• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the OWS against Capitalism?

Is the OWS Movement against Capitalism?

  • Total voters
    69
99percenter said:
OWS isnt against capitalism. They are against an unfair tax system that allows wealthy that allows wealthy to pay less taxes than them. They are against "too big to fail." Where were the main st bailouts? Wall st got bailed out. They want campaign finance reform, progressive tax system, reinstatement of glass-steagall act, etc. This isn't some anti capitalist movement. What we have in the US isnt capitalism. Its Socialism for the wealthy.
Click to expand...

LOL!!!

Yeah right.

They also want school loans forgiven. They want a tax on all financial transactions. They even want to cut off the heads of the rich.

Dude, these useful idiots don't know WHAT they want.
 
Mycroft said:
Dude, these useful idiots don't know WHAT they want.
Click to expand...

They want to retain a middle class in this country.............OMG its horrible!!!! Who do they think they are??? LOL!
 
Catawba said:
They want to retain a middle class in this country.............OMG its horrible!!!! Who do they think they are??? LOL!
Click to expand...
It is pretty selfish and greedy to want student loans to be forgiven.

I thought they were protesting against greed?
 
Catawba said:
They want to retain a middle class in this country.............OMG its horrible!!!! Who do they think they are??? LOL!
Click to expand...

I don't know how you can say that. I can find 50 things they say they want...some of them contradictory, some of them asinine, some of them unrealistic as hell. And yet, YOU say they want to retain the middle class.

Give me a break from the stupidity, eh?

Just admit that every one of the hundreds of OWSers want what they individually want and the Occupy movement is a chance for them to vent. None of them are going to get what they want.

But that's okay, dude. The useful idiots are just doing what those who control them want...except they aren't getting their heads busted.

THAT'S why this whole spectacle will fail.
 
Camlon said:
It is pretty selfish and greedy to want student loans to be forgiven.

I thought they were protesting against greed?
Click to expand...

They are.

The problem is, that to them, wanting to be allowed to keep what is rightfully yours is “greed”, while wanting to take what rightfully belongs to someone else is not.
 
Mycroft said:
LOL!!!

Yeah right.

They also want school loans forgiven. They want a tax on all financial transactions. They even want to cut off the heads of the rich.

Dude, these useful idiots don't know WHAT they want.
Click to expand...

Why not? Wall st gets bailed out. Why not main st?
 
99percenter said:
Why not? Wall st gets bailed out. Why not main st?
Click to expand...

I don't think Wall St. should have been bailed out. Or Main St.

The Federal Government has no business bailing anyone out.


btw, Main St. DID get bailed out...it was called the Stimulus Plan. Problem is...the money was misspent and wasted. By Obama and his Democratic buddies.
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
I don't think Wall St. should have been bailed out. Or Main St.

The Federal Government has no business bailing anyone out.


btw, Main St. DID get bailed out...it was called the Stimulus Plan. Problem is...the money was misspent and wasted. By Obama and his Democratic buddies.
Click to expand...

The stimulus didnt bail out main st. Quit spewing lies. All it did was give money to corrupt bureaucrats.
 
99percenter said:
The stimulus didnt bail out main st. Quit spewing lies. All it did was give money to corrupt bureaucrats.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and if those "corrupt bureaucrats" weren't saved, JP Morgan, BOA, Ford, and most of the corporate structure in the US would have failed, leading into a depression.
Instead of railing against Wall Street like an idiot, why don't you actually think about the consequences if Wall Street wasn't saved?
They might be corrupt, but they're necessary. Kind of how you hate tigers if they kill a family member, but they're necessary to the environment.
 
Proud South Korean said:
Yeah, and if those "corrupt bureaucrats" weren't saved, JP Morgan, BOA, Ford, and most of the corporate structure in the US would have failed, leading into a depression.
Instead of railing against Wall Street like an idiot, why don't you actually think about the consequences if Wall Street wasn't saved?
They might be corrupt, but they're necessary. Kind of how you hate tigers if they kill a family member, but they're necessary to the environment.
Click to expand...

Ford didnt get any money and i supported the GM bailout. Im not against people making money. Im however against the govt subsidizing losses for the wealthy. The problem with the stimulus was that it was more tax cuts than spending and money was giving to the states instead of federal govt directly spending it. That just adds a level of unneeded bureaucracy and liberal economists like krugman opposed it. And your tiger analogy makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
Proud South Korean said:
Yeah, and if those "corrupt bureaucrats" weren't saved, JP Morgan, BOA, Ford, and most of the corporate structure in the US would have failed, leading into a depression.
Instead of railing against Wall Street like an idiot, why don't you actually think about the consequences if Wall Street wasn't saved?
They might be corrupt, but they're necessary. Kind of how you hate tigers if they kill a family member, but they're necessary to the environment.
Click to expand...
I completely agree, but there was an option.

The government could have nationalized the banks, and given out small loans to the ones who have better liquidity. In this way, the bad banks would have been punished for their behavior. And the government could have sold the banks afterwards to the highest bidder.

However they banks were saved to save Americans. That is no reason to forgive student debt because of that. And that the students in OWS support it, show me that this protest has a lot to do with greed. The greed of bankers, and the greed of the students.
 
99percenter said:
The stimulus didnt bail out main st. Quit spewing lies. All it did was give money to corrupt bureaucrats.
Click to expand...

Your right. The stimulus DIDN'T bail out Main St...but it was supposed to. You can thank Obama for that one.
 
