ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Economy & Government

Occupying America

Updated on March 30, 2014
Source

By: Wayne Brown


The liberal media continues its struggle to keep the less-than-interesting news of the “Occupy Wall Street” debacle in the forefront of the news. The majority of Americans of a mature age saw this crowd back in the mid-60’s and have quickly dispensed with assigning any significant credibility to their desires. While we all appreciate the fact that we live in a country in which we are free to demonstrate and publicize our beliefs, mainstream America has little interest in watching or supporting a crowd of people simply demanding to be given things they have yet to earn or contribute to for that matter. The list of demands which forms the basis of this so-called “movement” could have been written by a group of junior high students or a naïve set of minds nourished on socialism. No doubt, many of our centers of higher learning allow the faculty plenty of opportunity to offer up this philosophy as opposed to teaching the pitfalls of it.


There is an underlying tone in the discussion of these events which seems to suggest that the basis for opportunity in America is limited. It suggests that there is a direct correlation between success and poverty to say that one can only be exchanged for the other so that the scales remain in balance. Given this rationale, those who listen to it and actually believe it are left to assume that they cannot achieve opportunity unless someone hands it to them or gets out of the way so they can have a place in line. If neither of those events takes place, they are relegated to a future of poverty among the downtrodden.


It is no wonder such thinking evolves especially when the goal of promoting such thought is to incite class envy and warfare. The rich are evil and got rich because they have not paid their fair share. So, on that basis, can we assume the poor are of the reciprocal description? I think not. But, given the rationale that “there are only so many places at the table”; one can begin to understand how minds can be shaped to believe that some folks have more than their share. In fact, no one promised any of us a share of anything except the “opportunity” to pursue happiness. No one promised that we would achieve it but we can pursue it all we want in America.


If one could take all the wealth of America, redistribute the assets evenly to the point that each and every person had an equal share, what can we imagine would happen? Would everyone be ridiculously happy and all be well across the fruited plains? The answer is clearly “no”. In essence, we conduct that experiment day in and day out. All of us face our opportunities and decide what we will do with them on a regular basis. Will we use our savings to buy a car? Will we take that vacation even though our hours have been reduced at work? Will we put a portion of our paycheck in the bank or just use it to party on Saturday night? We all make those decisions and each one of those decisions is the basis of an opportunity to take a different action; an action which could change the direction of our lives for the better.


There seems to be a perception that those who are classed as “wealthy” did nothing with the opportunities in their life except to “get lucky”. Certainly there are those who were born into wealth and always will be. There are also many, many more that had a vision, a focus, and a burning idea that they invested everything they could find into because they believed in it. For many, the gamble paid off and paid off well. In return, there are those in our society who want to demonize their success and convince others that it came only on the backs of others who were downtrodden in the process. We are back to that thought process of trading one rich person for one poor one.


Steven Jobs, one of the creators of Apple, died at the young age of 56 from pancreatic cancer. In that time span, he managed to get through college, gain a productive knowledge of computers, math, and science. He started a business in his garage which turned into the world of Apple Computers. Apple gave the world McIntosh, I-Phone, and I-Pad just to name a few of the things which came from the mind of Jobs. Steven Jobs was enormously successful and made a lot of money in the process. No doubt, he would be considered among the “wealthy” Americans who have not shouldered their “fair share” over time.


The same could be said for Warren Buffet and for Bill Gates. Both have been enormously successful. Buffet showed the world that a common man from Omaha with the right mathematical skills and some business knowledge could amass a fortune using good business decisions and a knowledge of the market place. Gates moved the computer “software” business from a point at which the term was not even understood to making it a common household reference. Both men, in their own way, like Steven Jobs, have done much to change the world we live in today yet there are those who want to label them as “evil” because of their success and point out that they have not taken on their “fair share” of the burden.


These are only a few examples and there are many more in America today. These are people who started out with the same opportunities all of us have in America. They had the opportunity for education and work. They had the opportunity to spend or save their money by their own choice. They had the opportunity to apply the knowledge they had acquired. They had the opportunity to dream and to work to make those dreams a reality. There was no one who stopped by their house one morning and handed them a box with “success” in it. They came by it like most do, by the sweat of their brow and by gambling all they had on the future. Had they gambled and lost, society might have labeled them “fools” and dropped their names from the history books.


Because Steven Jobs and Bill Gates were pioneers in revolutionizing electronics and the computer industry, does that mean they took away the opportunity for you or me to excel in those areas? That assumption would be a total mistake. Certainly it is a more competitive arena but given the fact that an individual can come forward with ideas that approach the same grand scale; ideas that bring breakthroughs in technology and improve lifestyles, there is still more than enough opportunity to go around. We have not seen the last Steven Jobs, Bill Gates, or Warren Buffet in America; not as long as there is an opportunity to achieve success in this country.


While Jobs, Gates, and Buffet have achieved success, can we assume that it came because they just had “great ideas”? That answer would be a resounding “no”. Great ideas are a good start to business success but one must have a viable plan to get from the idea concept to the physical reality of placing that product or service in the marketplace for consumption. Along the way, we can expect to run into those who will attempt to “steal” the idea for themselves on the basis of greed and outright laziness. These are “successful” people as well who have achieved their success in a different way. They are always out there and always will be. Some break the law while others simply walk a tightrope of technicality. These are people who give success a bad name and they exist regardless of whether a society is entrenched in capitalism, socialism, or communism. They exist because the desire they possess is driven simply by taking advantage of others to achieve their goals. No particular societal philosophy will eradicate them…they are part of the cockroaches of the world.


Given these types exist, should we eradicate all wealth and divide up the money equally? Theoretically, we could do that if we wanted to establish a totalitarian government that operated in such a manner. Even so, if that event took place, wait a few months; a few years, and the wealth will be just as out of balance again because there is an inherent trait within society by which some people accumulate wealth through work, focus, achievement and sacrifice. Conversely, there are those who, when given wealth, manage to squander it without regard to its limits until they awaken one morning and the wealth is all gone. Suddenly, they are victims; downtrodden; cheated by those with money. In the end, the only balance we can hope to achieve is to attempt to individually balance the efforts we make against the opportunity we have in life. If we elect to do little or nothing with those opportunities, then we can only blame ourselves as opposed to claiming that we were “victimized by the wealthy”.


America can rips itself apart on the basis of class envy and warfare and little of nothing will be achieved from it except chaos. The current “demonstrations” by the “Occupy Wall Street” crowd can be escalated into violence that ends in property being destroyed, businesses looted, lives threatened, and general chaos in the street. Some within our society who would seek a different path for America would relish the idea of the public fighting in the streets. At that point, it would be much easier to declare that the “system” had failed and the institution of a new government was more than justified. In that process, most of the freedoms we have today would disappear very quietly as would the Constitution and The Bill of Rights.


We have some significant financial problems in America today. We have those problems because some less than intelligent elected officials created government legislation which sanctioned “theft” in the American marketplace. Some individuals and companies capitalized on that premise while it existed at the expense of the American taxpayer. Unfortunately, that same government also “guaranteed” much of the money which was loaned in these schemes and had to pony up in the end when the “bubble” burst. The results sent shock waves through our economy. Many Americans suffered as a result of the downturn and that suffering is still evident in many regions today. We are here because some bad government and some bad business came together in a toxic concoction of monumental proportions never seen before in our history.


