The Demands of Occupy Wall Street

[WinePusher]

People at occupy wall street have released unofficial lists of demands here and there. There are apparently many out there and they don't seem to correspond to eachtother, but here's one unofficial list of demands:

-Demand 1: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending Freetrade by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.
-Demand 2: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.
-Demand 3: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.
-Demand 4: Free college education.
-Demand 5: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.
-Demand 6: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.
-Demand 7: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of Americas nuclear power plants.
-Demand 8: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.
-Demand 9: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.
-Demand 10: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.
-Demand 11: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the Books. World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the Books. And I dont mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.
-Demand 12: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.
-Demand 13: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

http://toddkinsey.com/blog/2011/10/08/o ... f-demands/

1) What do you make of these demands? Are they reasonable or unreasonable?
2) In a list of demands seperate from this list, OWS protestors have expressed disapproval towards the ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commision. Do you agree or disagree with the ruling?
3) Although absent from the list of demands, OWS have expressed disdainment towards what they percieve to be a growing gap between the top 1% of society and the remaining 99% of society. What is the truth regarding wealth and income inequality?

[JohnPaul]

Adurumus wrote:

2. Allowing student loan debt to be cleared with bankruptcy.

As noted, a lot of protestors likely are college students or graduates. The difficulties in paying back the loan. A cheaper way of saying this is "Make it easier to go to college", but that's not strong enough. The punchy version is "If I can't pay back my loans, I can't pay back my loans- excuse it on bankrupcy."

It's difficult for me to even address this second demand without spluttering all over my keyboard, but I will try to give my personal opinion.

How many college students would even attempt to pay back many thousands of dollars in student loans if they could simply declare bankruptcy and walk away from it?
How many lenders in their right mind would lend such money to a college student without some extra assurance of eventually getting their money back?

Student loans would no longer be available to anyone, and justifiably so.

I am afraid your parents are stuck with you, but if you, as an adult, honestly believe that some lender is obligated to pay your way through college and then you are entitled to simply walk away from it, then you, sir, are so lacking in basic moral character as to be beneath contempt, and there is nothing more to say about it.

Next question?

John

[WinePusher]

I, and the 99% movement protestors, would like to see this court ruling overturned and further, have it explicitly stated that corporations are not human beings. They do not have, or deserve, the intrinsic and inalieable rights that a human has.

You see, you and the wall street protestors don't understand the implications of this. If you look beyond stage one, you'd see that doing this would eliminate the ability to tax and prosecute corporations. Corporations aren't people, corporations are considered people for purposes of law. It's called legal fiction. Corporations are special in this regard. Governments are not considered people for purposes of law because it is impossible to tax governments or sue governments due to sovereign immunity.

2. Allowing student loan debt to be cleared with bankruptcy.Using this site, as credible as it is, shows the debts that are not dischargeable on declaration of bankrupcy.

Yea, student loans can't be stricken from the record by declaring bankruptcy in the same ways other forms of debt can. There's a reason for that, because education is intangible. If you declare bankruptcy, credit and collection agencies will come in and seize your assets. That is what deters people form declaring bankruptcy in the first place, on the one hand your debt is gone, on the other hand your credit is destroyed and your assets are seized. There is nothing that would deter people from arbitraily declaring bankruptcy on their student loans because the education you recieved as a result of the loan cannot be seized or taken from you.

The expectation of your wage after some amount of time would normally be your current wage plus or minus some reasonably small amount, do you agree? If you do, it follows that, in general, the rich will stay rich and the poor will stay poor. There will be some deviations from this trend of course, but it's still a trend.

The expectation is that the more experience you put into the labor market the higher your income will be. Most employed teenagers automatically fall in the bottom 1%. Ten years down the road, they will have risen out of the bottom 1% because their income will have risen due to their experience in the labor market. This defeats the myth of income immobility.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 26:

1. A constitutional amendment declaring that corporations are not people, removing money from politics.


What about this is bad? The phrase "corporations are people", seems to be coined through a 2010 Supreme Court Ruling that corporations are protected by freedom of speech. Not the people that run them in this case, but specifically corporations. There is a fear that, as time goes by, corporations will gain more and more rights and effectively become human. Mitt Romney has also borrowed the phrase.

I, and the 99% movement protestors, would like to see this court ruling overturned and further, have it explicitly stated that corporations are not human beings. They do not have, or deserve, the intrinsic and inalieable rights that a human has. Where in this do you disagree, so I may direct my argument towards those points?

That puts me in the 99% right there.

This ruling has devastating consequences for the american worker and individual.

2. Allowing student loan debt to be cleared with bankruptcy.


Using this site, as credible as it is, shows the debts that are not dischargeable on declaration of bankrupcy. Note that I use the source more as a pointing direction, not one for credibility. I can imagine that some people would take out a lot of loans for education and roll that into the ground, but why is it loans for education that are exempted? There's a lot of hardship on proving that you cannot utilize what you learned at schools. One information website jokes that being a double amputee will still not let you be excused, since technically most jobs don't really need legs, some don't need armes either.

As noted, a lot of protestors likely are college students or graduates. The difficulties in paying back the loan. A cheaper way of saying this is "Make it easier to go to college", but that's not strong enough. The punchy version is "If I can't pay back my loans, I can't pay back my loans- excuse it on bankrupcy."

I think we're seeing a situation where so many of these grads are unable to find jobs and the issue of loans is paramount, though in line with the "general grievances" of the 99%. I agree there should be something done to push these loans back at least until they find a job in their industry. I'm not for just forgiving these debts outright, as that is unfair to those who paid taxes to ensure these classes were taken with the implication there'd be another, 'better' taxpayer at the end of it.

That said, we can't stress the importance of going into university knowing what you want out of it, and if that results in a job that pays enough to pay off the debt you're incurring.

To any 99%er who hasn't volunteered to enter military service, I say you might do well to do so. We need bright, intelligent, motivated people of all races, sexes, creeds and colors to help us ensure the goals of the 99% can be met, and one way is through having our message "in the ranks".

You gain valuable scholarship benefits, earn life skills, secure liberty, add your voice to the culture, and so many more virtues as to be unlimited.

Join Now!

[nursebenjamin]

I, and the 99% movement protestors, would like to see this court ruling overturned and further, have it explicitly stated that corporations are not human beings. They do not have, or deserve, the intrinsic and inalieable rights that a human has.

You see, you and the wall street protestors don't understand the implications of this. If you look beyond stage one, you'd see that doing this would eliminate the ability to tax and prosecute corporations. Corporations aren't people, corporations are considered people for purposes of law. It's called legal fiction. Corporations are special in this regard. Governments are not considered people for purposes of law because it is impossible to tax governments or sue governments due to sovereign immunity.

This is a false dichotomy. Your argument is (correct me if Im wrong) that if political speech by corporations is restricted, then we could no longer tax and prosecute corporations. Theres no reason why we (the people) shouldnt be able to do all of the above (limit political contributions, tax, and hold corporations legally liable.)

Limiting political contributions at this point of time, in the wake of Citizens United vs. FCC and other ruling, may require a Constitutional Amendment. Limiting corporate influence of elections is something that the OWS movement, and the public in general support. According to some polls, 85% of Americans believe that corporations have too much influence over government. Im not sure how reliable these polls are, however, Ive seen nothing indicating that Americans want corporations influencing government policy.

And exactly how much corrupting influence corporations have over government is subject to debate. I argue that corporate money should not be used to purchase political influence, and that this is something We The People have choice over.

[Iolo]

Decent people? Give me a break. They're a public menace, they've vandalized the neigborhoods they protest in, and they're guilty of public displays of indecencies. Most of them are young people, in their late teens and early twenties. And it amazes how they can take weeks out of their lives to sit in a park and protest about something they don't understand. I wish I could join them, but I have a job and go to school. I guess these people don't.

You'd have been happy under the Soviet Union or Mediaeval Popery. How wonderful to believe whatever you are told by Power and hate anyone who opposes it. We call that 'serfdom' in our language.

[JohnPaul]

I have a couple of ideas to submit which I suspect will not be very popular.

The top one percent which you condemn so loudly pays 40 percent of all taxes which support our country, while more than half of the 99% pay no taxes at all. Who is contributing more to the country? I submit that America needs that one percent far more than that one percent needs America. They could easily pick up their assets and go lounge on a beach in Tahiti and let the rest of us stew in our own juices while our starved corpses rotted in the streets and our society collapsed into the Stone Age.