99percenter said:
Ford didnt get any money and i supported the GM bailout. Im not against people making money. Im however against the govt subsidizing losses for the wealthy. The problem with the stimulus was that it was more tax cuts than spending and money was giving to the states instead of federal govt directly spending it. That just adds a level of unneeded bureaucracy and liberal economists like krugman opposed it. And your tiger analogy makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Sorry, mistaken Ford for GM.
My point is that the poor needs the wealthy to live. I'm not inciting class warfare, I said numerous times how both sides need each other.
Just imagine a US without its major corporations, banks, companies, partnerships, etc... Millions will be unemployed, foreign governments and corporations will gobble up the US like never before, and there will be chaos.
Sorry about that analogy. I need to work on something more. Its basic point is how no matter how much you hate it, you shouldn't destroy it because it's necessary. A better one would be how anarchists hate government, but can't survive without one.
Tolerate it
 
99percenter said:
The problem with the stimulus was that it was more tax cuts than spending and money was giving to the states instead of federal govt directly spending it. That just adds a level of unneeded bureaucracy and liberal economists like krugman opposed it. And your tiger analogy makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Actually a lot of the money was directly spend by the government. Just think about Solyndra, and the big banks that got bailed out.

Why shouldn't states spend some of the stimulus, do you think federal government always knows what is best for the states?
 
Mycroft said:
Your right. The stimulus DIDN'T bail out Main St...but it was supposed to. You can thank Obama for that one.
Click to expand...
I am sorry. Obama may have parts of the blame, but Bush created TARP, and those hidden bank bailouts that are 10 times the size of Tarp.
 
Proud South Korean said:
Sorry, mistaken Ford for GM.
My point is that the poor needs the wealthy to live. I'm not inciting class warfare, I said numerous times how both sides need each other.
Just imagine a US without its major corporations, banks, companies, partnerships, etc... Millions will be unemployed, foreign governments and corporations will gobble up the US like never before, and there will be chaos.
Sorry about that analogy. I need to work on something more. Its basic point is how no matter how much you hate it, you shouldn't destroy it because it's necessary. A better one would be how anarchists hate government, but can't survive without one.
Tolerate it
Click to expand...

I have no problems with corporations like intel, msft, google, etc. that make money of off innovation, but i dont believe banks have a right to profit and create money out of thin air. Thats what created these bubbles and collapses. They were profiting of of things that just werent there. Hence peoples savings get wiped out and students cant find jobs to pay off loans.
 
Mycroft said:
Your right. The stimulus DIDN'T bail out Main St...but it was supposed to. You can thank Obama for that one.
Click to expand...

It wasn't supposed to bail out anyone. It was supposed to create demand and get money flowing again in the economy. Unfortunately obama borrowed a failed right wing theory that tax cuts do that. They don't. Spending does that.
 
99percenter said:
I have no problems with corporations like intel, msft, google, etc. that make money of off innovation, but i dont believe banks have a right to profit and create money out of thin air. Thats what created these bubbles and collapses. They were profiting of of things that just werent there. Hence peoples savings get wiped out and students cant find jobs to pay off loans.
Click to expand...

I do agree regulations on banks needs to be tightened, yet consider this. They are the financiers, the ones that run the financial system.
I know how many of their business are corrupt, yet that doesn't mean that the banking system should fail. What about welfare checks that are taken advantage of? The banking system is just like any other system, it has its corruption (more than most, but then again, it brings more benefits than most other political, social, or economic systems), but that's no reason why it should be abolished
 
Proud South Korean said:
I do agree regulations on banks needs to be tightened, yet consider this. They are the financiers, the ones that run the financial system.
I know how many of their business are corrupt, yet that doesn't mean that the banking system should fail. What about welfare checks that are taken advantage of? The banking system is just like any other system, it has its corruption (more than most, but then again, it brings more benefits than most other political, social, or economic systems), but that's no reason why it should be abolished
Click to expand...

Welfare checks getting abused doesnt create financial collapses that we saw in 08. Banks buying and selling worthless assets does. In iceland this created debt that was larger than there economy. Banks should be making minimal profit. Just pay operating costs, salaries, etc. and be done with it.
 
Camlon said:
I am sorry. Obama may have parts of the blame, but Bush created TARP, and those hidden bank bailouts that are 10 times the size of Tarp.
Click to expand...

Tarp = Wall St. bailout.

Stimulus = Main St. bailout.

Tarp worked. (though it cost too much) Stimulus didn't.

Neither should have been enacted.
 
99percenter said:
It wasn't supposed to bail out anyone. It was supposed to create demand and get money flowing again in the economy. Unfortunately obama borrowed a failed right wing theory that tax cuts do that. They don't. Spending does that.
Click to expand...

It was supposed to create jobs. Remember the "unemployment won't be over 8%"?

It didn't.
 
Mycroft said:
Tarp = Wall St. bailout.

Stimulus = Main St. bailout.

Tarp worked. (though it cost too much) Stimulus didn't.

Neither should have been enacted.
Click to expand...

The only thing tarp did right was save the auto industry.
 
99percenter said:
I have no problems with corporations like intel, msft, google, etc. that make money of off innovation, but i dont believe banks have a right to profit and create money out of thin air. Thats what created these bubbles and collapses. They were profiting of of things that just werent there. Hence peoples savings get wiped out and students cant find jobs to pay off loans.
Click to expand...

Problem is, people like you get equally mad when you realize that the tighter regulations, means no loans for you.
 
99percenter said:
Welfare checks getting abused doesnt create financial collapses that we saw in 08. Banks buying and selling worthless assets does. In iceland this created debt that was larger than there economy. Banks should be making minimal profit. Just pay operating costs, salaries, etc. and be done with it.
Click to expand...

I fail to see why banks should make minimal profits. They are a business, devoted to making maximum profits within the boundaries of law, just like any other corporation or company
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom