Occupy WallStreet
 

CHARTS: Here's What The Wall Street Protesters Are So Angry About...

So, in another thread this topic was raised and it started my blood boiling. I read the article, I encourage anyone participating tint the discussion to read it too so we are all on the same page.

As far as I can tell the Average American (which trickles down to Canadians too eventually the world) are being SCREWED and not in the fun way. I am not well versed in this kind of discussion, I just feel like people may want a place to discuss what's happening to the world economy, which is going tits up. Someone's making a shit load of money in this crazy market ...by this article it looks like the biggest culprit is the Bank of America. Rotten to the core.

What are your thoughts?

From Cubicle Crowd
FUCK.ALL in this case means the Average low income American seemingly gets no real help.

Quebec pays the highest taxes in Canada. We pay both federal and provincial income tax as well as consumable goods sales tax on every item of 14-15% By paying the high taxes you get a LOT of whiny bitches moaning about how little money they have because of it. BUT as mentioned in my initial quote we get so many services, including universal healthcare...such as it is.

We are paying $1.41 a liter which is about $5.30 a gallon. My Honda is over 50 bucks a tank.

heres the thing i posted originally that sparked this convo:

Americans are the last people on Earth getting screwed, in relative terms. People like to bitch about the top 1%, but the 99% keeps voting in shitfuck candidates that do shitfuck things and spend all of the government's money and then don't give a shitfuck about the 99%.

The rich haven't done anything but fund the government that the 99% poorly chose, so I really, really have trouble siding with anyone that wants to vilify them.

I've had to spend my entire life listening to 99% of people talk about how imperative it is to elect the lesser of two evils, so I'm pretty happy letting people suck on evil for a minute.

And what choice do we really have in our candidates? The only way to run for a US office is to have connections. Have you read the qualifications necessary to get on an election ballot? It's forbiddingly exclusive. You either need to have a petition signed by 3% of each state's population (and most states require that 3% to be 3% of the majority of districts with a total of 3%, making it an individual impossibility with all the travel involved), or win the selection of a party that already has that covered. And anyone who signs the petition cannot vote in a primary BY LAW. And you have to inform them of that caveat before they sign. Guess how many signatures you'll get? Granted, I can still do the parody part, but I did investigate the process, because I wanted to at least make it a legitimate parody.

Thankfully, I live in a state where party selection is not mandatory, so I can vote in any one primary I choose. I have chosen "The lesser of two evils" on many occasions. I had to, any other selection is a waste of a vote. In 2000, I elected McCain over Bush specifically because I had the feeling we'd be in Iraq by the end of his presidency (ask anyone I talked to, I predicted it). I have voted for third party candidates in obvious landslide elections to attempt to promote a possibility for a viable third party (the more votes they can get, the stronger their showing can be in the following election). I did that in 1996, but not in 2000 or 2004. Those were important to me because I did not want another Bush in the White House. In 2008, I may have voted for McCain over Obama because I didn't feel either was the better candidate. However, when McCain selected Palin as his running mate, and after seeing records of her deeds (She stopped the bridge to nowhere, but nobody remembers she supported it in the first place), I couldn't let myself allow a bobblehead to become Vice President.

You insinuate that we have a choice in our elections. We have the choice between one liar and another. We don't have a choice of a person that truly reflects our ideals, those sorts of people don't get the campaign donations (from the rich and the corporations) necessary to run in the elections. Then we have to sort through their lies and try to find the one who is closer to the truth (or less far from our ideals), and that is our "Lesser of two evils" selection, because the alternative is far worse. To say "We the People" elect our government is only a half-truth. "We the People" elect the better candidate that the rich parade in front of us.

Oh yeah, you're totally right, America has just been boiling over with political dissatisfaction and feelings of disenfranchisement for decades. What can we do? The rich buy ads on TV and campaign! The sovereign political power of the will of the people is no match for that.

I can show you millions of Americans who have disgustingly and self-aggrandizingly convinced themselves that they are doing their country a service by voting for a bad candidate, but I can't show you a single person that America would have voted for more than Obama or McCain.

I will believe that popular opinion is not reflected in America's political institutions once the two actually differ in views.

When the people in power make bad decisions and adversely affect this country, I ask, "How did we get here? I never wanted that." You and the vast majority of America cannot say that with honesty, and that's why we can't have anything better.

The problem isn't that the rich won't provide you something good to vote for, the problem is that they bought your integrity and you don't want it back.

Now, granted I didn't read the article (sorry campy) but I was just wondering how all these people can afford to take off work to protest? Like, I'm a student, if I were to go there (I live in Queens), I would have to do it during the weekend. How can these people be there for a week/days at a time or longer?

Somehow, I'm reading this as sarcasm.

"aggrandizingly?" What does that mean? I don't delude myself that I'm "doing the country a service", I just vote on my personal views, which is what is supposed to happen.

I have asked that question on many occasions. However, I spend much more of my time worrying about just getting to the next paycheck. I will never have the opportunity to run for office, nor will 99% of the population. To be able to run for office (I'm considering state legislature and above) is an expensive venture. And to advertise your opinions in a public environment is either expensive (ads, etc.) or in the form of a protest. And protesters do get viewed in a negative light.