Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
What's right about letting a city ordinance dictate when you're allowed to peacefully assemble? The first amendment says nothing about time frames.
Staying on site 24/7 (occupying) is expressive conduct, which is protected under the first amendment.
Is it privately owned?
Flanzo, that's a good point. I can understand that if people occupied a private space then the owner would have the right to legally remove them.
But if property is public then what is the legality? Almost every mid-sized town in America has ordinances against people occupying (ie, living on town property) a municipally governed place. And I think most people would think that's a good thing even though many people are being forced into that situation by the economy. But when that occupation is an expression of peaceful protest you would think that the First Amendment would override the enforcement of those laws.
The ironic thing is that people in NYC routinely "occupy" places that they have no right to and it is never enforced. I guess the homeless are more subtle and blend into places less visible than Wall Street.
1. Nobody really wants to do anything about the mentally ill and the homeless running around among us.
2. Boston police, among other cities, have been taking homeless people and throwing them into Occupy tent cities. Many have no affiliation with the movement, some are mentally ill, some are just freeloading off donations.
And in Worcester, about 300 bucks was stolen from a lock box by some gypsy who ran into camp one day earlier this week.
I don't know if there should be any worry about the military returning home and simply falling in line with Thomas, if that's what you meant.
Perhaps not immediately. Unless all these veterans are going to return home to equal or greater quality of life and opportunities they had before going on their tours of duty, I think it would be unwise to assume that the Iraq withdrawal will have no or negative effect on Occupy protests.
I think it's worth pointing out that the 2008 presidential candidate who received the most in campaign donations from active duty military was Ron Paul. Paul raised more than double the amount the second-largest recipient, Barack Obama, did. I would say Ron Paul's finger is closer to the Occupy pulse than your average candidate myself. I would say that, despite their different parties, these two both embody an anti-establishment sentiment in the context of the 2008 election. When it came down to the general election that year, Obama won more counties housing our biggest military bases than John McCain did. When I think about these things in today's context, yeah, I do think we have an incoming influx of returning veterans whose sympathies were already leaning in this direction years ago... and I don't think events of the intervening years will diminish that effect, either.
Of all the people I know personally who have gone to Iraq and/or Afghanistan and back, I would say liberals equal - if not slightly outnumber - the independents and conservatives combined. Now, maybe it's just the people I personally know, but it seems to me my personal frame of reference reinforces my hunch that returning veterans will give the movement a boost.
You can argue with my logic behind my assessment, but that won't explain away the fact that Iraq veteran Scott Olsen's skull was fractured by an Oakland PD projectile while participating in an Occupy protest. I also can't help but point out, in a full circle kind of way, that he was born and raised in Wisconsin. His hometown is near La Crosse, along the Mississippi in the Minnesconsin part of the state. His parents have flown out to California, and it sounds as if brain surgery will be necessary.
Oddly enough, I voted for Ron Paul (no, not kidding).
Regarding the Scott Olsen tragedy, his serving doesn't make it more upsetting (anyone having those injuries would be tragic), but it's somewhat fortunate he has that connection so people are more aware of what took place, can send him aid and can hopefully see that everyone, regardless of their role in these protests, needs to step back and realize these are your neighbors. I just hope, for Scott and his family's sake, that the image of a veteran being injured at a peaceful protest isn't taken advantage of and turned into some grand symbol. He's a person, a badly hurt one, and he needs people's well wishes, not to be used as a sign for the movement. Thankfully, this isn't what has happened, which is refreshing.
I happen to know a lot of NYPD officers that have been on the job for under 12 months and have all been stationed down on Wall Street. A couple are calm and level-headed, but one of my biggest concerns is: who are the people these cities are staffing at the Occupy protests? Trigger-happy probies fresh out of the academy? I got a ticket written for open container on Saturday in the subway (which is unheard of) and the two "cops" were about 18 years and 1 month old and kept calling each other "kid" every other sentence. Are these clowns supposed to keep the peace? The second a group of protesters get even mildly excitable, these idiots are going to do some harm. I was not pleased at all to see the NYPD stocking the protest with 90% rookie cops.
The bank the OWS group is using to deposit their donations is under FDIC investigation and have had 6 executives leave the bank in the past 6 months, basically signaling people to a "mini Enron" in terms of cooking books. Not that this has anything to do with the protesters themselves, I just found it funny that they used the last union bank left and it's under FDIC investigation because they cook their books:
And in the height of irony, a Long Island man has filed to trademark OWS. Yes, the same movement against this type of profiteering let someone trademark the name of their movement right out from under them. Not their finest moment, I would say. The a-hole inside me thinks this is pretty damn funny, but the kinder part of me hopes this guy isn't just bullshitting when he says he did it to keep the trademark in the hands of someone in full support of the movement:
Well some of you may have heard about the arrests in Nashville last night, personally I am heading down now to see if they will do anything to me during the day. I will be back Saturday to see what they do during the night.
Last Edit: Oct 28, 2011 12:26:58 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
Well some of you may have heard about the arrests in Nashville last night, personally I am heading down now to see if they will do anything to me during the day. I will be back Saturday to see what they do during the night.
I went down and met some nice folk this afternoon, the kids are with their mom this weekend so I am going to see if they care to arrest me tomorrow night. Considering I keep the computers working for half the lawyers in this city it may not go as well for them as they think it will.
Last night Worcester decided to move from Lake Quinsigamond State Park to the Common downtown.
