Occupy Wall Street being ousted RIGHT NOW

Occupy Wal Street isnt being funded by the koch brothers

BossPerson

What's your point? They're being funded by Warren Buffet and George Soros.

[QUOTE="anthonycg"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]Wow you havent been taking the essentials out of what im saying. In a crowd of 10 000 people, there will be a couple that do bad things. Should you disregard the movement and tell them all to go home because of a couple bored teenagers who want to break some glass? You saying that they should remain calm in the face of police brutality is a joke. The police themselves are breaking the law and even then the protesters dont do anything illegal. The protesters have been constanlty prevoked and they still retain the moral high ground. You act as if those protests are just a violent mob. A hipster is just a hippy, and no i dont and have never watched mtv a minute in my life. And i was just pointing out that many Americans call arabs(which I am) savages when they have shown more nobility in their protests than anybody here or in Europe...just an observation.

One one hand you support the message of the Occupy movement, but on the other you dismiss them because some windows are broken??? How come you arent angry at the police using unjust force??

BossPerson

It's a very simple concept. If you want to win this battle you need to fight smart. The power of the people lies in the constitution. That is the weapon you have. They have guns. If you fight them on that plain you will lose everytime. The very principle of provocation is to force your opponent on to a plain where you have the advantage. If a bunch of people start raging out come the guns and your advantage is gone. Why does this work? A chain is a as strong as it's weakest link. By provoking the squeemish the corrupt ones are able to ultilize their advantage immediately despite the people that are following the rules. Your rights become null when they potentially endanger a citizen. Yelling "fire" in a packed movie theater comes to mind. That is the problem. You have people that don't understand this concept and they will fail repeatedly until they learn it.

You will gain far more by standing your ground, not breaking the law and reporting the ones that are breaking the law. That is pressure. If cops are constantly caught breaking the law then they will be pressed into following the rules themselves. THAT'S what needs to be on youtube. However if you are breaking windows then you will be shot before your message is even delivered. Unfortunately the sound of guns is louder than the sound of your voice. Again that is the advantage they possess and people are easily fooled into allowing it to be utilized. And going into mob mode is hardly going to do anything. Those buildings that get damaged you the taxpayer will pay for, not the government.

It is also faulty logic to assume that all cops are corrupt. They are no different than you. They are just standing on the oppositie side of the fence.

Corrupt police is a problem but it isn't always that either. Sometimes they just freak out and overreact. I'm not saying that it's an excuse but it happens. And when one of them screws up the others still need to have his back. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the reason for the majority of the problems. Standing infront of 40,000 people and being expected to contain them can shake anyone. That's why people need to learn to protest correctly. Wanting to do good is fine but people need to do it right. I promise you the mobs all they're going to show on the news so don't give them the chance.

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

Occupy Wal Street isnt being funded by the koch brothers

airshocker

What's your point? They're being funded by Warren Buffet and George Soros.

Private property....... If the owners of said property want them to get out, they need to be removed. They have the final say on access and use of their property.Mafiree

[QUOTE="Mafiree"]Private property....... If the owners of said property want them to get out, they need to be removed. They have the final say on access and use of their property.Rockman999

Dude...

[QUOTE="Rockman999"]

[QUOTE="Mafiree"]Private property....... If the owners of said property want them to get out, they need to be removed. They have the final say on access and use of their property.anthonycg

Dude...

It is one thing to protest, but an entirely different thing to have a camping trip in a public park. It is one thing to march down the streets (provided you pay for the proper permits and have the proper insurance to cover it) and voice your first amendment rights, but it is another to form a mob and destroy private property in the guise of free speech. An occupier bathing in a resturant sink and breaking said sink is not peacefully demonstrating.

The courts have upheld the rights of citys and states to place restrictions on public places. Woodruff Park in Atlanta has signs that state the park closes at 10PM (it could be sunset honestly, but the point is the same, the park closes at night). People of all walks of life can use it daily, but they cannot camp there (there are rules against it posted with the closing time). People can even have protests there, after filing the proper paperwork. Why is that so hard to understand? OWS has no problem with breaking laws or destroying a small business owners property who are the ones that they claim that are representing.

