agree that to a certain extent the lion has control of the keeper, but before we got ourselves into a mess, that lion wasn't in control.

NoirHat said:
So all the banks that did the risky mortgage deals due to greed..had nothing to do with tanking the economy?

on a side note..money does not get destroyed for the most part, it flows around.
The poor have none, the middle class live pay check to paycheck..barely. And I see rich with shop vacs just sucking up money likes mad.

How long before there are Trillionaires? Banks collecting interest with Leverage on fake money created by the fed reserve....
The rich Laugh at 5-7% annual returns that everybody else is stuck with.

Cash is flowing one way, wages aren't moving, prices are skyrocketing and people are getting Really pissed. The system needs correction.

The U.S. gov't is incompetent and/or corrupt. It's a joke

The banks messed up the mortgages etc, yes they chose to do that and are at fault to a certain extent, but the government is who allowed them (freddie mac and fannie mae). The government is also what's going to allow our economy to stay down. Most importantly, people (OWS) are going to dig ourselves into an even bigger hole by supporting more government. Polls show they are for the most part in favor of more government (socialism etc). Why should we ever trust the government to play an even bigger role in our country when they have done such a pathetic job?

Ron Paul predicted this in 2002, and most OWS would call him Bat Shit Crazy, but a more libertarian government is what we need.

chano420 · Oct 25, 2011

Getwhatchuwant said:
In a way I agree in a way I dont. He is basically saying the abuse of the system came because the Govt did not use the tools in place to monitor and keep in check "big business".

The problem with the analogy is the "lion" in this case basically has the "lion keeper" in his back pocket. The Lion did not escape, he paid his way out.

If it wasnt for regulation (created by the lionkeeper) there would be nothing to "buy out" of.... We no longer practice free market capitalism. We practice crony capitalism. When this country put the free market into place the intent was never to have government deciding what interest rates could be charged, or who banks had to loan to, or which companies where "too big to fail".... This situation is 110% the fault of our government.

A corporation exists for the sole purpose of earning a profit. If government changes how they are able to do that then the good corporations will find the path of least resistence, as they should.

Roparadise · Oct 25, 2011

I think the main problems is that governments and people have not adapted to the modern era.

You can live in America,have a Bulgarian company. Employ Indians for SEO work,Romanians for programming. Products you sell are made by workers in China. And you have a Swiss bank account,with a German CFO,and a International Law firm from the United Kingdom to handle your legal issues.

Getwhatchuwant · Oct 25, 2011

chano420 said:
If it wasnt for regulation (created by the lionkeeper) there would be nothing to "buy out" of.... We no longer practice free market capitalism. We practice crony capitalism. When this country put the free market into place the intent was never to have government deciding what interest rates could be charged, or who banks had to loan to, or which companies where "too big to fail".... This situation is 110% the fault of our government.

A corporation exists for the sole purpose of earning a profit. If government changes how they are able to do that then the good corporations will find the path of least resistence, as they should.

I do see your point, do not get me wrong but there ARE regualtions in place and many for good reason.
Much of the money has been in the same hands for hundreds of years if not more. With no regulation the ones with money make the rules and not to the benefit of anyone aside from the corporation. As you mentioned a corporations sole objective is profits, so paying smaller wages, less benefit, higher work load all benefit the corp and harm the rest of the economy.

In essence because they can buy out of anything they wish, we are really experiencing what it is like with no regulation anyway. It just costs the corporations a few more dollars but the result is the same for the rest of us.

chano420 · Oct 25, 2011

NoirHat said:
So all the banks that did the risky mortgage deals due to greed..had nothing to do with tanking the economy?

You should know what you speak of before you cast such blame...

The banks did the risky mortgage deals because they were forced to by the government. Research the "Community Reinvestment Act" and what role Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac played in the crash.

While your at it, note the similarities between the mentality of the Occupy Wallstreeters to the cause of the "Community Reinvestment Act". People need to stop crying "Its not fair" and get off their ass and EARN what they feel entitled to. Gotta quit blaming the people who worked hard for their success and try to learn how they did it instead.....

chano420 · Oct 25, 2011

Getwhatchuwant said:
Much of the money has been in the same hands for hundreds of years if not more. With no regulation the ones with money make the rules and not to the benefit of anyone aside from the corporation.

Tell that to Bill Gates, Steve Jobs (RIP), and Mark Zuckerberg and the tens of thousands of people they employee. They were never handed old money, they earned it. Now they are richer than most of the people with old money....

