Источник
Public discussion posts pertaining to the Occupy Wall Street movement
Выбор редакции
20 сентября, 17:03

Remember Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez?

  • 0

Do you recognize the lady standing behind Bernie? here's pic of her platform

Выбор редакции
19 сентября, 15:23

The Profit of Dev-Econ Weakened

  • 0

Profit before people is, hopefully, a dying principle. "Rice expands free tuition: Rice University will not charge tuition for students from lower- and middle-income families making as much as $130,000 a year. The school aims to make college affordable for middle-income families." http://www.ricethresher.org/article/2018/09/rice-to-dramatically-expand-financial-aid "BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) -- Cornell University, Princeton University and Dartmouth College are among 11 private schools that have joined the Say Yes to Education program best known for providing high school students a tuition-free path to college. "The new additions bring to 54 the number in the Say Yes Higher Education Compact, whose members waive tuition for eligible students, Say Yes founder George Weiss said Wednesday." https://finance.yahoo.com/news/11-more-private-colleges-join-142026540.html

Выбор редакции
17 сентября, 15:38

Now is the time to UNITE!

  • 0

The primaries are over the selections have been made now will those that oppose Trump unify to defeat his minions or will we split apart to follow our dreams and let the GOP win?

Выбор редакции
16 сентября, 18:03

The Forest for the Trees: Stockholm Syndrome as we Re-Frame Societal Abuse in America and Beyond.

  • 0

I reposted my earlier comment as a post because so often we seem to ask why. We can't see the forest through the trees. And I think it is important we clear the fog: We are worth so much more. The answer to me is quite clear: Corporations and the narcissists running them have employed the psychology of gaslighting. For anyone who grew up with narcissistic parents...it is the exact same dynamic. When you begin to realize the relationship of codependency and narcissism it is being done on a mass scale. Employers and corporations have become quite like an abusive husband or parent. A lot of forced dependency coupled with a slow degredation of self worth...we have been taught to (latest buzzword) "reframe" the abuse. As well as adapt to a new albeit unhealthy "normal". We are taught we are responsible for how others treat us...that their behaviours are justified by our own failure and helplessness to change it. Instead of calling them out we work harder to prove our worth...which does NOT ever work.The helpless feeling feeds the worthless feeling which feeds the abuse cycle. To an extent yes we are responsible for what we accept...but NOT for the abuse - abuse is never justified or our fault...it is merely our responsibility to end the abuse and not allow it to continue. But it isn't our job to change the abuser or to somehow change his mindset...it is only our job to call out abuse and call it what it is. The idea of "reframing" abuse and taking it on as our responsibility to adapt to it...is an extremely dangerous idea. One used in many cults, and other abusive dynamics and the foundation for Stockholm Syndrome. Corporations coupled with government are abusing and taking advantage of the populous and what do we do? We work harder to prove our worth. This isnt working for us...they get our best and we get more abuse. It is our job to call it out and end it. We will never change the abuser or his mindset. We need to change what we are willing to allow. The first step is to realize this IS abuse. And to all those "tough" guys who voted for Trump. I hate to be the one to tell you...you have stepped into the role of an abused wife. Somehow believing your abuser is doing his best to take care of you...while he quietly and invisibly pulls the rug out from under your feet so you fall down and he can PRETEND to rescue you. It is quite difficult conundrum for how do you end abuse when you are reliant on your abuser...when you have no place else to work and you need him to put money in your bank account and feed you. Thus the dilemma. Sometimes he will let you succeed for a bit lulling you into a false sense of security before the next sabotage because rest assured the illusion of progress is his best weapon which allows him to distract and covertly destroy you. (He will convince you that you somehow induced the sabotage, and next time if you work harder to bend yourself into a better pretzel, you can possibly avoid it). He does not want you to and will never actually create conditions for you to succeed... because then you can escape. His grandeur and power is built and reliant on the mouse in his cage.

Выбор редакции
16 сентября, 14:37

Corporations are curious beasts...

  • 0

Corporations are curious beasts, they devour and adapt, in the 1970’s when the Equal Rights Amendment was moving though the country, they took the opportunity to create the “two income family”. Now they use the fear of immigrants to beat back efforts to provide public services. I guess that’s why wealth inequality is worst than its ever been and the plight of the average American hasn’t been this bad since the great depression. With an economy going at near 3% a year, 10 years after the collapse, almost all the gains are going to the very rich while the GOP, holding all seats of power, plan to reduce retirement benefits to pay for even more tax cuts. If the American people don’t wake up and start voting our nuclear arsenal will fall into the hands of religious fundamentalists. Was that an odd segway? Well desperate people do desperate things, the corporations should think about that. If we don’t stop the GOP from making the situation worse with even more tax cuts and program cuts then people will lash out and we will be thinking as fondly of Trump as some short memory people are of W right now.