The protesters are actually protesting in the wrong place. Banks and Wall Street can't do anything without Washington's say so. If they are so set against what Wall Street is doing, then they need to do what it takes to get rid of all of those in power in DC, after all, it is everyones fault that they are in power to begin with, from the President on down.

Also, if you are gonna protest, have a message. All of these convoluted demands makes for a nonprotest. It makes those there look foolish.

Don't get me started on forgiving your debts either. Go get a job and go to work. You can make money at the oil jobs in North Dakota or in other jobs. You are not going to make six figures a year straight out of college and you damned well will not be getting a corner office with a view.

Good.

These people need to realise that the 1% are rich because they worked hard for it.

You want more money?Stop wasting your time at OWS and earn it.

Good.

These people need to realise that the 1% are rich because they worked hard for it.

You want more money?Stop wasting your time at OWS and earn it.

call_of_duty_10

Good.

These people need to realise that the 1% are rich because they worked hard for it.

You want more money?Stop wasting your time at OWS and earn it.

call_of_duty_10

People need to realize not everyone at OWS are communists demanding equal salary.

yes the evil billionaire communists warren buffet and george soros who promote charity and human rights and who have promised to donate more than half of their earning by the time their gone. Seriously?? You think Warren Buffet and George Soros are as bad as The koch brothers, who may I add created their entire fortune by oil speculation that has driven up oill prics by 40 % of what its actually worth, pretty much imposing a tax on every person who drives a car?? You think Warren buffet and soros are as bad as those snakes who rob you everytime you go to fill up ur car? Buffet and Soros dont produce anything (their investors) but at least they dont skim a tax off the top of every person in America, and even around the world.

BossPerson

Any person that promotes bigger government, higher taxes, and socialism are evil to me. Well, any rich person with power. :)

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]

Gas the bastards and move in with the rubber bullets. Their silly little movement should have come to an end weeks ago.

QuistisTrepe_

These whiny little ******* are a pestilence. I have to put up with these punks here in Oakland. And what I get are disease-ridden, smelly hippies infesting my neighborhood, committing vandalism of small businesses (I guess they're the evil 1% too), theft, and violent crime (despite what you've been hearing about their allegedly peaceful demonstrations). They're not achieving anything, they're costing us millions for law enforcement sweeping the city, dispersing their encampments and bringing small businesses to a standstill with all the ruckus, interfering with mass transit, while drawing lawless lunatics from all corners of the Bay Area.

I want these people gone by any means necessary. They've had their say, the party is over. This isn't about ideology, it's about returning to civilized society.

I'll wait when 99% people are there.

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] They are protesting wealth and income inequality. One thing that represents the massive wealth and income inequality in the US is the private ownership of what should be (and technically is) public land. One obvious statement they are making with their choice of venue is that public land should be collectively owned. And it is a huge stretch. The analogy is nonsensical. On one hand you have a public space that is privately owned. And on the other hand you have privately manufactured goods being stolen from a privately owned store. There are no similarities between the two. -Sun_Tzu-

Regarding theft, it's really not that far off. Their stance (seems to be) that anyone and everyone deserves (aka: is entitled to) the same lot in life, regardless of the cards they are dealt and how they play those cards. It's the exact same mentality as saying, "I want a new jacket. Target has plenty. So I should be allowed to take this one. It may not be legal, but it's social justice for me to take it."

I never said that land ownership is the key issue with these protests (although in many ways it is, with all the foreclosures that have been going on throughout the country). Zuccotti park is symbolic of what they are protesting - i.e. wealth and income inequality and the degradation that is resulting from that - in the case of Zuccotti Park the private ownership of public land. The location of a protest always bears significance. There's a reason why civil rights activists sat in at certain restruants. There's a reason why MLK gave his dream speech at the Lincoln memorial. The venue of a protest is always a statement within itself. They are never randomly selected.