Given that premise, let’s withhold the judgment to say that all business is bad; all corporations are bad, and all wealthy, successful people are not shouldering their “fair share” of the load. In fact, the “load” or, in this case, the debt burden is a dynamic thing which is ever-changing but only in the upward direction. Government has no fiscal responsibility when it comes to money. It will spend all that is available and more…a proven fact. On that basis, how do we ever shoulder “our fair share”? If you and I pay more; if the wealthy man pays more, government only finds more and more ways to spend the revenue leaving us all in the same boat. All the wealthy people in American cannot fix that problem even if they tried.


Our problems are systemic in that we have a bloated government which continues to grow by the day and consume more and more revenue for its own upkeep. It is filled with and directed by far too many career politicians who have made it their mission to spend, spend, spend using every possible revenue source available including borrowed money to salve that itch. Spending money buys power; power over the people; power by the people, but no power “for” the people. Politicians, like those who would prey on the good ideas of others are a cancer on our society, which if we are to have a future, must be removed from their lofty posts and replaced with individuals who “potentially” can have America’s best interest in mind regardless of which side of the aisle they sit on.


America has weathered many storms in her long history ranging from revolution at creation to the bloody battles of our own civil war. We have endured famine, dust bowls, depression, political corruption, assassination, wars, nuclear threats, terrorism, and still we have survived. Through it all there have been both the poor and the wealthy yet we still survived as a nation because our focus was never about class warfare. The seeds of such envy have been planted over the past couple of years and the cancer grows within us. Feeding the fires of class warfare will never solve our problems; it will only speed up the process of ripping the nation apart at the seams. Lincoln told us, “A house divided shall not stand” and we, as Americans, should all take that to heart today for every word of it is as true now as it was way back in our long history as a great nation.


The current movement by the “Occupy Wall Street” faction will not address or solve the issues facing America today. The focus, if there is one, ignores the root of the problem…big government and runaway spending practices while pointing fingers paint the business world as an evil empire existing solely for the convenience and gain of the wealthy. This is pure and simple, envy in America which has no potential goal except to distract and disrupt the true issues.


As to the “Occupy Wall Street” crowd, we can only wonder if this so-called movement will produce as many socialist and communist as the “Hippie-Movement” of the 60’s did. If so, we can count on an ample stock of political appointees for future presidential administrations who will hang on to their dream of dismantling America and making it a “better place”.



©Copyright WBrown2011. All Rights Reserved.


10/18/2011


Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      You continue to avoid the fact that your beloved Marxism is actually an evil design that has resulted in over 100,000,000 deaths.

      Your beloved socialism in Europe has Spain, Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Ireland close to economic collapse, another fact that you simply ignore.

      And you call ME glib?

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      I have read nearly all of your stories and posts, why does a man with obvious intelligence and ability resort to contrite and glib statements when it comes to politics. It’s like you are Jekyll and Hyde, brilliant one minute and a retard the next.

      You still haven’t answered my questions.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "As far as Marxism/socialism killing 100 million people you and I both know that this is a ridicules statement."

      I said it had accounted for 100,000,000 deaths, an accurate statement, mostly due to the efforts of Stalin and Mao, in the name of Marxism.

      I know this makes you squirm, but anybody who still supports the evil of Marxism should squirm.

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      First, you didn't define it; you gave your opinion of it.

      As far as Marxism/socialism killing 100 million people you and I both know that this is a ridicules statement. It’s like saying that guns kill a million people per year. It’s not the guns that kill the people, its people that kill people. It’s not an economic system that killed 100 million people; it was those in power that killed people. And as I asked you before was America a Marxist society from the 40s through the 60s?

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      100,000,000 dead, and that does not bother you?

      You asked me to define Marxism, and so I did, but then you ignored the 100,000,000 dead.

      What does that tell us about you?

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      And like a good little Republican he side steps the question because he doesn't know the answer and is too steeped in his beliefs to look it up. As the old saying goes, if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle them with bull#$#@. By the way did you know that Jesus and the Apostles were socialists?

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      And so, like a good little Marxist, he totally ignores 100,000,000 dead people and the misery that followed every attempt to force this hideous system on those who don't want it.

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      Because, as I thought, you don’t have the slightest idea of what either is. You can’t describe the economics, neither the political system that drives it. To you they are words that describe anyone who doesn’t fly the Republican banner. As I stated before I would like to see us return to the economics of the 40s, 50s, and 60, was everyone in America at that time a Marxist or Socialist?

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "Will please tell me what your definition of Marxism/socialism is."

      Sure. It's a failed economic and sociopolitical system that has already accounted for the murders of over 100,000,000 innocent people, abject misery, and the failure of every country that has tried it.

      But why do you ask?

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      Will please tell me what your definition of Marxism/socialism is.

      I believe in a balanced approach to our country’s economy. And not because I’m a Liberal, I was a conservative for most of my life and you would know me if you saw me. I changed my thinking when I know longer answered to the Party for my pay.

    • RealHousewife profile image

      Kelly Umphenour 6 years ago from St. Louis, MO

      It's so true! The last two years we have had to cut back on help. In my business - others depend on us to get work.....didn't have much the last two years! I had to change our whole company dynamics to even stay afloat.....we had to work more (and not like we are slacking!) Thank goodness I don't have to retire now - won't even look at those retirement funds because it is painful.

      Want to know something else?

      The only reason I have stayed afloat - is because of all the foreclosure reports that have been ordered in the last two years. Usually I make money when people buy and sell homes - it hurts to make money from everyone losing theirs. But that's how it is right now. Sorry Americans!

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      Continued support of Marxism/socialism defies logic, since it has failed miserably no matter how many times it has been attempted. It brings nothing but failure, misery, and death.

      Well over 100,000,000 have been murdered in the name of Karl Marx.

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @the bunco squad....You are certainly welcome. I don't throw out comment on the basis of whether the agree with mine unless things just move to personal attacks. Now I can't possibly answer all these points you make in this space without writing a hub which is what I would suggest to you. I will attempt a few points. Unemployment and welfare are not nececssarily a problem to me until they begin to grow and get out of hand...becoming the norm. That is a sign there is a growing base of "non-producers" in the economy. With regard to the regulations by Bush, you are comparing less than three years of Obama with eight years of Bush...a bit premature. With regard to job creation, in all fairness take the 200,000+ temporary jobs of census taker out and all the jobs recently lost in the solar industry bankruptcies. Obama selectively droped money into the economy with the majority of it ending up in the hands of unions or green industries without mainstream effect. On that basis, each job created cost the American taxpayer over $357,000. Not very efficient from an economic stimulus standpoint. The government continues to spend and borrow the deficit portion. The national debt continues to rise coming dangerously close to the GDP level. Eventually assets = liabilities and we are broke...the debt collectors show up but there are no winners with the exception of any real property which can be confiscated. At present, the only thing I see Obama doing is driving the economy deeper and deeper into a stagnant mode which eventually robs the majority of people in the middle class of their economic powers. They then become far more dependent on government and far more receptive to the suggested direction in which they should march. I realize it is not your intent to push for a socialist or communist domination in making your points but the direction taken and the events accompanying it clearly show the intent. The Occupy Wall Street is just another grand opportunity to "use" people for those purposes in my mind. I hope that I am wrong but I certainly see the opportunity and the motive for doing so. A socialist government can eventually dismantle the wealthy but when that takes place the masses are all in the same state of being...poor and doing without. That has been proven time and again over history. WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @Pollyalanna...Thank you for the comments. I think we have a number wealthy folks out there who do good things every day and ask nothing in return...not even recognition. We all work to attain success and a level of security along with some satisfaction of self-esteem. Looking to the government for those factors is not the answer. We have previous generations who did not have the ability or opportunity to earn large amounts of money and prepare for the days of retirement who do need that assistance but as time goes on, the individual will have to shoulder more of that burden. WB

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      First, I want to thank you for this well written response and the opportunity for rebuttal.

