Already posted on PARF

[pwd72s]

But maybe folks could be civil enough to also view it here? A 2 minute clip of Phil Donahue interviewing economist Milton Friedman...

A 31 year old video clip ABSOLUTELY worth your time - dauckster's posterous

[livi]

Excellent piece. He really knows homo sapience. It is actually a precise reminder of how evolution works on all levels. Put a halt to the individuals intrinsic strive to gain position, breeding grounds and wealth - and there is nothing left.

OK, maybe that was a bit harsh, but still..

[Buckterrier]

Thank you Paul. I would not have seen that in PARF as I don't frequent there.
I had an interesting conversation with a customer about what is in our DNA. It started with men that cheat. Is the need to procreate with as many females as possible in our DNA? You could also bring up the want/need to be with younger women. Is the need to have 12 children in a woman's DNA? Now obviously those drives are stronger in certain people than in others. He brought up greed. Is that in our DNA? I actually never thought of it but I think it is. And the people that will screw their own mother for a nickel is no different than a caveman taking an others berries when he already has enough. Is it ingrained into our DNA?

[livi]

Yes it is.

The Selfish Gene is a fact.

[sammyg2]

Donahue is a poopy-head.

[DARISC]

Friedman's absolutely right about greed being the norm and capitalism being the best system. But that's not really news is it?

The important discussion to be had concerns tending our capitalistic system to ensure that it functions well and is not abused.

Clearly, the disparity between the upper class and the much larger middle and lower classes has grown at an alarming rate over a period of a very few years.

The middle and lower classes are upset about this, NOT because they are anti capitalism or socialist, but rather that our capitalistic system is being abused by the few who have the most power and it is to the detriment of everyone else.

That's what the 'occupy' demonstrations are all about the way I see it. The demonstrators don't want to bring down capitalism; they want the abuse of the system to stop so that they too can reap the benefits of their hard work and be a productive part of the system as they once were, not all that many years ago.

[techweenie]

Originally Posted by darisc

friedman's absolutely right about greed being the norm and capitalism being the best system. But that's not really news is it?

The important discussion to be had concerns tending our capitalistic system to ensure that it functions well and is not abused.

Clearly, the disparity between the upper class and the much larger middle and lower classes has grown at an alarming rate over a period of a very few years.

The middle and lower classes are upset about this, not because they are anti capitalism or socialist, but rather that our capitalistic system is being abused by the few who have the most power and it is to the detriment of everyone else.

That's what the 'occupy' demonstrations are all about the way i see it. The demonstrators don't want to bring down capitalism; they want the abuse of the system to stop so that they too can reap the benefits of their hard work and be a productive part of the system as they once were, not all that many years ago.

+1

[sammyg2]

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh, so that's why so many the occupiers are carrying signs that say something like "no more capitalism".

It's as clear as mother's milk

[Baz]

I have no problem with public protests as long as they are civil and I understand the message being sent. In many cases I just don't see it - and therefore the cause is diluted, for me and I'm sure for others...too bad because I agree there's way too much corruption in our government and tax dollars are not going to areas where it will help Americans the most - "someone" should be doing "something"!

If the folks don't like the way things are going with the establishment they can make another choice on election day, right?

Getting back on topic - I agree the Capitalist system gives most the opportunity to succeed so we should support it - not tear it down.



Excellent post - repped!

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by Baz

...Getting back on topic - I agree the Capitalist system gives most the opportunity to succeed so we should support it - not tear it down.

Yes, support and maintain it.

Regarding 'redistribution of wealth/income', that's a loaded phrase in that it generally connotes socialism or communism in the minds of many.

However, if one accepts that our capitalist system is in fact out of balance to the extent that it is effectively broken for the middle and lower classes due to abuses by the upper class, then it seems self evident that a redistribution of income is required to bring it back into balance.

This is not to say that the upper class's wealth should be taken from them and given to others, it's simply to say rid the system of abuses so that it can function 'normally' as it once did and income redistribution will occur naturally as the system comes back into balance.

[artplumber]

Originally Posted by DARISC

That's what the 'occupy' demonstrations are all about the way I see it. The demonstrators don't want to bring down capitalism; they want the abuse of the system to stop so that they too can reap the benefits of their hard work and be a productive part of the system as they once were, not all that many years ago.

BS. These people want what others (read Wallstreet or those "rich") have without doing any work for it. They want to work in a ho-hum job and get paid managerial wages or be managers & be paid ceo wages. Just look at the ideological spectrum represented there. If they were really serious, they would quit buying stuff they dont need to win the who has more stuff rat race, they would invest their own money (maybe in each other), and stop drinking the entertainment koolaid that supports the business model. All of these activities result in small amounts of profit from many people which then funnels to very few people.

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by artplumber

BS. These people want what others (read Wallstreet or those "rich") have without doing any work for it.

Sounds like you've done a tremendous amount of research on 'these people'.

It would be great if you shared your sources (unless, of course, your post is BS, in which case you can't).

[artplumber]

You mean like your sources?

My sources are my experiences with people in the USA, Michael Moore - one of their leaders, and their stated ideas that the someone richer than them must be abusing them.

[foxpaws]

artplumber - so you went down and talked to them - the Occupy movement? Or are you going with what appears to be some preconceived notions on your part and watching media which usually selectively reports on the sensationalism factor.