And you are completely misrepresenting their stance. They are protesting for equal oppurtunity. Equal oppurtunity is something that traditionally everyone supported - even conservatives. How you can go from equal oppurtunity to them wanting free jackets for everyone from target is ridiculous. All you're doing is knocking down strawmans and throwing around red herrings.

To your second point.... Then they are protesting for nothing. There absolutely IS "equal opportunity" in this country. If I can go from literally living in my car for a short time to where I am now, there is absolutely, positively NO reason that anyone else can't do the same.

[QUOTE="call_of_duty_10"]

Good.

These people need to realise that the 1% are rich because they worked hard for it.

You want more money?Stop wasting your time at OWS and earn it.

DroidPhysX

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

yes the evil billionaire communists warren buffet and george soros who promote charity and human rights and who have promised to donate more than half of their earning by the time their gone. Seriously?? You think Warren Buffet and George Soros are as bad as The koch brothers, who may I add created their entire fortune by oil speculation that has driven up oill prics by 40 % of what its actually worth, pretty much imposing a tax on every person who drives a car?? You think Warren buffet and soros are as bad as those snakes who rob you everytime you go to fill up ur car? Buffet and Soros dont produce anything (their investors) but at least they dont skim a tax off the top of every person in America, and even around the world.

airshocker

Any person that promotes bigger government, higher taxes, and socialism are evil to me. Well, any rich person with power. :)

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="call_of_duty_10"]

Good.

These people need to realise that the 1% are rich because they worked hard for it.

You want more money?Stop wasting your time at OWS and earn it.

surrealnumber5

And you also blamed the subprime mortgage crisis on government regulation?? PLease....the affordable housing act has nothing to do with this. Banks werent required to reach a quota. That act is actually good for banks, all it does is tell them to lower their down payments, but in turn they raise their interest rates.

The reason subprime mortgages disaster happened is because of the derivative trading that was making everybody (in the 1% rich). The notion that there is "too much regulation in the economy" and thats what caused the sub prime mortgage diasaster is the most perverted logic ive ever heard. You need to chill out with your boner for Adam Smith and realize that pure capitalism will not bring us the best society possible.

You even admitted that we can't blame greedy business men because they were just exploiting the loose regulations. Fine then, I blame the politicians (who were bought by the business men) for not making it law to ban speculative trading.

Again, people have the right to gather and demonstrate publicly. Even if I dont agree with their message. However, they should do so peacefully. Once they start destroying things or preventing others from living their lives, then they have crossed a line. You have the right to peaceful demonstration, not the right to go out and start destroying others property.

People are fed up with the feds America, hear them out.

Last time I talked about this, I talked to users who said job is not a right. Whether a job is a right or not has to do with a country's constitution. Where I reside, a job is a right. The constitution in the US gives people the right to arms but not education, housing, job and other common interests. I'm assuming all those go under "the general welfare" of the country but it's a strechy term. Anything could be for the general welfare of the country.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] I doubt the entire 1% got rich on their own. Combination of shady dealings and inheritance would describe a good portion of them.BossPerson

And you also blamed the subprime mortgage crisis on government regulation?? PLease....the affordable housing act has nothing to do with this. Banks werent required to reach a quota. That act is actually good for banks, all it does is tell them to lower their down payments, but in turn they raise their interest rates.

The reason subprimemortgages disaster happened is because of the derivative trading that was making everybody (in the 1% rich). The notion that there is "too much regulation in the economy" and thats what caused the sub prime mortgage diasaster is the most perverted logic ive ever heard. You need to chill out with your boner for Adam Smith and realize that pure capitalism will not bring us the best society possible.

You even admitted that we can't blame greedy business men because they were just exploiting the loose regulations. Fine then, I blame the politicians (who were bought by the business men) for not making it law to ban speculative trading.

lower downpayments -> more risk -> higher interest rates

if you dont understand that you will never understand any thing in finance, people dont give better rates (lower, or better for the loanee)to worse investments (higher risk)

edit2: everything in this world is speculative, you will never and can never get rid of speculation, uncertainty is something we who live within the confines of timehave to deal with. buying a sub at subway is speculative trade, you are expecting your sub to live up to somecriteria and there is no certainty that it will do so before you eat it. if you ever act it is a speculative act, lest you know the future and are not bound by time.

and even if you could get rid of all risk and speculation you would then get rid of all reward, risk and reward are one in the same.

They can destroy all they want, it's like trying to cover the sun with a finger. If they keep ignoring the problem it will only become worse and worse.kuraimen

The problem is this movement doesn't properly represent the real issues in this country. These OWS guys come off as lazy and entitled people who want more stuff without having to work hard. They fail to understand the concepts of living comfortably vs. being rich, how in our society equilibrium is met when the population can live comfortably. A good portion of the OWS protesters are living very comfortable lives. From their website, the one with the people posting pictures of themselves and a handwritten note, I can gather that a lot of them want something done for them after poor decisions they made.The real problem isn't income inequality to the 99%, it's the fact that the economy has changed quite radically and people don't understand how to respond.

America and the western world constantly demands more cheap goods while also demanding for more healthcare coverage, more workers benefits, and higher pay. Now healthcare costs have soared (topic for another discussion), but pay and benefits have kept up mostly with the cost of living on a national average in western countries for the most part. It's just been in recent years when the recessions begun did we start seeing a large problem. Our low-skill jobs are being ported overseas to meet up with the increased demands for cheaper goods. As people were cutting back and realizing that you cannot live on credit and over your means, companies kept finding ways to keep costs down while wages continue to grow. The solution was to outsource large amounts of these low skill jobs. This bascially kills the low-skill portion of the job market and ripples throughout the entire market effecting even the highest paid CEOs.

So we have a delima that is brought on upon our own greed and laziness. We have people living well out of their means thanks to a credit based economy, we have people demanding cheaper goods to keep up with stagnating wages, and we have companies outsourcing jobs to keep up with the demand for cheaper goods. While this is all going on we have loose banking regulations on how and what money gets invested where, healthcare costs keep rising, lobbiests are pushing for more regulations on businesses for environmental protection and green energy, and the job market is being flooded with people who are graduating college in the largest numbers ever due to society telling them they need a college education.

OWS is attacking one of these problems, the banks loose regulations, and they are attack the wrong source. As any large protest, this group of people is trying to narrow down the problem to a single source and use it as a scapegoat. The Tea Party used Obama, Hitler used the Jews, OWS uses the banks/large corporations. The real problem is at every single level, changing one does not change everything and some of the demands of OWS don't take the whole picture into consideration.

The real problem is society. We keep refusing to see the larger picture. We don't want to stop living outside of our means and we want some higher power (big government) to solve all of our problems. As long as we keep shopping at WalMart and telling our politicans to solve everything, nothing will change.

Honestly, I have never been more appalled by some of the comments made here than in my whole time in this forum. I liked it better when we just discussed video games. Im not gonna leave this forum, but I am gonna just say a few things before i leave and pretend I never came across this thread.

1) What are the protesters fighting for? The message is clear across the board."Get money out of politics" If anyone has a problem with this, then I think you are very sad. America's democracy is sick and has been sick for a while. You elect a rep, but they end up working for a bank or exxon or lockeed martin. The whole system is messed up to the point that we have been in afghanistan for 10 years fighting a bunch or maniacs with ak 47's who just want to oppress some women and blow up some pakistani buildings. Is the way to fight a terrorist cell through a full military occupation? No! You destrroy one cell, another pops up..thats why they call it a cell. We are in afghanistan scarificing american men and women becuase of the miliraty lobbies who profit off war. A top general just recently said that we could be in afghanistan until 2020. Do you think rooting out the Taliban(which wouldnt even stop terrorism in any way) takes 19 years?

2) Ask yourself if unfetered capitalism is working for your society. Is 30 % interst even moral? Too bad you have no choice, no bank is gonna compete with that price just like a "capitalist should." The price is fixed across the board and you have no choice but to pay what the banks want you to pay. To those who say "dont put your money in the bank" thats just plain stupid because we live in a soviety where that is the only option, its either that or nothing.

3) Stop listening to what the news media tells you and how they tell you what to feel. Take a second an renounce all the American ideological stuff you've been fed over the years and think. Does capitalism actually work? Do I live in a good society that i'd want my kids to be born into? Is there even freedom in the system, or has the government oppression of the British MOnarch been replaced by the ecnomic oppression of Bank of America and Exxon Mobil? Do I even live in a democracy? Do my politicians work for me or for money? Why are all my politicians millionaires? They dont get paid a million dollars in salary? And finally take a step back and ask yourself what you would be called a heretic for doing. What are my troops even fighting for? Is it possible that they're not "fighting for out freedom" but for something else? Why have they been dying for ten years in a war that isnt going to change anything? Does supporting the troops actually mean supporting the war they're in?

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] so give politicians more power to control the economy after all of the favor the sold to get us to this point? or are you going to somehow blame inanimate objects for the evils of politicians? all of thoserecently ousted green frauds did not get their money by on their own, they got it from politicians and they got it from us. most wealth was earned, in the past, before government accounted for 40% of the economy, now 40% of the economy is political and not productive. youre right some people do get rich by theft, but they are the same people you wish to give more power, and from my POV it seems that you want to give them more power because they have abused the power they already have.

surrealnumber5

And you also blamed the subprime mortgage crisis on government regulation?? PLease....the affordable housing act has nothing to do with this. Banks werent required to reach a quota. That act is actually good for banks, all it does is tell them to lower their down payments, but in turn they raise their interest rates.

The reason subprimemortgages disaster happened is because of the derivative trading that was making everybody (in the 1% rich). The notion that there is "too much regulation in the economy" and thats what caused the sub prime mortgage diasaster is the most perverted logic ive ever heard. You need to chill out with your boner for Adam Smith and realize that pure capitalism will not bring us the best society possible.

You even admitted that we can't blame greedy business men because they were just exploiting the loose regulations. Fine then, I blame the politicians (who were bought by the business men) for not making it law to ban speculative trading.

lower downpayments -> more risk -> higher interest rates

if you dont understand that you will never understand any thing in finance, people dont give better rates (lower, or better for the loanee)to worse investments (higher risk)

edit2: everything in this world is speculative, you will never and can never get rid of speculation, uncertainty is something we who live within the confines of timehave to deal with. buying a sub at subway is speculative trade, you are expecting your sub to live up to somecriteria and there is no certainty that it will do so before you eat it. if you ever act it is a speculative act, lest you know the future and are not bound by time.

and even if you could get rid of all risk and speculation you would then get rid of all reward, risk and reward are one in the same.

I could use some concentration of wealth in my bank accounts.

financial derivatives are financial instruments that hedge against excess profit and loss, there is no way for anyone to get "rich" by getting the contracted normative value for what the hedged against. i hate when people try to talk about subjects they got from party lines or the 10-o-clock news. financial derivatives are nothing more than insurance, and insurance is not a PROFIT instrument. now derivatives can be taken out on anything but for my example i will use grain as it is what i am most familiar with.

a farmer buys grain for feed at $50 per unit, any great flux in this price will drastically affect the price of his cattle on the market. so he takes out a derivative with the conditions that ffed market price will be within +/- $5 of its current market price and should the market price dip below 45 or above 55 the other party will either collect or pay the difference. if there is a bumper crop and the price drops to 30 per unit, the farmer would need to pay the other party that agreed to these terms $15 for every unit he purchases bringing his cost to 45/unit the lower limit. if the economy turns and inflation brings the grain price to 100/unit then the other party would need to pay the farmer 45/unit for every unit purchased so that the farmer would in effect be paying the high end contracted amount of 55/unit.

there is nothing evil or wrong here, just two discerning parties making a mutual agreement between each other, and the whole instrument was created to provide economic stability to producers and they were created because producers cannot control the whims of Washington or the fads on wall street.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]lol i remember you from the tuition fee thread. You still havent answered my question... What happens when the unfettered capitalist system reaches a point where wealth is concentrated to the point it is now? Less government regulations... more concentration of wealth, thats the way it works. Im not even debating economic ideas, this is ecnomic fact...naturally wealth and capital concentrate slowly over time.? Do you deny this? Capital creates production which created more capital and more production....and the system continues.

And you also blamed the subprime mortgage crisis on government regulation?? PLease....the affordable housing act has nothing to do with this. Banks werent required to reach a quota. That act is actually good for banks, all it does is tell them to lower their down payments, but in turn they raise their interest rates.

The reason subprimemortgages disaster happened is because of the derivative trading that was making everybody (in the 1% rich). The notion that there is "too much regulation in the economy" and thats what caused the sub prime mortgage diasaster is the most perverted logic ive ever heard. You need to chill out with your boner for Adam Smith and realize that pure capitalism will not bring us the best society possible.

You even admitted that we can't blame greedy business men because they were just exploiting the loose regulations. Fine then, I blame the politicians (who were bought by the business men) for not making it law to ban speculative trading.

BossPerson

lower downpayments -> more risk -> higher interest rates

if you dont understand that you will never understand any thing in finance, people dont give better rates (lower, or better for the loanee)to worse investments (higher risk)

edit2: everything in this world is speculative, you will never and can never get rid of speculation, uncertainty is something we who live within the confines of timehave to deal with. buying a sub at subway is speculative trade, you are expecting your sub to live up to somecriteria and there is no certainty that it will do so before you eat it. if you ever act it is a speculative act, lest you know the future and are not bound by time.

and even if you could get rid of all risk and speculation you would then get rid of all reward, risk and reward are one in the same.

what oil should be? what should oil be? i think it should really be sand.... the market states what oil should be not you or i but everyone in the world with our demand.

financial derivatives are financial instruments that hedge against excess profit and loss, there is no way for anyone to get "rich" by getting the contracted normative value for what the hedged against. i hate when people try to talk about subjects they got from party lines or the 10-o-clock news. financial derivatives are nothing more than insurance, and insurance is not a PROFIT instrument. now derivatives can be taken out on anything but for my example i will use grain as it is what i am most familiar with.

a farmer buys grain for feed at $50 per unit, any great flux in this price will drastically affect the price of his cattle on the market. so he takes out a derivative with the conditions that ffed market price will be within +/- $5 of its current market price and should the market price dip below 45 or above 55 the other party will either collect or pay the difference. if there is a bumper crop and the price drops to 30 per unit, the farmer would need to pay the other party that agreed to these terms $15 for every unit he purchases bringing his cost to 45/unit the lower limit. if the economy turns and inflation brings the grain price to 100/unit then the other party would need to pay the farmer 45/unit for every unit purchased so that the farmer would in effect be paying the high end contracted amount of 55/unit.

there is nothing evil or wrong here, just two discerning parties making a mutual agreement between each other, and the whole instrument was created to provide economic stability to producers and they were created because producers cannot control the whims of Washington or the fads on wall street.

surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] go back to that thread i replied to you every time, you stopped replying to me and i hate repeting my self.

lower downpayments -> more risk -> higher interest rates

if you dont understand that you will never understand any thing in finance, people dont give better rates (lower, or better for the loanee)to worse investments (higher risk)

edit2: everything in this world is speculative, you will never and can never get rid of speculation, uncertainty is something we who live within the confines of timehave to deal with. buying a sub at subway is speculative trade, you are expecting your sub to live up to somecriteria and there is no certainty that it will do so before you eat it. if you ever act it is a speculative act, lest you know the future and are not bound by time.

and even if you could get rid of all risk and speculation you would then get rid of all reward, risk and reward are one in the same.

surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

financial derivatives are financial instruments that hedge against excess profit and loss, there is no way for anyone to get "rich" by getting the contracted normative value for what the hedged against. i hate when people try to talk about subjects they got from party lines or the 10-o-clock news. financial derivatives are nothing more than insurance, and insurance is not a PROFIT instrument. now derivatives can be taken out on anything but for my example i will use grain as it is what i am most familiar with.

a farmer buys grain for feed at $50 per unit, any great flux in this price will drastically affect the price of his cattle on the market. so he takes out a derivative with the conditions that ffed market price will be within +/- $5 of its current market price and should the market price dip below 45 or above 55 the other party will either collect or pay the difference. if there is a bumper crop and the price drops to 30 per unit, the farmer would need to pay the other party that agreed to these terms $15 for every unit he purchases bringing his cost to 45/unit the lower limit. if the economy turns and inflation brings the grain price to 100/unit then the other party would need to pay the farmer 45/unit for every unit purchased so that the farmer would in effect be paying the high end contracted amount of 55/unit.

there is nothing evil or wrong here, just two discerning parties making a mutual agreement between each other, and the whole instrument was created to provide economic stability to producers and they were created because producers cannot control the whims of Washington or the fads on wall street.

BossPerson

no answer huh?

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

financial derivatives are financial instruments that hedge against excess profit and loss, there is no way for anyone to get "rich" by getting the contracted normative value for what the hedged against. i hate when people try to talk about subjects they got from party lines or the 10-o-clock news. financial derivatives are nothing more than insurance, and insurance is not a PROFIT instrument. now derivatives can be taken out on anything but for my example i will use grain as it is what i am most familiar with.

a farmer buys grain for feed at $50 per unit, any great flux in this price will drastically affect the price of his cattle on the market. so he takes out a derivative with the conditions that ffed market price will be within +/- $5 of its current market price and should the market price dip below 45 or above 55 the other party will either collect or pay the difference. if there is a bumper crop and the price drops to 30 per unit, the farmer would need to pay the other party that agreed to these terms $15 for every unit he purchases bringing his cost to 45/unit the lower limit. if the economy turns and inflation brings the grain price to 100/unit then the other party would need to pay the farmer 45/unit for every unit purchased so that the farmer would in effect be paying the high end contracted amount of 55/unit.

there is nothing evil or wrong here, just two discerning parties making a mutual agreement between each other, and the whole instrument was created to provide economic stability to producers and they were created because producers cannot control the whims of Washington or the fads on wall street.

surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]jesus christ man.. WHAT ABOUT THE CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH THAT YOU HAVENT ANSERED EVERYTIME I ASK YOU!! And they should ban speculative trading because it creates value out of nothing. Oil is 40% than what it should be. When i buy a subway, im not buying an future subway that doesnt exist, the price of subways doesnt go up because of what people think the price is gonna be in 2 years. Dont respond to that, just answer my first queston which you never answer. THE ANTURAL CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH

BossPerson

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]Wow.Wow!!!! you still havent answered my first question, the one that i begge you to answer and which you apparently have already done. Is it because it proved ur wrong and turns your entire capitalist utopian society on its head? Please just answer what i asked you about the NATURAL CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH. Holy crap

BossPerson

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]They can destroy all they want, it's like trying to cover the sun with a finger. If they keep ignoring the problem it will only become worse and worse.Wasdie

The problem is this movement doesn't properly represent the real issues in this country. These OWS guys come off as lazy and entitled people who want more stuff without having to work hard. They fail to understand the concepts of living comfortably vs. being rich, how in our society equilibrium is met when the population can live comfortably. A good portion of the OWS protesters are living very comfortable lives. From their website, the one with the people posting pictures of themselves and a handwritten note, I can gather that a lot of them want something done for them after poor decisions they made.The real problem isn't income inequality to the 99%, it's the fact that the economy has changed quite radically and people don't understand how to respond.