      Wiki: “Keynesian economics advocates a mixed economy — predominantly private sector, but with a significant role of government and public sector — and served as the economic model during the later part of the Great Depression, World War II, and the post-war economic expansion (1945–1973),”

      “With regard to the Monopoly model you use as an example remember one thing...the property is still "property" and the cash is still "cash"...possession is what changed.”

      Yes, from the bottom to the top.

      “Those transactions are going on in the American economy every day so the dynamics of exchange are taking place. But if you have no cash or no property, you are not likely part of the transaction.”

      My point exactly, soon no money pass hands except among the rich.

      “The problem with comparing the Monopoly game with the economy is that the model is far to simple to demonstrate the dynamics of the economy. For every transaction in an economy which takes places, six to seven other people are involved or affected in some way and trickle down(good or bad) takes place.”

      In the game the bank represents both the wealthy and the government. As either it pays the wages of $200 per pass of GO. The wage stays the same no matter what. If one player calls himself the wholesaler, another retailer, and another the ditch digger makes no difference. It still represents the trickle down well enough. And the game always ends in the same way. One player holds all of the wealth and the rest are destitute. The only way to prolong the game indefinitely is to have governmental intrusion in which wealth is taken from the richest players and given to the poorest to balance the system.

      In a perfect world, the wealthy would pay out greater and greater amount willingly through investment and wages and voluntarily balance the system. But this has not been the case since Supply Side economics took over in the seventies. It doesn’t help that we allow Wall Street to go unfettered, and allow the rich to plunder our economics system without conscience.

      .”When the government attempts to create the trickle down factor, the effect is not the same because the infustion does not match the normal dynamic of an active economy. Obama dumped tons of money into the economy but put it in all the wrong places. He would have achieved a better effect handing every person on the low end of the economic scale %50,000...at least the money would have gone into the main stream and created some consumer demand.”

      The first stimulus created 1.4 million jobs, that’s more than Bush created during his entire presidency.

      The unemployment benefits, SSI, food stamps, Etc. all work to create demand that would otherwise disappear and further disable the economy.

      “Governments does not create jobs. It creates environments in which business can either flourish or diminish which is the driver of job opportunity.”

      This is true from state to state. If there is more ample opportunities to gain higher profits in on state rather than another some companies will move. It is important to note that these companies generally pay lower wages and thus do not increase the tax base by much. The end result is usually the same, the state takes it in the shorts, has trouble meeting its burdens, and the company sends its earnings elsewhere thus depleting the states economic system. As soon as the state begins to tax the businesses at a rate that would stabilize their economy, the business looks for greener pastures.

      As far as the country goes, the best business environment is one in which there is an ample purchasing base. Companies that wish to do business here must be forced to pay the taxes that are imposed for that privilege. It’s like vendors at the fair, they pay very high fees to set up a booth, but they don’t mind because the amount of business that is generated makes the fees a pittance.

      “Jobs are a function of business need and ultimately that business need is drivern in large part by consumer confidence and the process of consumerism. The fact that money is dropped into the the economy does not correlate to businesses investing, expanding, and growing in an attempt to capture part of that one time money drop.

      How true, a one time money drop verses fixing the system by balancing it. But don’t forget that awful unemployment and welfare that is continually injecting money into the economy.

      Add to that ever-increasing regulation, an EPA with a budget increased by 125% under Obama,

      The Federal Register shows that Bush added regulations at a rate over 100 times higher that the Obama administration.

      “WASHINGTON – The Obama Administration today proposed a FY 2012 budget of $8.973 billion for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This proposal reflects President Obama’s commitment to ensuring the government lives within its means while ensuring that EPA can carry out its core mission: protecting public health and our environment while reducing air and water pollution in communities across America.”

      This budget proposal represents about a 13 percent decrease from the FY 2010 budget of $10.3 billion.

      http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf66185...

      The 2008 budget under bush was 7.2 billion the 2010 budget under Obama was 10.3 billion, this is 30% increase not 125%. And the budget is to be decreased by an additional 13% this year.

      The rest of your response unfortunately is based on conjecture and can’t be responded to.

      Do you think that it is coincidence that other major countries are doing stimulus and debating raising taxes on the wealthy? Why do the worlds leading economists recommend going back to the economic system of the 40s-60s? why do you think that Supply Side economics is known as voodoo economics?

      Thanks again for the chance to respond.

    • Pollyannalana profile image

      Pollyannalana 6 years ago from US

      Bill Gates is a wonderful man, he doesn't act like the rich that will have such a hard time getting through the eye of the needle; he does not look down on the poor man but helps him out. We give to all other countries, (the $40 million now to Libya which will probably feed terrorist!) why not our own? We live in a country that has moved all jobs worth having out of the country and let in millions we support while they take jobs America's underdog has done for centuries. Our government puts restrictions so bad our farmers cannot feed us and prosper while we can eat healthy but put no restrictions on China and Mexico who seemed to be trying their best to kill us. Anyone who doesn't see the end of this country a few miles down the road is DUI.

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @RealHousewife...I understand Kelly. Since you are a small business person trying to keep your business afloat, you might share with some of these folks on here the "fears" you face for the future under our current circumstance. It seems that Obama's leaning toward the "social good" that he wants to do blinds some folks to his smothering of economic opportunity for business. Thanks much. WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @the bunco squad...If you are referring to the years between the 1929 market crash and 1941....FDR tried for more than 12 years to employ Keynesian economics and basically failed at the process until the second world war came along and saved his butt economically. With regard to the Monopoly model you use as an example remember one thing...the property is still "property" and the cash is still "cash"...possession is what changed. Those transactions are going on in the American economy every day so the dynamics of exchange are taking place. But if you have no cash or no property, you are not likely part of the transaction. The problem with comparing the Monopoly game with the economy is that the model is far to simple to demonstrate the dynamics of the economy. For every transaction in an economy which takes places, six to seven other people are involved or affected in some way and trickle down(good or bad) takes place. When the government attempts to create the trickle down factor, the effect is not the same because the infustion does not match the normal dynamic of an active economy. Obama dumped tons of money into the economy but put it in all the wrong places. He would have achieved a better effect handing every person on the low end of the economic scale %50,000...at least the money would have gone into the main stream and created some consumer demand. Governments does not create jobs. It creates environments in which business can either flourish or diminish which is the driver of job opportunity. Jobs are a function of business need and ultimately that business need is drivern in large part by consumer confidence and the process of consumerism. The fact that money is dropped into the the economy does not correlate to businesses investing, expanding, and growing in an attempt to capture part of that one time money drop. Add to that ever-increasing regulation, an EPA with a budget increased by 125% under Obama, potential upcoming complaince with government run healthcare, the potential for increasted taxes on business, and th general unpredictability of what is going to happen in the private sector under this administrataion and you have a magnificent formula for suppression of economic activity and growth. Add some out of control labor unions, public sector pension plans which are underfunded and over-promised and things get really dismal. One does not have to even mention Wall Street or the finanacial industry in that process. In fact, Wall Street and the financial industry does not care for what it sees in the economy either. So, on that basis, people can sleep in parks for the rest of their life protesting Wall Street and the bankds and nothing with change in regard to the stimulus needed in the economy which is to get the bridle off of the private sector and restore some confidence level to the business five year plan. Obama totally misses that point either out of economic ignorance or it simply does not fit his socialist agenda. WB

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "The United States Department of Labor, bureau of Labor Statistics. www.bls.gov"

      I looked...it's not there.