Выбор редакции
15 сентября, 16:07

Victories keep rolling in! Democratic Insurgents Topple 6 New York Senate Incumbents

  • 0

By Vivian Wang Sept. 13, 2018 Years of anger at a group of Democratic state senators who had collaborated with Republicans boiled over on Thursday, as primary voters ousted nearly all of them in favor of challengers who had called them traitors and sham progressives. The losses were not only a resounding upset for the members of the Independent Democratic Conference, who outspent their challengers several times over, but also a sign that the progressive fervor sweeping national politics had hobbled New York’s once-mighty Democratic machine, at least on a local level. The most high-profile casualty was Senator Jeffrey D. Klein of the Bronx, the former head of the I.D.C. In that role, he was for years one of Albany’s most powerful players, sharing leadership of the chamber with his counterparts in the Republican conference and participating in the state’s secretive budget negotiations. But on Thursday, he was defeated by Alessandra Biaggi, a lawyer and former aide to Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, after a campaign in which Ms. Biaggi cornered Mr. Klein into spending more than $2 million, an astonishing sum for a state legislative race. (Cynthia Nixon, in her unsuccessful bid against Mr. Cuomo, spent less.) “If this doesn’t prove that political currency is people over money, I do not know what does,” Ms. Biaggi, who spent one-tenth as much as Mr. Klein, said at her victory party. “We have now cut the head of the I.D.C. snake.” Mr. Klein did not appear at his watch party. Also defeated were five other former I.D.C. members: Senators Tony Avella and Jose Peralta in Queens; Senator Jesse Hamilton in Brooklyn; Senator Marisol Alcántara in Manhattan; and Senator David Valesky in Syracuse. They fell to John Liu, Jessica Ramos, Zellnor Myrie, Robert Jackson and Rachel May, respectively. The only former I.D.C. members to survive the primary were Senator Diane Savino, of Staten Island, and Senator David Carlucci, of Rockland County. In another high-profile race, Senator Martin Dilan, who was not part of the I.D.C., was defeated by Julia Salazar, a 27-year-old democratic socialist whose candidacy energized young voters in swaths of gentrifying Brooklyn, despite near-constant controversy in the final weeks of the campaign. “This is a victory for workers,” Ms. Salazar told supporters at a party in Bushwick. The I.D.C.’s challengers had offered themselves as “true blue” alternatives to a cast of so-called fake Democrats. Though the I.D.C. disbanded in April — the move was widely viewed as a concession to rising pressure from the party’s left wing — the challengers were not satisfied, insisting that the incumbents had proven they were more interested in self-advancement than progressive change. In reality, the challengers’ victories alone will have little effect on the fate of progressive legislation in Albany. The true test of that will come in November’s general election, when Democrats seek to flip several Republican-held Senate seats. But the challengers’ wins sent a resounding symbolic message: The restless, impatient mood that has swelled within the national Democratic Party this year had come for local incumbents, too. Several of the I.D.C. challengers, as well as Ms. Salazar, had aligned themselves with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the 28-year-old first-time politician who, in a June congressional primary, upset Representative Joseph Crowley, the No. 4 Democrat in the House. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez endorsed Ms. Biaggi and Ms. Ramos. Ms. Ramos’s district overlaps with Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s. Ms. Salazar in particular drew comparisons to Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, who campaigned vigorously for Ms. Salazar, dispatching her own volunteers to Brooklyn to canvass for her and promoting her to her large Twitter following. “I think young women are a very visual, but also functional, embodiment of a rebuke of basically New York’s old-boy network,” Ms. Ocasio-Cortez said in an interview at Ms. Biaggi’s party. “And voters get that.” The I.D.C. challengers also allied themselves with Ms. Nixon’s opposition to Mr. Cuomo, and to Zephyr Teachout’s attorney general bid. The Working Families Party, a progressive minor party and frequent antagonist of the governor, endorsed all the challengers and