What is Occupy Wallstreet?

[Taem]

No, their explicit goals aren't clear. [...] Worse, having goals with this group is dangerous. How often will people give a list of goals, they get one of those accomplished, and suddenly the gas pedal is let up and everything falls apart.

Your own quotes state there is no hierarchy, and they have no goals, only vices. Part of my point. This group is like an aimless angry mob. Without a clear cut leader or goals to uphold, it's purpose is ambiguous and, I hate to say it, easily corruptible (send in some cronies to a Gathering and implant idea "x" and get the entire mob to start chanting it).

Along those lines, just a worst case here: Jim Morrison was master at group/mass manipulation; he could even, and often did, send and entire audience of concert goers on a riot destroying the town they were playing in. This Occupy group seems like they might be prime targets of coercion with their ill-directed ire and aimless goals... Suddenly, this movement has meaning and focus, but is it what this party stood for all along, or is this somebody else's ideals? Nobody knows because its purpose is not outlined! Something like this only has to happen at one rally and suddenly, the entire movement is branded, which is why in it's current state, these Occupy demonstrations seem dangerous to me, just people, most whom aren't even sure what they are protesting, gathered to express their anger.

I see many problems with your quoted sources logic which I'll outline below:

In the first act, bankers took advantage of deregulation to run wild (and pay themselves princely sums), inflating huge bubbles through reckless lending.

Which normal citizens took advantage of buddy. Don't just blame the bankers. I personally know, and I bet almost everyone on these boards does also, at least three people who rode the wave trying to cash in on home prices and got burned. Whose choice was that? The bankers didn't force them to sign these balloon rates. I'd hope if they bought a house, people would understand what the hell they were doing. Unless your implying all Americans are too stupid to understand what they are doing from day to day, and the bankers are the ones who control the world? This is a load of hogwash.

In the second act, the bubbles burst — but bankers were bailed out by taxpayers, with remarkably few strings attached, even as ordinary workers continued to suffer the consequences of the bankers’ sins.

Who was really bailed out? If the big banks fell, well guess what, I'm 100% sure the entire economy would have tanked. There would not have been enough money for the US to pay the companies claiming bankruptcy and the US would have went down, which would have brought the world down. So again, who was really bailed out? And who really put us in the mess in the first place? I doubt it was the bankers buying up all the homes. I'm not saying they didn't ignore all the warning signs, but if your pointing fingers, might as well point at the people snatching up the homes first.

And, in the third act, bankers showed their gratitude by turning on the people who had saved them, throwing their support — and the wealth they still possessed thanks to the bailouts — behind politicians who promised to keep their taxes low and dismantle the mild regulations erected in the aftermath of the crisis.

Again, the interest rates are so low, banks can't make money. Blame the fed for dropping the rate so ridiculously low. Bernake should be shot. The big banks are greedy, sure, and are imposing redundant penalties on necessary banking practices (like using your ATM card, or looking at your statement, overdraft "protection", etc.), but that's all within their right, and the reason I bank at a Credit Union. Take your business away from the big banks and they will change their ways. Again, its UP TO YOU as an individual to make a difference, but blaming banks... makes no sense. Show they your unhappy by moving all your loans and whatnot to a Credit Union.

"How do you close the deficit? End the wars and tax the rich!"
"End the wars and tax the rich... that's something I can get behind!"

A new spin on, "Get government out of our politics!" Pick your slogan. Besides, I don't agree with ending the war. I think we should invest american bases in Iraq to be prepared for anything. You always hear in the news how we caught terrorist X here in the states, whereas in other countries with less security, subways are derailed and blown up in London or Ireland, car bombs set off in almost any major city, but not in America. I was shocked to hear about the FBI or CIA finding out about Iran sending an ambassador to hire Mexican drug cartel to do a hit on the Saudi Prince's ambassador. America is the real deal in law enforcement and while we may not be 100% safe, we are leaps and bounds safer than many other countries. Is it because of our distance from the Middle-East, or the way we do business in other countries? I'm kind of leaning towards the latter, meaning I feel these wars, or at least our occupancy of the Middle-East territory, is vital to our security and sovereignty. I'm sorry most people don't see it that way.

Everyone not in the top x% has been in a decline since the deregulation in the early 80's, and if you can't see how unbalanced things are now then you're quite frankly a lost cause.

This argument of yours is a total strawman, and a ruse. Of course any moron can see how unbalanced things are financially right now (which might explain why there are so many protesters without a clue as to what they are protesting) but this has nothing to do with what others in your quotes are suggesting this Occupy movement represents. Your quote is a, "if your not for us, your against us" mentality with the pro bono caveat of being generic enough to suggest that if you can see the economy is unbalanced, then you must understand what we're about, because people who don't see how unbalanced the economy is are the ones we're protesting against! Nice little attempt at manipulation. I saw right through it.

So lets sum this up: The Occupy movement represents an overall dissatisfaction in these areas;

1) Getting government out of big business (privatize as much as possible)
2) Taxing the rich by fixing tax loopholes for the wealthy
3) Ending the "wars" (I have no idea what that means)
4) Fixing the "corruption" of the privatized banking industry
5) Fixing the "corruption" of Wallstreet
6) Fixing congress (perhaps a 3rd party?)
7) Fixing tuition costs (by punishing privatized schools?)
8) Fixing health care costs (by punishing insurance companies?)
9) Getting people back to work (how exactly?)

Did I miss anything? I didn't read any calls for Social Security reform, but I'm sure that can be added in there. And exactly how does this group plan on approaching these goals? To what end? Just bitching about these issues does not solve anything. If this group had an agenda, an outline, a goal, a purpose.... then maybe I could back them because they have many valid points, but as of now, its just grandiose whining with no clear cut presentation on a way to fix the presented issues. This group needs a leader to write a letter to congress outlining their angst's, then perhaps something will get done and coalitions will form in unity against "x". Until then, I stand by my initial assessment that Occupy Whatever is nothing more than a potentially dangerous group of misguided, angry citizens. Having said all that, it could be something quite spectacular with the right influence and some direction. It's definitely turned a lot of heads.

---

I look forward to your full thoughts Taem, and I'm wondering if you might be able to explain a potential process through which powers vested in the Federal government might be ceded back to the States. Having worked for the government, I can think of a few things I'd prefer handled at a local level, but I cannot for the life of me see a viable path to making that happen.

I'm going to have to give this some serious thought without sounding too cartoonish. My ideas were pretty simple and straightforward, but not entirely thought out. I'm going to have to dwell on this one for a bit.