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      The United States Department of Labor, bureau of Labor Statistics. www.bls.gov And I asked you a question, are you going to answer it? give me an explanation of what we should do and how it it will work to fix the economy. or just admit that you hate Obama and you would rather see the country destroyed than have him be re-elected.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "During the Bush administration the rate of inflation was 21.2%."

      No it wasn't! Where's your evidence for that absurd claim?

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      The Fed, or our central bank determines the amount of currency to be in circulation at any given time. As I stated before, this is a set amount of currency. At times they will decrease the currency to a set amount, other times they will raise it to a set amount. If there is not enough currency in circulation, like now, when the wealthy are holding on to it, then they will add currency through purchasing government bonds. There is more currency in circulation today than fifty years ago, because there are more people, businesses, jobs, etc. But this is not a ticket to print as much as they wish. And they don’t print it to pay bills. They stay within defined parameters. Even you have to be bright enough to figure out that if there isn’t a defined amount of currency or wealth then the currency and wealth would be worth nothing.

      Here’s one for you Hopalong, what is the greatest factor for establishing the value of anything? Here’s a hint, if there were 500 Mona Lisa’s, they would be worth much less than one. Our dollar holds its value because we don’t just print as many as we want.

      During the Bush administration the rate of inflation was 21.2%.

      Thus far in the Obama administration it is 5.8%. the Fed has actually decreased the rate at which it normally adds currency and is in a deflation phase.

      But none the less, what do you want Will? Do you want the country’s economy to collapse so you can get rid of Obama? That sound a lot like what you and those like you claim that the Occupy Wall Street people are doing. Twists, turns, jumps and bumps only cloud the facts, they don’t change them.

    • RealHousewife profile image

      Kelly Umphenour 6 years ago from St. Louis, MO

      WB - I read this as soon as you published it! I knew I would enjoy the commentary but what I was thinking before versus now.......just reading the comments is like a roller coaster ride! And I can't add anything intelligent here. My reality is that I'm working harder and more hours and making less. Why? Because my taxes are so high.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "the Fed is printing money like crazy"

      this is a quote from a commercial that airs on all of the Right Wing nut bar radio programs, this is not a fact.

      (sigh) :

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      Like I told you before, if they just printed it we wouldn't have to borrow it, and we would have no national debt. it is you who has no idea what you are taking about.

      "the Fed is printing money like crazy"

      this is a quote from a commercial that airs on all of the Right Wing nut bar radio programs, this is not a fact.

      and as far as the U.S. being the largest land owner, never mind, I give up. if I tell you the world is round your going to reply that it is Obama's fault and it would be better if it was flat.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      Bunco

      The largest land owner in the world is the US government, which owns about a third of the US. It also prints and spends more money than the rest of the world combined, so guess who is the real culprit in your Monopoly analogy?

      BTW, the real reason the prices are rising is due to inflation, because the Fed is printing money like crazy, trying to stimulate the economy.

      I've been reading your rants and shaking my head in disbelief, because you obviously have no idea whatsoever what you are babbling about.

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      Not to be obnoxious, but by your definition what was the reason for the things I mentioned?

      Property has a cash value, it is cash held in trust. If you sell the property you trade it for its cash. And in the game as in life it is the controlling principle. Just as you can mortgage or sell the properties in the game you can do the same in life. The total value of the properties is $5690 and the total cash is $15140. This is a total of $20830. When the property is all purchased there is still $5690 worth of property and $15140 in cash, a total of $20830. As people pass GO they are paid from that same $20830, and when rent is paid it comes from that $20830.

      Just for fun let’s say that a player took money from another monopoly set and began to use it in the game. Seeing that this was not fair, the other players would raise the price of their rents to make up for the injection of money over and above the games economy, this would be inflation.

      Now let’s try something else, what if the leading player wanted to prolong the game and gain not only all of the property, but all of the money as well. What he would do is allow the other players to borrow money from him and pay him back with interest each time they passed GO. So now they can pay his rent and when they pass GO they give him one half of their $200 pay. Eventually the money they borrowed runs out and they still have to pay him their loan payment. By this time the winning player has amassed nearly all of the banks funds and all of the property, still a total of $20830.

      In a game this is fine, but in real life our economy must go on. In years after the depression the people in control understood that the balance of wealth needed to be maintained. The taxes on the rich were extremely high in order to ensure the flow of currency to the bottom, which in turn would purchase goods and services from the top.

      “The problem with your rationale is that we currently do not have the money we are spending. Efforts to bring in more revenue only incite more spending.”

      The government must bring money to the bottom, it does this through spending. And it must take money from the top; this is done through taxation of the wealthy.

      “Increasing the revenue stream to the government without any significant reduction in outflow only escalates the problem. That is how we got here. WB”

      Our national debt was 10 trillion dollars at the end of George Bush’s term. It is only a little over 14 trillion right now. So don’t play the Obama is the devil card with me. The truth is that a national debt is irrelevant to our economy. Our economy is strictly the flow of cash from bottom to top and back, that’s all. If the cash is not flowing there is no economy. By borrowing cash and pouring it into the bottom of our economy the president staves off the stagnation and demise of our economy. Without the billions in unemployment, social security, food stamps etc. our economy and the world would have spiraled into a massive depression. It is those trillions of dollars that has kept the economy moving.

      Now I have another question for you.

      Supply and demand dictates that when the demand drops prices should drop. Yet since the recession began though the demand has dropped prices have risen. This is because the wealthy want to continue to gain the same amount of profits no matter what it does to the economy. Why would you give them more tax breaks to reward this behavior?

      And Will, the stimulus created 1.4 million jobs that’s more the Bush created in his entire presidency.

      What socialist policies would those be, and how are they effecting the economy and capitalism?

      And I don’t work for the White House, at least not any longer….

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      The failed trillion dollar stimulus was pure Keynesian, and as always, it did not work.

      Capitalism works, but it is currently stalled due to the socialist policies of Obama and the Democrats.

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @the bunco squad....No I didn't need Wiki to recognize that one...just enough details. Maybe in your definition of Keynesian Economics those things happened...not in mine. The only thing that economic theory in its truest form has ever reined over is failure. Don't start reciting the pull out of the Great Depression as your example...you're wasting your breathe.

      One thing you missed in the Monopoly game....you can own a lot of property (assets) and have zero cash (currency). There is a differentiation even in the game.