While you are contemplating that idea, here is another. You probably believe in the principle, ONE MAN/ONE VOTE. Why not apply the same principle to taxes and distribute taxes equally? After all, this is a democracy and we are all equal, right? I don't mean the same tax RATE, but an equal dollar AMOUNT. Think of that while you are shouting about equality.

Incidently, I am not among the one perecent. Only a few times in my working life did my income reach the top 48%, but I had the same opportunities as Bill Gates.

John

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 35:

The top one percent which you condemn so loudly pays 40 percent of all taxes which support our country, while more than half of the 99% pay no taxes at all. Who is contributing more to the country? I submit that America needs that one percent far more than that one percent needs America.

And therein lies the rub. The richest 1% don't need America, in a time when America needs them the most. That so many wealthy and well off individuals would forsake the country that provided their wealth is, if only to me, a disgusting and unconsionable state of affairs.

They could easily pick up their assets and go lounge on a beach in Tahiti and let the rest of us stew in our own juices while our starved corpses rotted in the streets and our society collapsed into the Stone Age.

Is that not what is occuring as I type?

While you are contemplating that idea, here is another. You probably believe in the principle, ONE MAN/ONE VOTE. Why not apply the same principle to taxes and distribute taxes equally? After all, this is a democracy and we are all equal, right? I don't mean the same tax RATE, but an equal dollar AMOUNT. Think of that while you are shouting about equality.

The problem here is that so many of the poor have only the one dollar to start with.

Incidently, I am not among the one perecent. Only a few times in my working life did my income reach the top 48%, but I had the same opportunities as Bill Gates.

It's good to hear you was born into a wealthy family.

Some others of us weren't.

[Goat]

I have a couple of ideas to submit which I suspect will not be very popular.

The top one percent which you condemn so loudly pays 40 percent of all taxes which support our country, while more than half of the 99% pay no taxes at all. Who is contributing more to the country? I submit that America needs that one percent far more than that one percent needs America. They could easily pick up their assets and go lounge on a beach in Tahiti and let the rest of us stew in our own juices while our starved corpses rotted in the streets and our society collapsed into the Stone Age.

While you are contemplating that idea, here is another. You probably believe in the principle, ONE MAN/ONE VOTE. Why not apply the same principle to taxes and distribute taxes equally? After all, this is a democracy and we are all equal, right? I don't mean the same tax RATE, but an equal dollar AMOUNT. Think of that while you are shouting about equality.

Incidently, I am not among the one perecent. Only a few times in my working life did my income reach the top 48%, but I had the same opportunities as Bill Gates.

John

Now, I have to object to your wording.. you are missing a word in the 'pay no tax' .. .. that is "pay no income tax. That includes much of the 1% , because many of them have their income from long term investments, rather than a salary.

This not so little characteristation sort of shows you are not using proper information

[JohnPaul]

JoeyKnothead wrote:

It's good to hear you was born into a wealthy family.

Some others of us weren't.

?????? My father owned a small farm, so we managed to survive the Great Depression without starving, but never did my father's income rise above what is now called the "poverty level." If that is what you call a wealty family, I cannot even imagine your own family's position of absolute abject degrading poverty! Fortunately, the government did not tell us back then what the poverty level was, so I enjoyed a happy childhood in spite of it.

When I retired, my income was about $42,000 per year, at that time slightly above the national median (50%) level. At some personal sacrifice, I had managed to accumulate some IRAs and had put the maximum 6% of my wages into my employer's (evil corporation) 401K plan. I was the only one in my department to do so. The others thought I was crazy, and preferred to spend their money on new cars and vacation trips. When I retired, I had managed to accumulate enough investments (evil stock market) to provide a small safety cushion, but I assure you my income now is only slightly above the so-called poverty level.

Please tell us all about your terrible suffering at your abject poverty level.

John

[nursebenjamin]

I have a couple of ideas to submit which I suspect will not be very popular.

The top one percent which you condemn so loudly pays 40 percent of all taxes which support our country, while more than half of the 99% pay no taxes at all. Who is contributing more to the country? I submit that America needs that one percent far more than that one percent needs America. They could easily pick up their assets and go lounge on a beach in Tahiti and let the rest of us stew in our own juices while our starved corpses rotted in the streets and our society collapsed into the Stone Age.

I would argue that the one percent has already done this, except they are residing in gated-communities, being entertained at exclusive clubs, as well as lounging around places such as Tahiti.

By the way, your 40 percent number isn't true.[1]