provided training and staff for their campaigns. Bill Lipton, the state director of the W.F.P., cast the I.D.C. losses as a major triumph, even in the face of Ms. Nixon’s defeat. “The center of gravity has shifted, and Andrew Cuomo will face a radically different Albany,” he said. Still, the divergent fates of the challengers, compared to Ms. Nixon and Ms. Teachout, suggested that the I.D.C. upsets spoke more to the strength of anti-Republican antipathy across the Democratic Party, than of anti-establishment sentiment in its far-left flank. At a polling site in the Bronx, several voters who said they had chosen Ms. Biaggi also picked Mr. Cuomo over Ms. Nixon, citing the governor’s experience. That was also true of many of the establishment figures who endorsed the challengers yet backed Mr. Cuomo, such as Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Representative Carolyn Maloney and the City Council speaker, Corey Johnson. Indeed, for allies of the insurgent slate that had challenged the Democratic Party machine, the anti-I.D.C. candidates emerged as the only electoral victors of the night. Mr. Klein and his fellow former I.D.C. members, by contrast, campaigned as virtual islands. While they nominally won the support of Mr. Cuomo and their Democratic colleagues in the Senate after announcing their dissolution, Mr. Cuomo — who himself has been accused of tacitly supporting the I.D.C. — said little if anything about them on the campaign trail. The I.D.C. members had faced primary challenges before, and they had long been a target for Democratic activists. But that anger, for years restricted to only the most politically attuned New Yorkers, crested over the past few months, in tandem with the surge of progressive energy nationwide after the 2016 presidential election. Activists began calling the I.D.C. members “Trump Democrats” and sought to educate voters who knew nothing about their senators’ so-called betrayal. “We didn’t exist a few months ago, and now we’ve raised over $250,000,” said Jim Casteleiro, the campaign manager of No I.D.C. NY, a volunteer group. Nearly all the voters at the Bronx poll site who backed Ms. Biaggi cited Mr. Klein’s role in the I.D.C. as a motivating factor. “He’s a good man, but I don’t think it’s time for ushering in another Republican majority,” Peter McHugh, 59, said of Mr. Klein. Also potentially harmful to Mr. Klein was the barrage of negative headlines in recent months, including an accusation of sexual misconduct against him and a state Board of Elections finding of improper campaign financing. The challengers’ victories boosted the emerging progressive narrative that the old political model — buying expensive television ads, cozying up to real estate, corralling union support — had been displaced by vigorous grass-roots organizing. Each challenger outspent his or her opponent on Facebook advertisements, sometimes by a huge margin. Ms. Biaggi and her allies spent between $14,500 and $93,800 on Facebook ads since May, while Mr. Klein and his supporters spent between $2,400 and $14,796. Ms. Salazar adopted similar tactics against Mr. Dilan, who although he was not a member of the I.D.C. was successfully portrayed as another out-of-touch corporate Democrat. The Democratic Socialists of America, of which Ms. Salazar is a member, deployed its full organizing power for her in Brooklyn. A string of negative headlines about Ms. Salazar in the final weeks of the campaign — suggesting that she had misled reporters and voters about her immigration status, religious background and socioeconomic status — seemed to have little impact. Still, Lina Newton, a political-science professor at Hunter College, noted the geographic limitations to the grass-roots organizing that has propelled the insurgent candidates to victory. Ms. Nixon, after all, deployed similar tactics in a statewide race to no avail. “Personal outreach is much more important on a local level,” Professor Newton said. And on that local level on Thursday, it was potent. Ms. Biaggi, in an interview, gestured to the sneakers on her feet, calling the previous hours “the most exhausting day in my life.” For Mr. Klein, she had a simple message: “It was a tough fight. And, I should also say, we should thank him for his service,” she said. “But his time is up.” Mariana Alfaro, Nate Schweber and Angela Macropoulos contributed reporting https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/13/nyregion/state-senate-election-results-idc-klein.html