      The problem with your rationale is that we currently do not have the money we are spending. Efforts to bring in more revenue only incite more spending. Obama just dropped over $500 billion dollars in the economy with little or effect of any significance. $300 billion still sits somewhere in reserve and he's back in frton of the Congress asking for another $450 billion. Increasing the revenue stream to the government without any significant reduction in outflow only escalates the problem. That is how we got here. WB

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      So you figured out how to use wiki, maybe next you’ll figure out how to form an opinion based on facts. Keynesian economics made us a super power, resided over the greatest economic boom of our history, and created more jobs in ten years than Supply Side economics has in forty. But that is not the point. Basic economies work the same no mater how they are manipulated. Money must move fro bottom to top and back.

      As far as total wealth and the money supply, they are inextricably linked. Wealth that is not cash is potential cash or cash held in trust. The overall worth of an economy is based on the total of all three.

      In a game of monopoly there is an allotted amount of property, with a set price. Also there is a certain amount of cash. When a player bankrupts the other players the game is over. As well when there is no more money the game is over and the player with the most cash and property value wins. Ditto for our economy.

      The reason I used this argument was to reinforce the concept that social programs and government spending does not a socialist state make. It is a necessity when the balance of an economy tips so far toward the top. Fix the imbalance and we won’t have to worry about communists or socialists. Read about the economic expansion of the 30s through the 60s. Read about the tax system and the circulation of wealth. Or stick your head in the sand and be a good little republican.

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @Sunnie Day...My wife will tell you that one of the things she has always heard me say is, "Most of us are where we want to be". When she heard me say it, it was relative to love and relationships but it generally fits other avenues in life. We rationalize why we are somewhere and generally end up staying there. We may say we want to be somewhere else but what do we do to get there. As you point out, when you find that way up or out, you do what you have to do to make it happen. No one else is going to do it for you. Otherwise, think of some good reasons which you are choosing the stay where you are. Opportunity is not a limited resource and we have to freedom to pursue our own happiness. What else is needed? Thanks for the good words. WB

    • profile image

      Sunnie Day 6 years ago

      Great hub Wayne. My thoughts are not so much about the political parties as much as society as a whole... You bring out some valid points. We as a society do tend to blame each other for our problems when many of us have had some of the same opportunities to move ahead. Sure there are many out of work, or have had serious life altering things to happen and that is when we do step in to help our fellow brothers...To sit back and complain and not take advantage of the many free programs and try to better ourselves is wrong. I went to school on a Pell grant, with four children at home. The government paid my daycare. It did not fall in my lap. I had to get up and try, ask questions, work odd jobs, clean houses, whatever to get through. It is wrong to say every rich American had it handed down to them. Many have worked hard, saved for what they have. They are good money managers. I see many couples throwing away their money on silly things then wondering where their money has gone. Anyway. Just my thoughts. Thanks again...

      Got my wheels a turning. I always told my children do not blame anyone for your life. It is your choice what you make of it; even if you have to take, a job that you think is beneath you. Work is work! Take what you and call it day....

      Sunnie

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @Kristin Turner...Nothing wrong with that perspective but in the process of protesting one should always know who they are partnering with. That is the point here as well. There is nothing worsse than having good intentions only to see those intentions turned into an ugly chaotic mess that benefits only those behind the scenes. If this unclear to you, check with your local community organizer and let them explain it. WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @the bunco squad...No wonder I was having trouble with your concepts...why didn't you just ocme on out and say you were pedaling Keynesian Economic Theor? What wing of the White House are you working out of anyway? That approach to economics has long since been proven in error. I don't claim to be an economic expert but you seem to be one. But, I suggest that you go back and figure out the difference between total wealth and the money supply before you start lecturing others on how to fix things. The point of this hub is to say that the greatest potential these people who are sleeping in parks on Wall Street have is to be manipulated by others...that is already beginning to happen. It has nothing to do with economic theory but I'll give you a hint...it has everything to do with the march toward a socialist cave. WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @Joe Badtoe...The things you list here have little to do with whether the media has a liberal slant. You might want to look back at 2007 and see what happened when democrats took control of both hourse...spending went through the roof. It's no wonder that a budget could not be set...who would agree to such spending? With regard to healthcare, there are plenty of folks in America who have made it very clear that the last thing they want to see is the government running the medical industry...hell, the government can't even run the government. And regarding the candidates, as long as we have what we have in the White House, there is no room to criticize anyone else. WB

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "I can't even be bothered to debate this with you."

      Good.

    • Joe Badtoe profile image

      Joe Badtoe 6 years ago from UK

      Will Starr you are typical of the deluded right who think anyone that disagrees with your view must be a socialist. Socialism caused the global economic disaster? Really? I can't even be bothered to debate this with you. Far left? jeez

    • profile image

      Kristin Turner 6 years ago

      Absolutely Genius.....And yes, the 60's brought about enormous amounts of change but people fail to understand the significant difference between nonviolent protest that stood for something and some idiots that got together in groups and decided to cause chaos. Not all hippies were about getting high and doing nothing; most of them were for something that my generation will never understand...PEACE. If any of them had ot see vietnam they would understand why hippies were so hell bent on ending the war; the average life expectancy for an American soldier in Vietnam was only 36 seconds. That is not a way I would want live either. In a perfect world there would be no need for protest but as citizens of a country that have prided oursleves in getting to the top by fighting for it; war will never end and hopefully we do it for the right reasons and dont fall flat on our ass.

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      Nice diatribe, many problems. First the reason I mentioned Reagan is that this system of economics began with him and is the same system we have today and which yiou champion. And you obviously don’t know anything about economics or you wouldn’t make some of the statements that you make. As an example you said “We have bloated federal government which spends everything it can find and borrows more only then to want to put that burden on the backs of American busines...the job creators and providers.” The job creators and providers who have not done so, and which you can prove no different. The amount of job creation and the wage level should reflect the tax incentives that they have received, yet they do not by any measure. However the accumulation of wealth does reflect those incentives. The federal government has been the only means by which some of that disparity has been relieved. Your wish is eliminate the one thing that continually makes it possible for those at the bottom to survive.

      “It is no wonder that those who have the ability to invest have pulled away from the playing field...invest in what, government regulation?” this statement is erroneous as they

      have never been at the playing field. The accumulation of wealth is the glaring evidence. of this truth.

      “By the way, controlling 88%^ of the wealth is not the same thing as controlling 88% of the money supply.”

      Whether I hold 5 million in my pocket or have it invested stock, bonds property etc. etc, does not matter. There is a fixed amount of currency that is tied up in those vehicles. And if 20% own or control the vehicles they own or control the money.

      “If you want the American businessman back in the game, get the government off his back and out of his pocket and he will be right back there investing in the marketplace, risking his capital, and hoping for a profit on the gamble. That is the true "economics' that all of it pivots upon.”

      Again this statement is false and has been proven false for the past forty years. And as far as regulation is concerned over 100 times more regulation was added during the Bush administration. So that’s another big bowl of horse hockey.

      And your statement makes it patently obvious that you don’t understand economics.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      So sayeth another far-left, UK socialist. Europe is collapsing around their ears from rampant socialism, but they are in full denial.

      The last economic collapse produced Adolph Hitler, and World War Two.

    • Joe Badtoe profile image

      Joe Badtoe 6 years ago from UK

      'over the top liberal'? considering what Republicans have done to their own country over the last 10 years I'm amazed there hasn't been a civil war or a revolution. Over $1-2 trillion wasted on unwinnable wars -millions of jobs lost and republicans doing everything to prevent a budget for job creation being released. Then you have people campaigning to deprive fellow citizens of health care-which is insane and cruel. OWS is a cross generational(including ex Vets)organisation making a clear statement saying that banks control/ruin too many lives. As for agenda that's almost to ridiculous to accept when you consider the agenda of the Koch Brothers, ALEC and god knows how many other right wing organisations all desperate to sacrifice their own country and majority of lowest earners simply because they don't like the President.

      You think people like Perry,Bachmann,Gingrich,Palin etc are credible politicians and, god forbid, intelligent enough to lead the US? If OWS achieves better regulation of Wall Street and rid politics of corporate influence you might just get the US back to where it once had global respect for its humanity and not the continuous fear of its imperialistic ambitions under bush regime. As for the 2012 Election well I sincerely hope it's a victory for the millions of ordinary decent hard working people and not a victory for billionaire sponsors of puppets in the White House. Wall Street makes nothing other than millions of dollars for a small group of control freaks who buy votes from the gullible and create offshoots like the Tea Party to help keep the money men in power. I just hope a lot of people wake up before 2012. The common assertion I'm seeing is one of activism against greed and abuse of human rights and for me this is a sign of real hope and not passive acceptance that nothing can change.

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @Joe Badtoe...Maybe its just not liberal enough for you, Joe. From my perspective, it is over the top liberal and I think you will find that a common assertion. One does not have to listen to Beck or anyone else to figure that angle. As to the OWS, my point is a simple one. Those who populate it have a greater chance of being used to forward someone else's agenda as opposed to achieving anything else. That may not be apparent to you at the moment but hang in there. As we get closer to the 2012 election, you will see the effects of the manipulation. WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @cjv123...Thanks Carol. Apparently my writing leaves some feeling cold and unappreciated. LOL! WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @the bunco squad..."Since the wealthy are not voluntarily returning the money through jobs and higher

      wages, they must be forced to in order to save what is left of our economy, this is done"

      You make this statement and insinuate that I know nothing about economics? You rant and rave about the flawed economics of Reagan only to then turn around and say that he is the reason we are here today...20+ years after he left office. Then you suggest that economics cannot work unless the "trickle down effect" takes place...something Reagan always pointed out. Maybe you should take the time to give the lecture on "guns and butter" so we could have a better understanding of the choices of war. We have bloated federal government which spends everything it can find and borrows more only then to want to put that burden on the backs of American busines...the job creators and providers. Then if we go along with some of these demands, we can add free higher education along with the benefits of government run helathcare to the price tag. It is no wonder that those who have the ability to invest have pulled away from the playing field...invest in what, government regulation? By the way, the fact that 20% of the people control 80% of the wealth is not news nor will it ever be. If wealth were easy to attain, then we could all have it. Then what would it mean...wealth is a relative thing. By the way, controlling 88%^ of the wealth is not the same thing as controlling 88% of the money supply. As to the OWS "movement", call it whatever you like, I don't care but you can sleep in the park the rest of your life and it will not fix what the federal government has done to the economy and cotinues to do. If you want the American businessman back in the game, get the government off his back and out of his pocket and he will be right back there investing in the marketplace, risking his capital, and hoping for a profit on the gamble. That is the true "economics' that all of it pivots upon. WB

      through taxation and governmental programs

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @anndavis25...Too many women, too many parties, too much fun. The liberal media would skewer me! LOL! WB

    • Joe Badtoe profile image

      Joe Badtoe 6 years ago from UK

      You lost the argument with your opening lines slating 'liberal' media. If you seriously think US has a majority liberal media you are as delusional as Glenn Back and as worldy wise as Sarah Palin. A completely odious article full of jingoistic nonsense. Occupy movement has far more morals than any banker and far more compassion than authors of right wing sycophantic drivel.

    • cjv123 profile image

      Carol 6 years ago from Michigan

      Picture me with a my palm in the air high-fiving you Wayne. Voted up, UP UP! Love that Hippie video/song too. ROTFL!

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      “America has little interest in watching or supporting a crowd of people simply demanding to be given things they have yet to earn or contribute to for that matter. The list of demands which forms the basis of this so-called “movement” could have been written by a group of junior high students or a naïve set of minds nourished on socialism. No doubt, many of our centers of higher learning allow the faculty plenty of opportunity to offer up this philosophy as opposed to teaching the pitfalls of it.”

      First, just because you determine in your mind that something is not a movement does not make it any less so, and for you and yours to presume otherwise is nothing less than total arrogance on your part. As for the content of the demands, no matter what they were if they did not coincide with your political dogma you would feel the same way.

      “If one could take all the wealth of America, redistribute the assets evenly to the point that each and every person had an equal share, what can we imagine would happen?

      You labor under a misconception. You do not understand even the most basic economic facts.

      1) There is a specific amount of money in our economic system

      2) Money must flow from bottom to top and back again in order for an economy to work.

      3) For over forty years the top has been accumulating wealth through tax cuts and

      Incentives that were meant to spur job creation and greater wages

      4) It has reached the point at which the wealthy now hold almost 88% of the total wealth

      of the country. ( this means that they hold 88% of all of the money)

      5) This leaves 12% to be divided among the bottom.

      6) @12% there is no money left to buy goods and services from the top so they must lay

      off workers and raise prices to remain profitable.

      7) Money must be moved from the top to the bottom in order for an economy to exist.

      8) Since the wealthy are not voluntarily returning the money through jobs and higher

      wages, they must be forced to in order to save what is left of our economy, this is done

      through taxation and governmental programs

      9) This is not socialism or re-distribution of wealth, it is in fact the form of economics that brought us out of the depression and presided over the greatest economic boom in our history, from the end of WW2 until Ronald Reagan.

      10) it is not an equal share that they want, it is a return to economic policies that benefit everyone and not just the wealthy.

      It doesn’t matter who you name or how you tare down a movement, the facts are still the facts. The money has gone up the hill and has not come back down in sufficient amount to balance the economy and keep it moving. The people have a right to be angry.

    • anndavis25 profile image

      anndavis25 6 years ago from Clearwater, Fl.

      When are you running for public office? Great hub for thinking. A vote up.

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      Ruchira...Look beyond the surface of the activity and watch the actions that take place over time. The focus of the group and the actions of the group will not necessarily match up. Over the next few months, you are going to see these people manipulated from inside to take some actions which are not going to make them a very appealing organization (loose use)to the American public. Certainly there are those among the crowd who feel that they will accomplish something of significance and change will come about. In the end, the something of significance is going to be violence and chaos in the streets creating fears among the citizens who watch and offering our own government the opportunity to escalate its involvement a bit higher in our lives...watch for it...it's coming. WB

