# \#OccupyWallStreet **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 19, 2011, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851 "2011-09-19T18:27:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 84
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1661 "2011-11-04T20:51:03Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > In my defense though I notice that you haven’t actually taken issue with anything specific that I’ve said and then requested a cite for that issue. > So far the only thing you asked me to substantiate was a “fairy tale.” This particular fairy tale: > [@Scylla](#): > > Yes, but you’ll remember that Bush involved him in the process and got his prepproval. “Preapproval” implies he had veto power, or at the very least, the power to insist on changes. That is what we have been asking for cites on, cites that do not rely on your dubious and biased recollections. Briefing the president-elect does not constitute "preapproval’. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1662 "2011-11-04T20:55:19Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > If the cite agrees with what I said why is this a problem for me? Because it fails to support your common assertion, except that Blumer, unlike canny **Scylla** , attempts to prove his specific claim (Obama is a socialist and shares blame with his fellow traveller George W. Bush for the creation of TARP). It’s unfortunate for his argument (including the part you agree with) that he does so by portraying third party spin from John Kerry as an official communique from the Obama campaign. This is ludicrous, as **elucidator** pointed out, and damages your claim, should you endorse Blumer’s argument. However, your specific point, **Scylla** , was that G. W. Bush “involved [Obama] in the process” of creating TARP “and got his [preapproval].” You’ve lately clarified this claim as follows: > [@Scylla](#): > > Bush started the Tarp, but because it wod have to be continued by Obama, both wanted a continuous. Coordinated plan. So, bush worked with the transition team, so that it was bipartisan. The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was signed into law by Bush in early _October_ 2008. The Obama transition team, being limp-wristed wussies (this was before they turned into socialist muslim Demoncrats), waited until _after_ the November elections before they began working directly with Bush and Paulsen. It’s true that Senator Obama took at least as active a role in discussions within Congress and with the Executive branch as any legislator at the time. It’s also fair to say that the Obama team began exerting influence over the execution of the program even prior to his inauguration. But it is not accurate to say that Obama was given more of a hearing by the White House or allowed any special approval authority over any of the law’s provisions during the legislative phase. > [@](#): > > You don’t fucking remember any of this at all? Not quite the way you do, apparently. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1663 "2011-11-04T20:56:37Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > …reinstate Glass-Steagal (the repealing thereof was pretty much responsible for most of the recent financial bullshit bubbles; this should be a no-brainer to _everyone_ in politics), While symptomatic of the free market deregulatory attitudes that facilitated this fustercluck, I am not sure where permitting various types of financial instititutions to be owned by the same entity was the cause of most of this crisis. A better culprit would be the Commodities Exchange Act that prohibits government bureaucrats from regulating derivatives like credit default swaps. > [@](#): > > raise taxes to what they were under _Reagan_, close blatantly abused tax code loopholes… This shit is not unreasonable. It should be fucking obvious to the government. there are general anti-abuse rules that are supposed to close abusive tax shelters but the problem is that the biggest tax loopholes are based around things like preferential capital gains and dividend treatment. [quote] Again, I don’t know how I can explain this to you: _the system has failed_. In the USA, Wall Street _has_ fucked Main Street up the ass, and now these people, who have worked their asses off and, for some bizarre reason, _still failed_, are pissed. QUOTE] Its an underlying sense of persistent inequity in the system. See the ultimatum game. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1664 "2011-11-04T20:58:34Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > … not getting a cite because I don’t take you seriously as debaters… Oh, the starched piety! _C’est les hors puckque_! You answer people that you clearly hold in contempt, you’re not looking for a fair fight, you’re looking to win. You don’t pass up an opportunity to piss on somebody if you’re sure you’re smarter than they are, and can easily prove it. When someone can punch in your weight class, well… Its not the size of the ego so much as how it eats. Yours is predatory. Be warned: if it can’t feed on others, it will feed on you. Or worse, those you love. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1665 "2011-11-04T20:59:25Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > This particular fairy tale: > “Preapproval” implies he had veto power, or at the very least, the power to insist on changes. That is what we have been asking for cites on, cites that do not rely on your dubious and biased recollections. Briefing the president-elect does not constitute "preapproval’. Oh. So you really don’t want a cite. What you have is a semantic complaint. You believe the word preapproval does not accurately describe what occured because of a lack of veto power. It seems to me that you really don’t want a cite. What you wish to do is make an argument that may necessitate a clarification, restatement, retraction, or what have you. Why on earth would you ask for a cite on this? Why not simply take issue with the word preapproval. I admit the argument you’ve made against the word is a good one. Preapproval is likely to strong a description. I can’t fucking figure out why on earth you would ask for a cite on this. We substantially agree on what occured we just differ on what it means or constitutes. Oh well. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1666 "2011-11-04T21:00:22Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > You place no blame on the people who actually took the loans out? It’s all the fault of the big bad banks, who put a gun to the heads of the borrowers? > > How about all the other Dem groups, including ACORN, who sued banks, accusing them of redlining? Therefore resulting in more loans to people who had no business owning houses (because, after all, it’s the American dream.. what are you, racist?..) > > Hell, your boy Obama was even involved in one of those suits in 1994, a class action against Citibank. Look up Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011 sometime. > > Sub-prime loans were the stuff of which the toxic derivatives were made, and it was not some idle whim or fancy of the bankers that led to the proliferation of sub-prime loans. The majority of subprime mortgages were originated by folks who were not subject to CRA. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1667 "2011-11-04T21:03:01Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Its not the size of the ego so much as how it eats. Yours is predatory. Be warned: if it can’t feed on others, it will feed on you. Or worse, those you love. Eat me? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1668 "2011-11-04T21:11:54Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Yes. I have plenty of blame. One of the biggest villains is Stan O’neill. > He should be put in prison. Here’s the thing though, largely the decisions were made at the executive level. Everybody in the entire industry has been vilified for their actions. I have a lot of family and friends in the industry and they are almost without exception smart, rational, hard working group of people. But they tend to be greedy, short sighted and self entitled. I don’t blame them for the mess but these are the sort of people that gravitate towards and thrive in that industry. Their natural inclinations make this sort of crisis inevitable unless they are regulated and they don’t like to be regulated. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1669 "2011-11-04T21:18:19Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > You’re fucking kidding, right? > > You’re saying the invisible hand makes all transactions turn out super, and free market theory fails if they all don’t. > > That is what you said, what I laughed at and you reiterated, right? > > And you are claiming to be an economist or some kind of economic expert? > > I just want to triple check that this is what you are really claiming. I didn’t think he was saying that eery single transaction works out super. But that these transactions in the aggregate are supposed work out well. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1670 "2011-11-04T21:24:58Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > I can’t fucking figure out why on earth you would ask for a cite on this. This wasn’t addressed to me, but I’ll offer the observation that your assertion regarding the level of Obama’s involvement in TARP was a rejoinder to **gonzomax** ’s rebuttal of a previous criticim you offered regarding Obama’s job performance as Chief Executive: > [@Scylla](#): > > Anyway, so after he gets elected what happens? Well, effectively he just continues the policies of the previous administration. He keeps fighting the wars. He keeps Gitmo open. _ **He continues TARP** _ and even keeps some of the same guys in charge of fixing the economy… (emphasis added) > [@gonzomax](#): > > TARP was in effect . it was sold as the savior of the American economy. he could not kill it. It was voted in by congress and the senate. > [@Scylla](#): > > Yes, but you’ll remember that Bush involved him in the process and got his prepproval. So the question of Obama being an architect and special preapprover of TARP rather than being the executive inheritor of the program is not an overly fine distinction; this is central to your rebuttal of **gonzo** ’s point, and in my opinion its counterfactuality destroys that rebuttal. In fact, **gonzo** was correct; Obama had no unilateral option other than to execute TARP within the guidelines of the first division of Public Law 110-343 (Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008). ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1671 "2011-11-04T21:26:12Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > Because it fails to support your common assertion, except that Blumer, unlike canny **Scylla** , attempts to prove his specific claim (Obama is a socialist and shares blame with his fellow traveller George W. Bush for the creation of TARP). It’s unfortunate for his argument (including the part you agree with) that he does so by portraying third party spin from John Kerry as an official communique from the Obama campaign. This is ludicrous, as **elucidator** pointed out, and damages your claim, should you endorse Blumer’s argument. > > However, your specific point, **Scylla** , was that G. W. Bush “involved [Obama] in the process” of creating TARP “and got his [preapproval].” You’ve lately clarified this claim as follows: > > The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was signed into law by Bush in early _October_ 2008. The Obama transition team, being limp-wristed wussies (this was before they turned into socialist muslim Demoncrats), waited until _after_ the November elections before they began working directly with Bush and Paulsen. > > It’s true that Senator Obama took at least as active a role in discussions within Congress and with the Executive branch as any legislator at the time. It’s also fair to say that the Obama team began exerting influence over the execution of the program even prior to his inauguration. But it is not accurate to say that Obama was given more of a hearing by the White House or allowed any special approval authority over any of the law’s provisions during the legislative phase. > > Not quite the way you do, apparently. Yeahhhhhh. Not quite the same. I notice in that narrative you provided you completely ommitted the part that I talked about which was where Bush offered to take direction from Obama and ask Congress for more funds if Obama wanted him to. Obama did and Bush did. That would seem to imply a bit higher of a level of participation than what your narrative describes, don’t you think? I have another question. If Bush asked Obama whether he should try and get more money before he did it, what would you call that? There’s a word I’m looking for. What is it? Oh yeah! “Preapproval.” Funny how that works out. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1672 "2011-11-04T21:28:41Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > This wasn’t addressed to me, but I’ll offer the observation that your assertion regarding the level of Obama’s involvement in TARP was a rejoinder to **gonzomax** ’s rebuttal of a previous criticim you offered regarding Obama’s job performance as Chief Executive: > > (emphasis added) > > So the question of Obama being an architect and special preapprover of TARP rather than being the executive inheritor of the program is not an overly fine distinction; this is central to your rebuttal of **gonzo** ’s point, and in my opinion its counterfactuality destroys that rebuttal. > > In fact, **gonzo** was correct; Obama had no unilateral option other than to execute TARP within the guidelines of the first division of Public Law 110-343 (Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008). I guess if there wasn’t preaprroval as I’ve described, and if there hadn’t been a QE2, and talk of a Qe3 than you would probably be correct. Since all these things actually happened, I think I am correct. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1673 "2011-11-04T21:35:48Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > There’s a word I’m looking for. What is it? > Oh yeah! “Preapproval.” > Funny how that works out. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. The discussion regarding the request for more money was part of the administration of the _already created_ program by the outgoing Chief Executive in cooperation with his elected successor. That doesn’t show _preapproval_ of anything, it shows proper transitional coordination of executive details during a change of administrations. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1674 "2011-11-04T21:37:17Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I have a lot of family and friends in the industry and they are almost without exception smart, rational, hard working group of people. But they tend to be greedy, short sighted and self entitled. I don’t blame them for the mess but these are the sort of people that gravitate towards and thrive in that industry. Their natural inclinations make this sort of crisis inevitable unless they are regulated and they don’t like to be regulated. Small sample, anecdotal, and corellation does not equal causation, to boot. Maybe all you just come from a selfish family and hang out in a neighborhood of selfish people. Maybe you belong to an unusually selfish ethnic group. Anyway, your characterization of those in the finance industry differs from my experience. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1675 "2011-11-04T21:47:30Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > No. That’s not the origin of my claim. The origin of my claim is having been alive and having paid attention, and being able to remember what happened a mere three years ago. > > Bush started the Tarp, but because it wod have to be continued by Obama, both wanted a continuous. Coordinated plan. So, bush worked with the transition team, so that it was bipartisan. Later Bush offered to ask Congess for an additional 3 billion or so if Obama wanted it. He did, so Bush did. > > I think Geitner kept on two of Bush’s team so that their would be consistency. It was a pretty decent example of cooperation and bipartisanship. > > You don’t fucking remember any of this at all? Your memory is faulty. TARP was proposed late Septmber 2008 and was signed into law less than a week later. Obama was not the President elect yet. At this point we had already bailed out Bear Staerns, AIG, put pressure on B of A to buy Merril Lynch. Obama supported TARP (as did McCain) but was not consulted in the drafting of the bill or given a tacit veto, neither was McCain. He might have differed in the details of how he ahndled TARP (I vastly prefer how Obama handled the GM bailout (make the equity worthless and pay the bondholders pennies on the dollar (but still better than they would do in chapter 11), so I suspect he would not have made AIG creditors whole, paying them 100 cents on the dollar but then again he wasn’t the former chariman of Goldman Sachs either) but he supported the principle of doing something rather than taking a laissez faire approach to the whole mess. Part of the frustration seen in OWS is the result of large efforts made to rescue walls treet from failure through tarp and then very little done to punish wall street for doing this to us or to regulate or reign in wall street excess. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1676 "2011-11-04T21:48:47Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. > The discussion regarding the request for more money was part of the administration of the _already created_ program by the outgoing Chief Executive in cooperation with his elected successor. That doesn’t show _preapproval_ of anything, it shows proper transitional coordination of executive details during a change of administrations. Oh geez. Hmmm. Ok. if Bush says “Hey Obama! You want think I should go and get some more buckaroos for this tarp thingie?” and Obama says “Yes, please.” Then it seems to me that Obama would have **i** approved\*\* that part of Tarp before Bush did it. Yes? But that’s not a “preapproval?” * * * Listen, let us abandon semantics and reason together. The amount of control Obama had, and the degree of input that Obama had on Tarp is arguable. When push comes to shove it is strictly notional since Obama had no real control other than what Bush decided to give him, up until the day he was elected. On the other side of the coin Obama was consulted. He did have an input. His advice was asked for and followed, and he didn’t change things very much, if at all, that I can see after he was elected. Then, on his own, he went and did a round two on his own. So, the idea that they were note basically of two minds and that it wasn’t bipartisan is not really supportable by the evidence. Gonzo’s thesis seems to be that Bush forced the evil Tarp down Obama’s throat and he had no say in it. Apparently it tasted so bad that he did a QE2 on his own. How that would work, I don’t know. Gonzo never really seemed to wrap his head around the concept enough to answer it. Now, if you think that makes sense and you stand with Gonzo on it, more power to you. It is a precarious rhetorical position. You are a brave man fro standing there. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1677 "2011-11-04T21:54:09Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Your memory is faulty. TARP was proposed late Septmber 2008 and was signed into law less than a week later. Obama was not the President elect yet. > > Obama supported TARP (as did McCain) but was not consulted in the drafting of the bill or given a tacit veto, neither was McCain. I remember correctly. Both candidates were consulted and preapproved TARP before Bush went public with it (I recall McCain being a bit of a bitch about it,) because it was important that this be bipartisan. Again, how much control Obama had over this is subject for debate. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2011, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1678 "2011-11-04T22:46:15Z")
> [@](#): > > Gonzo’s thesis seems to be that Bush forced the evil Tarp down Obama’s throat and he had no say in it. Apparently it tasted so bad that he did a QE2 on his own. How that would work, I don’t know. Gonzo never really seemed to wrap his head around the concept enough to answer it. > > Now, if you think that makes sense and you stand with Gonzo on it, more power to you. > > It is a precarious rhetorical position. You are a brave man fro standing there. Bravery has nothing to do with it. I take no stand on **gonzo** ’s larger point regarding BHO’s philosophical alignment with TARP, other than to say I see no fundamental dischord between Obama’s stated positions and the general idea behind TARP. In that sense, you are more correct than **gonzo**. My only point is that your narrow assertion regarding Obama’s involvement in the creation of TARP is incorrect, and that it fails to support your broader statements regarding Obama’s discretionary continuance of Bush programs. In that sense, **gonzo** is more correct than you are. > [@](#): > > Both candidates were consulted and preapproved TARP before Bush went public with it (I recall McCain being a bit of a bitch about it,) because it was important that this be bipartisan. This is inexact. Since “TARP” is merely the US Treasury program authorized by the Act signed into law by Bush, you’re correct in the sense that both campaigns were consulted to a degree by the outgoing administration prior to implementation/rollout of the program. But this does not mean that any party had control of said implementation beyond the limits prescribed by the legislation, nor does it mean that any prior or subsequent consultations by the Bush administration with acting US Senators (POTUS candidates or not) had any procedural clout over the provisions of the law. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2011, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1679 "2011-11-05T00:38:03Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > While symptomatic of the free market deregulatory attitudes that facilitated this fustercluck, I am not sure where permitting various types of financial instititutions to be owned by the same entity was the cause of most of this crisis. A better culprit would be the Commodities Exchange Act that prohibits government bureaucrats from regulating derivatives like credit default swaps. I was under the impression that Glass-Steagal was also what prevented, say, speculating on Oil or Gold or other real, tangible goods and in doing so driving up the price immensely. I may be wrong. > [@](#): > > Its an underlying sense of persistent inequity in the system. > > See the ultimatum game. Because there _is_ an underlying, persistent inequity in the system. Upwards mobility in the USA is basically a joke; it has almost reached the point where if you’re born poor, you are as guaranteed to die poor as the farmers in the dark ages. We’re clearly not quite there, and it is _possible_ to be that 1 in a million rags to riches poster child, but it requires more luck than skill or work. The sooner people realize this and start demanding things like, say, I dunno, _the fucking Estate Tax_ back, the sooner we’ll get to the level of income equality that most of the rest of the first world is at. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2011, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/1680 "2011-11-05T02:00:01Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > What _would_ you recommend? I mean, for fuck’s sake, the media for all intents and purposes _completely ignored_ the public occupation movement until it was about a month in. Instant media? I hate to break it to you, but a group of tweets, facebook status updates, and youtube clips is not going to change things in any meaningful way. They’re incredibly easy to overlook and ignore. 20,000 people squatting in Times Square? Not so much. No, I’m sorry, there _still_ is no other effective, let alone better, way of making the government see than public protests, unless I’m missing something. There’s a big difference between watching a CNN report about a group on facebook with 200,000 likes that decries the actions of wall street and having to drive past a group of 20,000 protesters every day on your way to and from work. I think you miss the point. They are totally dismissable for the actual protests. They only start to be meaningful through the media. It’s the media not the protests that matter. > [@](#): > > It’s not just guys in Art History. It’s also, you know, pretty much everyone else. > > [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfjdP9K0UWI](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfjdP9K0UWI) > > Again, first half of this vid most definitely related. The basic gist of it is that a lot of people bought into the “Go to college, get a somewhat sensible degree, and you’re _bound_ to find a job somehow” story, which… suddenly collapsed around 2006. Now they’ve sunk years of their life and tens of thousands of dollars into a degree that may or may not help them even get off the ground. Hell, the guy speaking has a degree in biology and genetics, and _he_ can’t find a job worth