Выбор редакции
10 сентября, 18:16

The Market is self regulating.

  • 0

“I believe in the free market!” “You mean like you have faith in God? You don't know exactly who or what He is. His ways and means are a mystery. His purposes are hidden from you and unknowable by one who is so much less than Him. You believe He loves you. He loves not just life in general but you individually. God knows and loves you. Like God, rich free market capitalists love and care for you. Is that what you believe? Yes. I see. The rich and their corporations are our salvation. We must have faith if we are to be saved.” “If I'm smarter or quicker than others, I deserve the money I make off of them.” “So there's no such thing as fraud? Con artists aren't criminals, they're just smarter than we ordinary people? Caveat emptor is the whole of the law? If you're quicker, stronger than me and intimidate me in such a way that I give you what you want of me, is that exchange based on the threat of violence not a crime?”

Выбор редакции
07 сентября, 15:52

Stock Fantasy

  • 0

I've never subscribed to Oscar Wilde's pejorative definition of a cynic. The Philosophy of Cynicism can be reduced to the demand for honesty even if brutal. But, "A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing," does describe a wannabe elite investor, who is actually a fool. Consider the price of stocks in the market compared to the real value of the issueing entity. When a stock is issued, an investment is made and the issuer receives the capital, which adds to the value of existing assets. When a stock is subsequently traded, the issuer receives no further material wealth from the transaction, presuming that the entity is not a party to the deal. So can today's stock price really be said to reflect the value of Apple or Amazon or any other stock issuer? Are they worth $trillion or are they worth the value of their material assets and cash minus their liabilities? Are the mass of stock traders really so savvy that they know the difference between price and value or take such into account when they bid up the price of those stocks? I think not! By the way, this discussion applies to the real estate market too. I think the cyclic boom and bust of the markets is evidence of the foolishness of most participants. I think the all time winners buy stocks when they are at their low, often at the IPO. The average fool in the market starts buying as the prices rise. When they're high enough the big operators start a panic and the fools sell out, often lower than they bought in. When the price is low enough, guess who buys and starts the cycle one more time. Is there a factor that limits how many times the con can be played? I'll leave the answer of that to your imagination and your estimation of the wisdom of the all time losers that bid up the price of stocks and real estate. .

Выбор редакции
05 сентября, 14:13

Insurgent Democrat Topples Another Incumbent in Boston Primary

  • 0

"A Boston City Council member won a stunning upset victory over a veteran Democratic representative in a Massachusetts primary contest that had become a proxy battle between older, whiter incumbents in the party and a new, more diverse generation of younger candidates. Ayanna Pressley, 44, defeated 10-term incumbent Mike Capuano, 66, in the primary to represent the district, which covers parts of Boston, Cambridge and the surrounding suburbs, all but ensuring she’ll become the first black woman elected to Congress from Massachusetts. No Republican sought a nomination to run for the seat. “It seems like change is on the way,” Pressley said in her victory speech, echoing her campaign slogan “Change Can’t Wait.” ..."

Выбор редакции
04 сентября, 16:07

Monopsony

  • 0

The top dogs pay more for labor and the middle men take it all, while paying minimum wage [no doubt] to those who actually do the work. How many otherwise good people will rationalize these travesties by saying of the parasitic creeps in the middle, "It's their business." Monopsony is as great a danger to real people as the oligopolies that take the little money we make and saddle us with life long debt to get what we need to live in our capitalist utopia. The workers at the bottom of this pyramid of parasites are really fucked by everyone in the great pile of "entrepreneurs" above them. "Like a fissure in a once solid rock that deepens and spreads, once a business sheds an activity like janitorial services or housekeeping, the secondary businesses doing that work are also affected, often shifting those activities to still other businesses. A common practice in janitorial work, for instance, is for companies in the hotel or grocery industries to outsource that work to cleaning companies. Those companies, in turn, often hire smaller businesses to provide workers for specific facilities or shifts. Because each level of a fissured workplace structure requires a financial return for their work, the further down one goes, the slimmer are the remaining profit margins. At the same time, as you move downward, labor typically represents a larger share of overall costs - and one of the only costs in direct control for satellite players further from the superstar firm around which they orbit." https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/09/why-we-should-worry-about-monopsony.html

Выбор редакции
01 сентября, 17:16

Regression

  • 0

We're regressing to a feudal like hierarchy. "Hudson: As Samir Amin said at the meeting yesterday, China is the economy that is trying to be the exception to the Western economic model. That model is forcing a choice between civilization and barbarism. The West is moving rapidly into economic barbarism and militarism. "As you can see, the austerity program of the Euro is destroying the economy there. The United States is cutting taxes on the rich, while indebting the working class very highly. The one country that is independent and not taking the advice of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund is China. "So we're hoping to do what we can to make the Chinese economy successfully resistant. What that means is how is China going to handle its real estate, how is it going to handle its debt, how is it going to handle its tax system." - reprinted on August 8, 2018 at Naked Capitalism https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/08/michael-hudson-life-thought-autobiography.html

Выбор редакции
30 августа, 16:46

This was once an optimistic place where people dreamed of changing the future.

  • 0

Then the Green Party ego whores co-opted it and it became a "beat down the Dems" site, we can't even celebrate our victories here because those come from joining the Democratic Party and fighting the GOP. We were once a movement of unity but this forum has become a backbiting destructive force.