Joe Conason: How and Why to Co-opt Those Cops on Wall Street

» socaljay on 10.07.11 @ 08:14 AM

There’s only one problem with you plea Joe, and that is the simple fact that these “protesters” don’t even come close to representing the majority of Americans.  They are demanding a laundry list of life guarantees and redistributive progressive values-based concerns. 

The majority of Americans get up each morning and go to work, doing their best to take care of themselves and their families.  These protesters want the fruits of the labor of others, just like any like-minded in the progressive left.  Where is it written that a person who works their whole life, making the sacrifices necessary to become successful, is obligated to watch their wealth stolen by an angry mob? 

The big difference between the Tea Party movement, and this Occupy Wall Street crowd is that the Tea Party wants to protect American’s right to the opportunity to be successful, while the Occupy Wall Street crowd is all about taking what others have earned for themselves without working for it, which is right in line with the left’s primary ideology.  No big surprise here, and even less surprise that the left’s political and media machine is behind them lock, stock and barrel.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Rambler on 10.07.11 @ 03:55 PM

Socaljay, I don’t think you have any idea what the majority of Americans do or have experienced.

The only people who have made standard of living gains in the past 30 years are the richest 5%. And that’s a pretty redundant accomplishment when you’re already filthy rich.

Since 1980, the top 1% have had their incomes increase at 48X the rate of the professional class. How could that be? Did they do all the work?

How can you justify this disproportionate re-distribution of wealth?

The richest 1% need to be shook up a little. They have had their faces in the trough for a while now, and have become fat and insensate at the expense of everybody else.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Rambler on 10.07.11 @ 06:39 PM

Socaljay, the loyal serf. Steve Jobs really has nothing to with your argument, and it’s a slap in his face that you use him.

Jobs was an exception, not the rule. Though many would like to be grouped with him, I bet you can only name a handful of the richest 1% who contribute in any meaningful way to wealth creation. And there are about 1,600,000 in that group.

There is only a finite amount of wealth created, and it’s not just created by the larger-than-life people like Steve Jobs. Most of it is created by the hard work of much less wealthy people. The majority of working Americans.

And capital wealth is only one asset that makes a country wealthy. Her people are another, so you can refer to the good teachers as wealth creators, too, I guess.

Wealth accumulation is about grabbing a disproportionate share of that wealth. Since it’s created by so many, the concentration of it to so few does indeed constitute wealth redistribution.

Your ilk introduced that term; it’s about time it was used correctly.

In a perfect capitalist world, only a gross level of effort and contribution could lead to a gross accumulation of wealth. Not so in this world. Here, the clever gaming of the rules and the systematic cheating of the system is the common denominator of the ultra rich. As a rule, since the exceptions like Steve Jobs will always shine in burning contrast.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» Rambler on 10.07.11 @ 10:06 PM

Socal, you have to put Ayn Rand down for a minute and look around. You have already lost.

Teachers are part of the problem? Why? Because they collectively bargain? Where would you be without your teachers?

You’d let the ultra rich steal a dollar from you while you fought with a teacher over a nickel.

The richest 1% lost a trillion dollars to one another in 30:1 leveraged bets, and they did it using our money. The winners walked away with the proceeds, and we paid to make the losers whole again. These are the polished thieves whose company you aspire to?

Not one of them made your career more affluent. None of them taught you or your child a life skill. None of them provided a service that made your life better. Yet, they took your money as sure as if they had picked your pocket. And you are their serf.

Call them. See if they have a job for you, swabbing their yacht decks, or cleaning their private jets, or mucking their stables, serf.

Or, aspire to be an apprentice thief. Is that your ambition?

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» AN50 on 10.09.11 @ 09:53 AM

Rambler, wealth accumulation is nothing more than wealth transfer. There is nothing wrong with this or all your socialist/progressive arguments would be wrong as well. What is wrong with wealth accumulation or transfer is that it produces no net gain in wealth to the economy as a whole and is in fact a net consumer of wealth.

Fully 60% of our national economy is now involved in this type of wealth. The remaining 40% cannot make enough additional surplus wealth (wealth generation) to make up the consumption and we have publically and privately been borrowing the difference for 5 decades now. If the protesters had any clue about this at all they would be singing a different tune. But more than that, if your precious locked in public service unions ever found an intelligent moment and realized they are every bit the wealth sucking accumulators as those snarky investment bankers, Wall Street fat cats and others in finance and law, they would be singing a different tune as well.