a damn. You gonna count Genetic Biology to the same category as Art History? Never mind that when he started his degree, it was _the shit_ and basically guaranteed you a job in that field. > > What with their underwater mortgages that obviously every idiot could’ve seen coming? Like, my dad’s house? > > Uh… no. They never failed. They went to college. They more often than not chose a sensible degree. They worked hard and did what they could. But then the system turned around and kicked them out on their asses. When a man with a PhD can’t find a job, what exactly did he fail? > > And some of you are morons who can’t see the overarching problem. Again, if you’re stuck in a shit situation and you aren’t angry and frustrated, you’re stupid. I personally have no right to complain–I live in Germany, and Germany is actually doing really, really well. But those guys who believed the story that their parents told them, who went to college, busted their asses, succeeded, and _still got fucked by the system_ because the financial and political institutions are broken to hell and back? They have every right to be angry, and every right to demand change to that system. We are, after all, a fucking democracy. > > And their demands aren’t even too extravagant–pull the ridiculous amount of corporate money out of politics, reinstate Glass-Steagal (the repealing thereof was pretty much responsible for most of the recent financial bullshit bubbles; this should be a no-brainer to _everyone_ in politics), raise taxes to what they were under _Reagan_, close blatantly abused tax code loopholes… This shit is not unreasonable. It should be fucking obvious to the government. But no, they’re just commie fags bitching because they failed somehow, because every one of them majored in women’s studies or art history or homeopathy and fucked themselves. :rolleyes: Yeahhh. I hear what you are saying. I don’t see it like that. Probably the most important thing that ever happened to me in my life is when I got 3rd degree burns over both my hands as a child. I spent about 6 weeks in the worst agony that I think a human being can suffer. I’m not trying to be hyperbolous here. I think that’s a fact. The pain would come in waves and it would seem like after a time the pain would be so bad that it would overwhelm the nervous system until things recovered enough for me to hurt some more. It was a fundamental, life changing experience. After that, I kind of understood that the world was not my friend. I’m kind of surprised that most people I meet tend to think that the world is their friend and the natural state of things is comfort and ease. I run marathons and ultramarathons to keep discipline and remind me of what it is like to suffer. I think suffering is fundamental to the human animal, the natural state of affairs and something to get used to. What I know for a fact from those weeks of agony and from those ultra marathons is that focussing on the pain, thinking about it, feeling sorry for yourself, it all makes it worse. On the other hand, realizing that pain and suffering is natural and just another feeling and really no different from pleasure, or hot, or cold… that gives you strength. So, I think about the fossils of ancient man who were dug up with these terrible injuries that they carried with them for years, injuries that frankly because of their mind set they probably didn’t notice. I think of people who suffered real hardship without questioning it, the Okies in the dust bowl. I think about our forefathers who fought for freedom, the generation that fought wwII. I think about my father who died suffering from cancer brought on most likely from agent orange, who suffered agonies that I think few people have suffered, and did it without complaint. I think of my grandfather who went insane with alzheimers and my grandmother who went insane because even though her mind was intact, her body failed her, and after two years in bed, she lost her mind. I think of my mother’s cancer. I think of the cancer and the suffering that is waiting for me. I think of what is waiting for us all, because, as Jim Morrisson said “no one hear gets out of life.” When i think of that, I think that’s what’s really to be feared in life. The suffering that most of us have lived our lives without ever feeling (but the fucking check is in the mail, you better believe that,) but that most every other generation in the world has felt. Then I think of these occupy sons of bitches. They are upset because their college education isn’t worth what they thought it was, and they can’t get a management job right out of school. Or that their job isn’t good enough. Or, that they didn’t really pay attention and do their due diligence when they took out a mortgage… and, by comparison, I don’t really feel sorry or bad for any of them. I just don’t. I look at the tape and for the most part there is a bunch of really healthy people who have been afforded every opportunity and are sitting at what is basically the apex of human comfort and luxury… and they are ungrateful. To have