OCCUPY WALL STREET

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Dean Thoreau

Unfortunately, Occupy Wall St has been occupying privately owned property not a public park, not a city park,....The owner of the land has told them they will be evicted..and they need to move. They have done neither so they have been evicted.
Please do not take this for my lack of support for occupy wall street...I am extremely supportive of all occupy movements across the country i spend much time here at the occupy philly one....

But, having a legal leg to stand on is usually a smart idea. and there is such a thing as trespassing....I dont like it,,,I am glad the city of philadlephia has been absolutely wonderful...they have even supplied some electric lines form city hall...However, the people who own our old liberty park are not as open minded nor do they want the occupiers on their property. Sad ,, but nothing to get ones bloomers in a bunch about,,There are plenty of places in the wall street area to occupy, march and stroll...If they would put their signs down they could occupy the nyse visitors section for a day....or so...Peaceful gatherings as in occupiers walking 2 by 2 down wall street sidewalks very very slowly, in silence, no signs...(see with no signs and in silence then it is just people walking) walk slow enough and you can cause major bedlam on that street.... and bluntly a few stalled out vehicles....in opportune places can make quite a statement....
The biggest point is however, the occupiers have started something good, but for it to continue each individual in the 98% needs to take responsibility for their own actions and say enough is enough and cut up the credit cards, close the bank account, open a credit union account, and start cutting their shackles to corporate America by buying locally, not buying on credit, and by simply saying I dont need it...I dont want it....none of us need the new fancy cellphone or the latest computer, or 4 00 channels on tv or the latest shoes, purse or jeans....we want so we say need....and until every person stops supporting the 2% with their need for immediate material gratification,,all the occupations in the world will do nothing..

Read this..... and I promise you will see what I am saying..

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brendanc...wn-everything/

Dean:

I get what you're saying and I'm wrestling with this myself because my wife and I are not buying on credit and we've basically decided that if we can't save up for it, we don't need it. On the other hand, certain industries--and here I'm thinking about the computer industry--is predicated on a certain amount of 'churn'. Let's say that people took your advice and stopped buying the latest computer. That means that Dell, Apple and HP won't need as many employees so they'll lay them off. That means that the software vendors won't need as many employees so they'll lay *them* off. If everyone closes up their pockets and buys only the necessities then I think the economy will get worse, not better. It may not be the way we want it to be but I fear that whether we would prefer it, this is the economy we have to start with and make changes to that system.

I would like to see more emphasis on thrift and delayed gratification on the consumer side and a return to slow-and-steady growth on the business side. I would like to see businesspeople once again use, as one metric of success, hiring people instead of it being seen as, at best, an inconvenience to have a larger payroll this year than last.

Cheers
Aj

[Cin]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

Dean:

I get what you're saying and I'm wrestling with this myself because my wife and I are not buying on credit and we've basically decided that if we can't save up for it, we don't need it. On the other hand, certain industries--and here I'm thinking about the computer industry--is predicated on a certain amount of 'churn'. Let's say that people took your advice and stopped buying the latest computer. That means that Dell, Apple and HP won't need as many employees so they'll lay them off. That means that the software vendors won't need as many employees so they'll lay *them* off. If everyone closes up their pockets and buys only the necessities then I think the economy will get worse, not better. It may not be the way we want it to be but I fear that whether we would prefer it, this is the economy we have to start with and make changes to that system.

I would like to see more emphasis on thrift and delayed gratification on the consumer side and a return to slow-and-steady growth on the business side. I would like to see businesspeople once again use, as one metric of success, hiring people instead of it being seen as, at best, an inconvenience to have a larger payroll this year than last.

Cheers
Aj

The upper 10% of income earners have a much smaller debt burden relative to income and net worth. Those people should have ample spending power to help fuel an economic recovery.

The data in 2007 stipulated that low income families I made up 40% of the population and just 12% of consumption. Middle class, 50% of the population and 46% of the consumption. Wealthy 10% made up 42% of the consumption.

The figures might have change somewhat, but the reality is the rich can afford to consume enough to make up for the rest of us slowing down a bit considering what's been happening. Hell I bet they prefer to spend to help economic recovery more than they would like to pay more taxes. They could just take one for the team.