We may need teachers, cops, firefighters, doctors, bankers and lawyers but these professions require a net surplus of value to be made somewhere else to pay for it. They on their own do not produce surplus economic value no matter how much emotional feeling we have for them. As much as I agree with the protesters, that the banking industry is filled with narcissism and greed, what these people ask for is not only similar it is worse. It is transfer of wealth without even a smidgeon of merit. In other words the snarky narcissistic investor may be transferring wealth from the many to themselves (Warren “I feel guilty” Buffet) but at least they are working to do it and not sitting around un-bathed for a week and just demanding someone else by force of law do it for them.

Because both political parties have failed miserably to make one of the most important distinctions in our economy, wealth generation versus wealth accumulation, both have lumped them together and the result is the catastrophic and self destructive cultural behavior of “get it for free”.

Andrew Carnegie, Hendry Ford, Bill Gates and yes even Steven Jobs all became filthy, stinking rich, building real companies that produced real value goods that also made our economy filthy, stinking rich. The same cannot be said for the junk bond pirates of the 80’s who looted healthy companies for their assets, investors like Buffet and currency manipulators like Soros who became stinking filthy rich sucking like giant parasites off our sick and dying economy. You can add the horrendously hypocritical entertainment industry to that group of charlatans as well.

When you realize that your work and effort are part of an economic machine where some functions are net consumers of value and others are net suppliers of value I guaranty you, you will be less concerned with who owns what and more concern by what those owners are doing, whether a tyrannical socialist government, nameless international corporation or the little factory down the street making value adding durable goods.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

» AN50 on 10.09.11 @ 04:56 PM

I know Rambler. Those arguments have been made and trust me its painful having to say that such professions are not economic value adders. It makes it sound like they are not valuable at all even though we need them. The same is true of medicine. In fact a lot of the pro Obama care, single payer and socialized medicine arguments make those claims. But when it comes right down to it, they are not value adders when economics is the consideration.

I have worked in manufacturing most of my life. Most manufacturing is a net wealth producer (unless you are a GE and do it in China), but even within the manufacturing business you can divide jobs by those that actually add value and those that are necessary but a net drain on the bottom line. Being an engineer, most of my career has been on the painful negative side. Its not pleasant working your whole life knowing that someone needs you but would rather do with out if they could. We need doctors, not want them. We need cops, not want them. We need teachers, not want them. We need bankers, not want them. We need store clerks, not want them. And there is a concerted effort to reduce these needs as much as possible everywhere to reduce our consumption of wealth (value) while increasing our value added efforts.

I love being an engineer, but unless I am designing a tool or something that actually adds more value than I consume, I have to recognize where the value is added and do everything I can to support that while minimizing my impact. And that my friend is where my irritation with our selfish narcissistic culture comes from. Warren Buffet commands my respect for his investment prowess, but he is a parasite. You may hate the Koch brothers for their politics, but like Gates they add far more value to the economy than they take out in personal wealth. We don’t have to punish doctors, lawyers, cops, teachers and other noble trades. We just have to recognize that they are a benefit that someone has to pay for and they cannot add enough value on their own to pay for them selves.

When the left and the right finally recognize this and get it through their thick selfish addlebrained sculls we can start to move our economy in the right direction, producing more than it consumes and providing the surplus value to pay for great teachers, cops, doctors and even a few bankers.

But Rambler we have been moving very much the other way and for decades and the proof is in our country’s staggering debt. We no longer desire to produce our own energy or goods. Oh, they are to dirty or hard. But it’s those endeavors that add the most bang for the buck. We instead teach our children to be some fancy pants investment banker or some noble but high paying profession like a lawyer, never ever considering the balance on the books. An economy cannot survive long on services and middlemen unless there is a much larger economy out there producing enough wealth to buy it from us. Right now we are the biggest. And I really don’t think as big a potential China is to take over that roll, that’s what we should do. We would be much better off staying in the producer category and having every one else chase us. Once you are knocked off the top none of those noble professions is going to buy you a plug nickel.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.