been born in the 20th century in a country like this is automatically to live better than the kings of 1000 years ago. With all the advantages, you would think that anybody but the most incompetant person would be immediately grateful. The mexicans that come to this country sure are. As are many asians. They know what suffering and repression is. They are not playing. The very fact that the Occupy people have the LUXURY to camp out in a park for months on end is testament to their privileged status. What they really want… is more. They are pissed that others have more. I am really just filled with fucking contempt for them. * * * Ok. Now that I got that off my chest, I will admit that I am atypical. Unusual. My experience is unusual. It may have colored me and made me a little insane, a little unsympathetic, and given me some weird views on suffering that an undamaged individidual might not have. I concede that as a possibility. But there is a part of my brain, one that I don’t listen to at my own hazard, a part that is cynical and usually correct. That part tells me that my view is the correct one. That pain and suffering or the norm, and any moment without them is a blessing, and those that complain over little things are damned. * * * And, let’s face another fact. There are plenty of jobs out there. Mexican immigrants know this. One of our big problems as a country is that we think we are entitled to a good job, that is rewarding, and pays well. Sometimes though, you need to mow lawns or flip burgers. Sorry but that’s the sad side of the American dream. You have to earn it. The other sad part is that even if you work hard and do everything right, you can still get fucked. That’s life and it ain’t fair. All the camping out in a park and eating delivery pizza isn’t going to change that. > [@](#): > > … > > [World in a Day 2022 - Supporting #DoddieAid](http://obamaachievements.org/list) > > You’re a moron. Obama has been _incredibly_ effective, while being dogged by needing 60% on _every_ vote (yep, no blame on the idiots in the Republican party there) _in his first two years_. If he passes anything worthwhile or sensible before 2012, I’ll be fucking shocked–after all, to quote the leaders of the house, their goal is to make Obama a one-term president, not _actually solve our problems_. I thought you were in Germany. FYI, things haven’t massively improved in ole USA since Obama took office. I don’t blame him. Maybe things will get better down the road. But, so, far, none of the shit that he’s done has really helped anybody. Yet. So I reserve judgement on his effectiveness. > [@](#): > > That reminds me of a great sign I saw: “Those who say we have no goals is either lying or can’t read”. Yeah, but all the signs all say something different. Give me a break. > [@](#): > > Again, I don’t know how I can explain this to you: _the system has failed_. In the USA, Wall Street _has_ fucked Main Street up the ass, and now these people, who have worked their asses off and, for some bizarre reason, _still failed_, are pissed. > > Dammit dude, what you seem to be missing is that they’re not hiding from responsibility. Their situation just sucks. What responsibilities? The responsibility to pay off their debts? No shit–they can’t find a job. They’re not hiding, they’re not shirking, they simply cannot fulfill it because the systems in place to help them fulfill it got destroyed. Again, I fail to see how we’re living the American dream when educated, bright young people can work their asses off, get through college, and _still_ can’t find a job. And then suddenly because you can, you didn’t get lucky, you just worked harder? That’s bullshit and you know it. There are other places where these problems don’t exist. Germany. Denmark. Sweden. There is no reason our income inequality should be on par with the third world rather than the old world. There is no reason that our financial sector should be able to jack up the price of oil by investing in it. There is _no reason_ that we should have lower tax rates on the upper brackets than anywhere else in the world, and demand higher taxes on the 49% who barely earn enough to live. The system is flawed, fucked, and does not work, and if you succeeded, it’s because you got in before everything broke down, or you got very, _very_ lucky. I’m not going to repeat what I said before. I just simply these claims of suffering and injustice to be particularly compelling. History is full of people who have suffered far worse without blaming somebody else and who have done something to improve their situation. I am not impressed by the “suffering” and these whiny entitled people who have no idea how good they have it. [/quote] Actually, “jobs” was in there. Do me a favor and actually watch it, you moron. [/QUOTE] FUCK! FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCKITY FUCK!!! I missed that. Fuck! I did that to myself, didnt’t I? I deserved that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851.md?page=83) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851.md?page=85)