      @maven101...Thanks much Larry. I am all for bringing about ethical and moral behavior in both private and the public sector of America. In the past, that has been driven primarily by the people demonstrating their dislike of things either at the polls or at the consumer level. Both are quite effective if used properly. When I see protesters as these events say that they voted for Obama in 2008 and they are very disappointed in his performance thus far but they will vote for him again in 2012...well, that pretty much tells me the story. If that mindset pervades this crowd, there will be nothing of value or significance accomplished which the American public will appreciate. WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @C.A. Johnson...Hi CA...good to see you around and thanks for the comment. I have no problem with a small movement which takes wings and generates action. I have fears that this particular movement is going to simply become the platform to faciiitate the wishes of others. For now things are peaceful, but you watch, as we near the next election cycle, the violence and escalation will begin. There are many in this crowd who are there because they have to have a cause to survive in this world. Those are the ones who are easiest to manipulate. Mix in a few union thugs, a community organizer or two and you have yourself the right ingredients. I have not seen anyone yet who can give a reasonable explanation of what is being attempted in this process. I hope that I am wrong on the one hand but on the other, I suggest you watch the growth of this situation over the next few months...the signs will be there. I might also suggest you go to LuxmiH's hub site and read her latest hub. I will send you a link via email Thanks. WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @the bunco squad...Based on what I see, the real problems we have today financially came about with legislative adjustments to the Fair Housing Act under the Clinton Administration. That turned the crooks loose in the financial sector. The Bush Administration asked the Congress to make some changes in that legislation but the Congress by that time was under control of the democrats and nothing happened. The mid-term elections of 2007 handed both the House and the Senate to the Dems. The budget got flushed and the insane spending began. That only continued under Obama and the effort to expand on it continues today...and still we have no operating budget for the federal government...just more pleas for money. I don't know where your figures come from but I seriously doubt that 88% of the current money supply is "out of circulation". The wealth held by the so-called rich in this country is not necessarily a liquid situation. A lot of assets are owned and valued but they are not cash until they are sold. I have seen numerous "rich people" who are strapped for cash flow but are still rich in the value of the assets they have acquired. Money simply held out of circulation makes no one any profits. WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @leroy64...The best indicator is the list of demands which they published a while back...mostly "gimmes". In the end, they really believe that the government should run everything without placing any limitations on their freedoms...it's a nice untopian thought but that is all that it is. WB

      @Ghost32...Good points Fred. Thanks for the comments! WB

    • maven101 profile image

      maven101 6 years ago from Northern Arizona

      Wayne...Thank you for this thoughtful and astute Hub which reflects my thoughts precisely...

      In a nutshell, OWS is about equal outcomes, not equal opportunity...They want to rid Wall Street of greed yet their " list " of demands reflect nothing more than greed itself...the shrill babbling of self-serving useful idiots wallowing in their own filth signifies nothing, and that whisper will die when the last joint is puffed...Larry

    • Ruchira profile image

      Ruchira 6 years ago from United States

      America which used to be called a land of opportunity is alas under the grip of corporate greed and this has impacted many people who were just not lucky enough to get a break in spite of their well education.

      OWS is vibrating with activity 'cause of the increase in corporate greed and I hope and pray that some action be taken. Corruption is getting everywhere and if we don't raise our voices now, it will be too late.

      Thanks for raising such a beautiful message. I hope we get all the exposure and support to bring the situation under norms.

    • C.A. Johnson profile image

      Charlotte Anne Johnson 6 years ago from South Hutchinson, KS

      Hello, Wayne.

      I know I haven't been around for a while but here's my 2cents.

      OWS is the beginning of a voice. Whether you agree with their viewpoint or not, they are a whisper that will grow until it's heard. The things that are wrong in this country result from actions committed over decades. There will not ever be an overnight fix or even something that can be done in a year or two. There is a problem with CEOs taking home multimillion dollar bonuses while the company is laying off thousands. There are systemic problems in both the financial industry and in government; a lot of it happening because the two have become too closely entwined.

      For change to happen in this country a whisper needs to become a voice loud enough to be heard causing an acknowledgement that change needs to happen. One voice will bring about a united voice that will change the world as we know it.

      You do not have to support the movement, just support the voice that will cause a ripple effect.

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      O.K. Wayne, so for the past forty years the rich have been given tax breaks and incentives to pour their money back into the economy by virtue of creating well paying jobs. What has happened instead is that wages have gone down and job creation has been abysmal. Instead the rich have kept the money and now hold over 88% of it at the top. This leaves 12% of the entire nation’s money for the bottom to live on and buy products, which they can’t because they don’t earn enough. At the current rate of acquisition the rich will hold the entire monetary system within a decade. How do you propose to change that? And don’t say more tax breaks for the rich because that is what got us here in the first place.

    • profile image

      Ghost32 6 years ago

      'Morning, Wayne. Great Hub.

      My favorite line, referring to the unlikely complete redistribution of wealth, is this one:

      "Even so, if that event took place, wait a few months; a few years, and the wealth will be just as out of balance again."

      No kidding. Adjusting the cash levels in people's pockets will neither eliminate the drive to succeed inherent in high achievers nor sprout ambition where only the "gimme mentality" previously existed.

      On a personal level, I've had my wealth redistributed to others many times over the decades. Six times my assets were reduced to nominal levels via the wonderfully leveling mechanism of divorce. Twice, my debt was redistributed to others via the equally marvelous device known as bankruptcy. In recent years, my wife's medical expenses and the current administration's economic policies combined synergistically to do the job.

      My wealth has been redistributed a LOT.

      And yet, as many times as I've been "milked dry", plus one, I've risen from the economic ashes.

      You can't keep a good man down, and you can't get a lazy man's butt up off the couch.

      Voted Up and More.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      "I thought the point of the corporations the Occupy group is protesting was to enable individuals to own pieces of businesses and receive a portion of the profits. Isn't that what they want, a piece of the pie?"

      Then they should buy shares! If you have a retirement plan, then you already own shares and are a part of the corporations the far left is trying to destroy!

    • leroy64 profile image

      Brian L. Powell 6 years ago from Dallas, Texas (Oak Cliff)

      I thought the point of the corporations the Occupy group is protesting was to enable individuals to own pieces of businesses and receive a portion of the profits. Isn't that what they want, a piece of the pie? Am I wrong? I have been wrong before, so I don't mind being wrong. The Occupy movement confuses me, although they have a point about the Federal Bank not being a good idea. Thomas Jefferson thought a national bank concentrated too much power on the private investors a national bank requires.

      I see more protests on the news, than I see here in Dallas. I have been to the park they are at. I am beginning to suspect that the movement is focusing on places that get them in the news.

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @CMerritt...Thanks much, Chris! WB

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 6 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      One word...............Bravo!

      Chris

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @dahoglund...My guess is you would have a lot of "no-takers" on that proposal. The opportunity to achieve success and some level of lifestyle is out there for those who want to attempt it. No one gets it "custom-tailored" for their needs. Those who would go out and create six-figure debt college loans while getting a degree in underwater basket-weaving might be quite talent in making some of the spending decisions of our fat federal government. Unfortunately or fortunately they are in line behind those who already occupy those seats. Let's just hope that age brings wisdom to the majority of folks. WB

    • dahoglund profile image

      Don A. Hoglund 6 years ago from Wisconsin Rapids

      A thought occurred to me. We could redistribute wealth by redistributing the work and responsibility. Would anything change?

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @LuxmiH...I write these pieces on the basis of what I experience, feel, and see. I also believe that the system we have in America is far better than any thing offered up anywhere else. Those who do not believe that are free to go to those places they so admire. Our system has some flaws but it certainly is not broken. This group of confused park dwellers will soon enough find themselves being used just as clearly as your recent Hub outlines. It is one thing to be innocent...another to be naive. Thanks for the good words. WB

    • LuxmiH profile image

      Luxmih Eve-Lyn Forbes 6 years ago from Fort Pierce, Florida

      Hi Wayne: keep up the great work! It is good that someone is arguing with you, it means that they are reading what you write! That's a good start. In some cases though, I have to say that when ignorance is bliss... none so deaf as those who refuse point blank to hear. I know that i have combined two sayings.