America and the western world constantly demands more cheap goods while also demanding for more healthcare coverage, more workers benefits, and higher pay. Now healthcare costs have soared (topic for another discussion), but pay and benefits have kept up mostly with the cost of living on a national average in western countries for the most part. It's just been in recent years when the recessions begun did we start seeing a large problem. Our low-skill jobs are being ported overseas to meet up with the increased demands for cheaper goods. As people were cutting back and realizing that you cannot live on credit and over your means, companies kept finding ways to keep costs down while wages continue to grow. The solution was to outsource large amounts of these low skill jobs. This bascially kills the low-skill portion of the job market and ripples throughout the whole thing.

So we have a delima that is brought on upon our own greed. We have people living well out of their means thanks to a credit based economy, we have people demanding cheaper goods to keep up with stagnating wages, and we have companies outsourcing jobs to keep up with the demand for cheaper goods. While this is all going on we have loose banking regulations on how and what money gets invested where, healthcare costs keep rising, lobbiests are pushing for more regulations on businesses for environmental protection and green energy, and the job market is being flooded with people who are graduating college in the largest numbers ever due to society telling them they need a college education.

OWS is attacking one of these problems, the banks loose regulations, and they are attack the wrong source. As any large protest, this group of people is trying to narrow down the problem to a single source and use it as a scapegoat. The Tea Party used Obama, Hitler used the Jews, OWS uses the banks/large corporations. The real problem is at every single level, changing one does not change everything and some of the demands of OWS don't take the whole picture into consideration.

The real problem is society. We keep refusing to see the larger picture. We don't want to stop living outside of our means and we want some higher power (big government) to solve all of our problems. As long as we keep shopping at WalMart and telling our politicans to solve everything, nothing will change.

And nothing of value was lost.

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] what capitalist utopia society? there has not been anything near one since the early 1900's. and my god go back to that other thread i already efing answered you

surrealnumber5

DO YOU DENY THAT IN A PURE CAPITALIST SYSTEM, THE NATURAL CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH WILL OCCUR???? ANSWER YES OR NO PLEASE.

you cant squeeze an answer out of this guy

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]Well then do me a favour and asnwer me here. You havent answered me in that thread, i rea through it again. Why are u scared to repeat your answer?

BossPerson

DO YOU DENY THAT IN A PURE CAPITALIST SYSTEM, THE NATURAL CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH WILL OCCUR???? ANSWER YES OR NO PLEASE.

You know hat you're doing right?

you're taking the theoretical views of democracy and capitalism as it exists in the minds of adam smith and jefferson, but you dont undertsand what those things have become in reality. I tell you money buys politicians and you say, "nooo!, billionaires have as much power as their vote because thats how democracy works" derp.

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] scared to come up with an argument? i mean you have yet to make a counter argument..... in either thread.

surrealnumber5

DO YOU DENY THAT IN A PURE CAPITALIST SYSTEM, THE NATURAL CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH WILL OCCUR???? ANSWER YES OR NO PLEASE.

you cant squeeze an answer out of this guy

BossPerson

You know hat you're doing right?

you're taking the theoretical views of democracy and capitalism as it exists in the minds of adam smith and jefferson, but you dont undertsand what those things have become in reality. I tell you money buys politicians and you say, "nooo!, billionaires have as much power as their vote because thats how democracy works" derp.

BossPerson

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]wow, you are living under a rock if you think that billionaires have as much power as you or me. I can't find anyone who would agree with that as it it os so obvious you're wrong it is truism. Money is power and those who have money have influence in politics and in society (since everyone wants money) Money itself is a commodity that everybody wants (I know its not a commodity in the true use of the word, but it is in its practical) To think that someone who knows so much about the workings of the ifnance system can observe the most simple thing of all (that money equals ower) then that is sad and it proves you are delusional. And i didnt even mention concentration of power, i said concentration of wealth...which you still havent answered. Wow.

DO YOU DENY THAT IN A PURE CAPITALIST SYSTEM, THE NATURAL CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH WILL OCCUR???? ANSWER YES OR NO PLEASE.

BossPerson