Getwhatchuwant said:
As you mentioned a corporations sole objective is profits, so paying smaller wages, less benefit, higher work load all benefit the corp and harm the rest of the economy.

The great thing about a free market is if you dont like it you dont have to work for that company. You can go find a company that pays more and has better benefits. Or, an even better idea, you can put in 80-100 hours a week and make your own success. Thats whats great about the free market.

Troshi · Oct 25, 2011

chano420 said:
If it wasnt for regulation (created by the lionkeeper) there would be nothing to "buy out" of.... We no longer practice free market capitalism. We practice crony capitalism. When this country put the free market into place the intent was never to have government deciding what interest rates could be charged, or who banks had to loan to, or which companies where "too big to fail".... This situation is 110% the fault of our government.

A corporation exists for the sole purpose of earning a profit. If government changes how they are able to do that then the good corporations will find the path of least resistence, as they should.

This is basically what I was trying to get across. People seem to get too hung up on 'lions' and 'zookeepers' to realize what the point of it all is.

TermsB · Oct 25, 2011

It's wrong from the very beginning. The lion analogy is terrible, as a lion is a natural predator who doesn't have a set of morals that apply to a global scale. The lion keeper would obviously be the government or government officials, but what this is suggesting is that the government officials be responsible for keeping an eye on every single lion in the wild. You cannot regulate a country this big while keeping an eye on the practices of every person within it. What you can do however is hold the people accountable who know the laws, and are obviously trying to bend them in ways that they understand should be illegal, but are not yet.

You should all be able to understand this being in internet marketing. Sites may have anti-spam features in place such as captchas, however we automate it anyways. So you're still blaming the site for not protecting itself from the spam, when clearly they made the attempt and people found the loopholes. This makes zero sense.

Troshi · Oct 25, 2011

TermsB said:
It's wrong from the very beginning. The lion analogy is terrible, as a lion is a natural predator who doesn't have a set of morals that apply to a global scale. The lion keeper would obviously be the government or government officials, but what this is suggesting is that the government officials be responsible for keeping an eye on every single lion in the wild. You cannot regulate a country this big while keeping an eye on the practices of every person within it. What you can do however is hold the people accountable who know the laws, and are obviously trying to bend them in ways that they understand should be illegal, but are not yet.

You should all be able to understand this being in internet marketing. Sites may have anti-spam features in place such as captchas, however we automate it anyways. So you're still blaming the site for not protecting itself from the spam, when clearly they made the attempt and people found the loopholes. This makes zero sense.

I didn't come up with the lion analogy.

It is the government's job to keep an eye on the big banks/big businesses that have huge effects on our economy.

There are clearly loopholes in our government that companies can exploit, but the government also has power to close those loopholes up before they get out of control. I've mentioned Ron Paul already, but he was one of the few people that actually stood up against stuff like this. If we would have had a congress like Ron Paul we would have caught the bubble before it collapsed.

Roparadise · Oct 25, 2011

Troshi said:
I didn't come up with the lion analogy.

It is the government's job to keep an eye on the big banks/big businesses that have huge effects on our economy.

There are clearly loopholes in our government that companies can exploit, but the government also has power to close those loopholes up before they get out of control. I've mentioned Ron Paul already, but he was one of the few people that actually stood up against stuff like this. If we would have had a congress like Ron Paul we would have caught the bubble before it collapsed.

But how can you regulate banks,and big businesses when they can just move to another country?

Spawn · Oct 25, 2011

wall street=the Trojan horse

TermsB · Oct 25, 2011

Troshi said:
I didn't come up with the lion analogy.

It is the government's job to keep an eye on the big banks/big businesses that have huge effects on our economy.

There are clearly loopholes in our government that companies can exploit, but the government also has power to close those loopholes up before they get out of control. I've mentioned Ron Paul already, but he was one of the few people that actually stood up against stuff like this. If we would have had a congress like Ron Paul we would have caught the bubble before it collapsed.

This nor any argument (to my knowledge) for strong regulation has ever proposed a real solution to address the fact that the bureaucratic process is slow and expensive. What should be done in the mean time if you cannot hold those seeking the loopholes accountable during the times that the legislation is still in the process of being passed?

Why You Shouldn't Support Occupy Wallstreet

Supreme Member

Registered Member

Elite Member

Elite Member

Elite Member

Regular Member

BANNED

Supreme Member

Supreme Member

Regular Member

BANNED

Elite Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Supreme Member

Senior Member

Supreme Member

BANNED

BANNED

Senior Member

Main Menu

Marketplace

Making Money

BlackHat World