      Voted up and more.

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @the bunco squad...Well, if you want to credit those things to the "hippie movement" go ahead and include the Weather Underground, SDS, Black Panthers, the Charlie Manson murders, Watts riots and the Chicago riots...something a community organizer could be real proud of on a resume. The OW crowd causes me no fear but the folks behind the scenes willing to manipulate the crowd certainly cause me great concern...they should be of great concern to every American. Those who want "fix capitalism" need to be sure they recognize a socialist/communist at work before they start torquing the bolts on the repairs. The same folks were around in the 60's stirring the pot and attempting to causse mass chaos. The timing was not right and America was too strong financially at the time. Things are different today and the timing is superb. Keep you eye on the news and see what happens with the park dwellers. It may take a couple of months yet but it will come. WB

    • the bunco squad profile image

      the bunco squad 6 years ago from Savannah GA

      The civil rights movement, desegregation of schools, the end of the Vietnam war, equal rights for women, the end of the draft, the lowering of the voting age, pretty impressive resume for a bunch of hippies. And by the way the most in Occupy movement want change in the capitalist system not the end of it. Just like when Ronald Reagan wanted to change the system to a total supply side system which has ended in the current debacle.

      My question to you is why are you Right Winger so scared of the O.W. movement if it as small, insignificant, stupid and incoherent as you claim?

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @WillStarr...Thanks for the input, Will. Your comments are always insightful. WB

      @FitnezzJim...You were probably the "consumate flowerchild" in your day, Jim. Thanks for the input. WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @mp2525...I don't want to take anything away that rightfully belongs to the hippie culture, but like others have expressed here, I don't see a correlation. I am not denying those events you cite but I do not associate them with the "hippie movement"....the Civil Rights Movement...yes, The Freedom Rider Movement...yes, but I really think the vast majority of the hippies missed those events. WB

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @QualityContent...You are correct on the opinion aspect and thank God we have that privilege. Certainly the world is not perfect but, at the same time, I see nothing to suggest there is a world out there waiting for a singular mindset which basically translates to the "world peace". While that might have its positives, there are far too many realties which will come to bear. Money certainly can be associated with evil but it also does a lot of good and it is a logic basis for exchange...certainly more practical than a barter system which I don't believe the government would entertain at all. Money is a necessary element of capitalism. That does not make capitalism bad...only the bad apples in the human mix create those flaws. At the same time, move to an environment based totally on socialist principles and see how long harmony exists when less and less of those who populate the system are "producers"...there is no incentive to produce. Though our system might have some flaws and some hiccups, it still brings a relative level of promise that is far higher than in most countries around the globe. On that basis, in my opinion, it is worthy of fixing and retaining. WB

    • FitnezzJim profile image

      FitnezzJim 6 years ago from Fredericksburg, Virginia

      I think you're right Wayne, at least the way I remember it, the two movements had two toally different slogans. The civil rights movement objective was 'equal rights for all'. The Hippie movement objective was 'Tune In, Turn On, Drop Out'. I'm fairly sure 'dropping out' was an equal opportunity thing, so it's quite possible there were people who belonged to both.

      But, that's just me and my memories, I have no clue how the historians of today might be teaching it.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      Today's Wall Street demonstrators are the same old Marxists of the 60's, most of whom are now conservative business people, well over the 'never trust anyone over 30' stupidity.

      We all have to grow up sometime.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      BTW, the first Hollywood actor to march with Dr. King and inspire other actors to do the same, was despised by the liberal left.

      It was conservative icon, Charlton Heston.

    • WillStarr profile image

      WillStarr 6 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

      mp2525,

      It is you sir, who does not know your history. The Civil Rights Act was enacted July 2, 1964. The hippie movement got under way with the Summer of Love, in 1967.

      Hippies had zip to do with the Civil Rights Act.

    • mp2525 profile image

      mp2525 6 years ago from Los Angeles

      Just a few historical facts that you may want to consider are:

      Greensboro sit ins of 1960

      Birmingham Demonstrations of 1963

      Selma to Montgomery March of 1965

      Civil Rights Act of 1964

      Voting Rights Act of 1965

      Free speech is a wonderful right, and you are entitled to your opinion. However, you are not entitled to your own version of the facts.

    • QualityContent profile image

      QualityContent 6 years ago

      No, our major problems in this world are in fact our monetary system. Money itself is the cause of almost every single problem in the world. The money system controls the government, jobs, its responsible for crime, poverty, war, pollution, lack of health care etc...

      In the future (near) technology will simply eliminate most jobs. Even the slavery jobs in Asia will be replaced by automation, robotics and the steady march of technology. So the children of tomorrow will have no job. Who will buy products when no one has any money to buy them? That is where we are headed whether anyone likes to believe it or not. Money is becoming obsolete. The system is dead.

      But no one is ready because we are trapped in an endless circle of "isms" and no one can figure out which system will work for all mankind. It's how we move past all the BS and create a sustainable world for everyone.

      Either we fix the problems or they get worse, its our decision but in the process I expect more war because mankind is very good at that. Feeding people, not so much.

      You have your views I have mine, I guess that is what makes this world unique. I pray our future generations have a world to look forward to because all those kids (mostly) out there in the street are our future.

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @QualityContent...I'll let you tell them that when they stop by to interview you. Capitalism, the marketplace, nor the financial basis on which we do business are the problem here. The problem is big government, over-regulation, out of control spending, and a determined march toward socialism. WB

      @mp2525...I think we are talking about two different things...I guess I was not aware that the "Hippie Movement" had any major impact on the civil rights movement which also took place at the same time. I don't connect those dots so maybe I am not the only one who missed history class. WB

    • mp2525 profile image

      mp2525 6 years ago from Los Angeles

      RE: Your "American Occupation" article, you state:

      "The majority of Americans of a mature age saw this crowd back in the mid-60’s and have quickly dispensed with assigning any significant credibility to their desires."

      Talk about naive...how about total ignorance of History...or perhaps you think that the Civil Rights Legislation enacted as a direct result of the 1960's demonstrations were insignificant steps forward in our country's evolution toward a more just society.

    • QualityContent profile image

      QualityContent 6 years ago

      "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered."

      "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies..."

      "The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."

      This isn't about a bunch of "bums" It's about the future of our world.

      1. War (getting tired of this yet?)

      2. Poverty

      3. Hunger

      4. Jobs (disappearing due to technology)

      5. Environmental destruction (those great corporations that have our best interests at heart)

      6. Polluted water

      and yes the movement should be directed more at the government (worldwide), except you get to choose from the "war party" or the "bailout party."

      You see people are tied of this world being destroyed all in the name of profit. At the end of the day it's profit before people and thus the destiny of this planet if we continue on that path is destruction. Maybe you should tell that to FOX news....

    • Wayne Brown profile image
      Author

      Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas

      @GNelson...I will give it some thought! Thanks. WB

    • GNelson profile image

      GNelson 6 years ago from Florida

      You need to send this to the FOX Opinion Network, They would love it!