Capitalism is the best system out there - but, since we are all greedy fools at times, don't you think that we need to temper that capitalism with common sense regulation? Unfettered capitalism is a pretty bad idea...

[techweenie]

Originally Posted by foxpaws

artplumber - so you went down and talked to them - the Occupy movement? Or are you going with what appears to be some preconceived notions on your part and watching media which usually selectively reports on the sensationalism factor.

Capitalism is the best system out there - but, since we are all greedy fools at times, don't you think that we need to temper that capitalism with common sense regulation? Unfettered capitalism is a pretty bad idea...

Even Adam Smith pointed out the requirement for regulation.

[techweenie]

I've been watching the Occupy Wall Street protests for a while. They are not strictly comprised of young or old, middle or lower class people. There seems to be a constellation of issues but they seem to be clustered around the fact that financial institutions are the de facto government. Neither major party has the intestinal fortitude to pursue the decision makers who brought the US to the brink of financial collapse in the Fall of '08. And even with TARP, there was a lack of transparency. Further, the Fed is operating behind the scenes with a rumored $15 trillion contribution to keep financial institutions afloat. (The Fed needs auditing, which Ron Paul has said for many years.) The problem with all of the aforementioned actions is that even though they saved us from the "Iceland problem," these actions were made without visible conditions. And so C-level pay stayed in the 7- and 8-figure range even as corporations lost 9 and 10 figures. And, of course, it comes back on Joe Sixpack to make up the difference. So there are a lot of Joe Sixpacks who would be aligned with the movement if they understood it. And the media was, for weeks, complicit with the wishes of major advertisers in ignoring the protests or at best, dismissing them as 'dirty hippies.' It's a big deal. And dangerous to the Wall Street status quo.

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by techweenie

I've been watching the Occupy Wall Street protests for a while. They are not strictly comprised of young or old, middle or lower class people. There seems to be a constellation of issues but they seem to be clustered around the fact that financial institutions are the de facto government. Neither major party has the intestinal fortitude to pursue the decision makers who brought the US to the brink of financial collapse in the Fall of '08. And even with TARP, there was a lack of transparency. Further, the Fed is operating behind the scenes with a rumored $15 trillion contribution to keep financial institutions afloat. (The Fed needs auditing, which Ron Paul has said for many years.) The problem with all of the aforementioned actions is that even though they saved us from the "Iceland problem," these actions were made without visible conditions. And so C-level pay stayed in the 7- and 8-figure range even as corporations lost 9 and 10 figures. And, of course, it comes back on Joe Sixpack to make up the difference. So there are a lot of Joe Sixpacks who would be aligned with the movement if they understood it. And the media was, for weeks, complicit with the wishes of major advertisers in ignoring the protests or at best, dismissing them as 'dirty hippies.' It's a big deal. And dangerous to the Wall Street status quo.

Well said. A lot of people have a gut level understanding of this, but there are no simple boogie men to target and no simple answers. It's a complicated, wide ranging problem and that makes it hard to describe. I think you've done a very good job of it.

[genrex]

I agree. And the protesters are just starting to get organized. This is big, and it will get bigger over the next year, through the elections for sure. Any action taken to stop the protests would only make them grow.

[strupgolf]

I'm not with the Wall-streeters nor against them, but I seem to see what their purpose is. Today, Bank of America posted $6.2 BILLION profit for the 3rd quarter of 2011. PROFIT, and they want to charge THEIR customers $3.00 each time they withdraw their money from their account. How much is enough? And BOA is also cutting 25,000 jobs worldwide. I love capitalism like anyone, but how much is enough, at what time does the Board say, yep, that's enought, I don't think it ever happens, which is both good and bad.

[artplumber]

Originally Posted by foxpaws

artplumber - so you went down and talked to them - the Occupy movement? Or are you going with what appears to be some preconceived notions on your part and watching media which usually selectively reports on the sensationalism factor.

Capitalism is the best system out there - but, since we are all greedy fools at times, don't you think that we need to temper that capitalism with common sense regulation? Unfettered capitalism is a pretty bad idea...

So let me get this right. If you agree with them all is good, but if you disagree then you must not have talked to them or watched their talking heads spout baloney on various news services. Have you talked to them? Do you have preconceived notions of your own? (I freely admit I detest Michael Moore, and all the BS that he promotes as "truth". So anyone that thinks he walks on water is going to get short shrift from me.)

Here's mine - it is a dog eat dog world. You can't find enough legislation to control what people will do - although apparently we should keep trying. Some people are going to be rich (not me), some people are going to be poor (hopefully not me). There is no way to level the playing field, it is always easier to make money if you have money, and know the right people. Guess what protestors - the good old USA with all of its faults is still the most level playing field that they are ever likely to see. Think about if these protestors had to live in the caste system in India, or South Africa (even post apartheid). That's where it is really unfair. Here, you can become almost anybody no matter what your colour, original economic status, or religion.

So their options are limited. Easiest one is don't participate in the madness, but that takes people content with themselves that won't buy into the commercialism that businesses (of all types) want us to do. Witness Apple and their ability to convince people to buy the "next thing" even though they bought the last "thing" last year. Ridiculous in my eyes, but I bet that more than half of those protestors walk with gadgets like that on them. People apparently can't do the math - I would love to have 300 million people each give me a dollar. They probably wouldn't notice it, and I have just become a very weathly man.

Strupgolf: If you are PO'd @ B of A, then move your money. If enough people do, it will be just like Netflix.