Wasn't long before 20-25 people got arrested. Common "closes" at 10. Cops shown up in huge numbers at 10:15. Those inside the Common were taken in for misdemeanor trespassing. By 11 there's a march on the police station, where a few more get arrested for walking in the travel lane of a street.
The Worcester Occupy team will try this again probably next week, and we get back to Lake Park in the meanwhile.
The interesting thing about Worcester is - the mayor (who is generally supportive of us) and the City Council have little power. The City Manager, who is appointed and oddly enough has more power than the elected officials, is the one mostly responsible for opposing Occupy Worcester and getting swift police action against us.
The interesting thing about Worcester is - the mayor (who is generally supportive of us) and the City Council have little power. The City Manager, who is appointed and oddly enough has more power than the elected officials, is the one mostly responsible for opposing Occupy Worcester and getting swift police action against us.
Give that mayor and council hell. In the city manager model of municipal government, they're the ones who appoint an alternate authority and delegate their responsibilities to that person - and they can take it away. Don't let them pass the buck on saying they're not responsible for that treatment, when it's their own appointee who's responsible for that treatment. Give them the choice between firing your city manager (and, you know, actually running the city themselves) or making their lives hell.
1. Nobody really wants to do anything about the mentally ill and the homeless running around among us.
2. Boston police, among other cities, have been taking homeless people and throwing them into Occupy tent cities. Many have no affiliation with the movement, some are mentally ill, some are just freeloading off donations.
.
I don't know, man - seems to me like #2 is a great way of addressing #1.
Why do you feel this way?
Last Edit: Nov 8, 2011 5:23:17 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
Do you have access to Google? It's the square in front of City Hall.
This isn't a good analogy at all. A public search engine is not comparable to a (theoretically) privately owned park. If a park or property is not a public space, it is very relevant to the discussion, because people living on it would be trespassers. Expressive conduct is certainly protected by the laws of this country, but you don't have the freedom to express yourself wherever you want. You can't walk into someone's house and set up a tent in their living room because you want to express yourself.
Btw, the overtime costs for NYPD at the Occupy Wall Street protests just eclipsed $2 million. And I still don't know what they want other than for all corporations to burn in hell and anyone with a shirt and tie in the financial district to be tarred and feathered.
There are way too many officers at OWS. It looked like an army when I strolled down there.
It's NYC law that they have to be stationed there for stuff like this. As long as the protesters make their living in Zucatti Park a 24/7 exercise, the cops will need to be there 24/7.
Just be happy that they're sending all the new officers down there, if they were sending the veteran officers that OT figure would be WAY higher.
Do you have access to Google? It's the square in front of City Hall.
This isn't a good analogy at all. A public search engine is not comparable to a (theoretically) privately owned park. If a park or property is not a public space, it is very relevant to the discussion, because people living on it would be trespassers. Expressive conduct is certainly protected by the laws of this country, but you don't have the freedom to express yourself wherever you want. You can't walk into someone's house and set up a tent in their living room because you want to express yourself.
Haha. I wasn't making an analogy but you would be correct if I was. Sorry, I can be a little hard to understand at times. I was simply saying you could have found the answer to that with a google search. Frank Ozaganti park is a public space, so I feel citizens have a right to expressive conduct there. As long as they are peaceful. So much has happened in Oakland since you asked that question. I think the protesters need to do a better job of policing themselves and help oust the fringe elements that are spraying graffiti, provoking the cops, etc. That's a tall order in a leaderless movement.
You are totally right about not having the freedom to express yourself wherever you want. I wasn't trying to say that at all. I'm all for arresting the trouble makers that are causing a problem for both the police and protesters.
I just walked in the door so I'll respond to your other thoughts a little later tonight.
yes, I tend to agree you’re a bully and caustic as well I will not afford you another of my expressions I refuse dialogue LOW MEN = flanzonyc and Badass Barry Hall I mean really Badass Barry Hall, what the hell, that’s just seriously fucking sick. Your approach is what gives me the strength to fight my fight another day. I refuse dialogue with either of you.
yes, I tend to agree you’re a bully and caustic as well I will not afford you another of my expressions I refuse dialogue LOW MEN = flanzonyc and Badass Barry Hall I mean really Badass Barry Hall, what the hell, that’s just seriously quacking sick. Your approach is what gives me the strength to fight my fight another day. I refuse dialogue with either of you.
Settle down, I wasn't bullying anyone. I just offer my opinions.
The interesting thing about Worcester is - the mayor (who is generally supportive of us) and the City Council have little power. The City Manager, who is appointed and oddly enough has more power than the elected officials, is the one mostly responsible for opposing Occupy Worcester and getting swift police action against us.
Give that mayor and council hell. In the city manager model of municipal government, they're the ones who appoint an alternate authority and delegate their responsibilities to that person - and they can take it away. Don't let them pass the buck on saying they're not responsible for that treatment, when it's their own appointee who's responsible for that treatment. Give them the choice between firing your city manager (and, you know, actually running the city themselves) or making their lives hell.
The city manager is running around saying how we're costing taxpayers thousands of dollars (their estimate being between 8k and 10k). The city manager was blaming us for poor policing service on Saturday night.
Yet someone found it ok to send half of the city's police force to arrest 17 people for setting up tents in a park behind city hall. Meanwhile you got bar fights and robberies in progress being ignored. Where's the priorities?
It's bad enough the amount of force which gets thrown at us is excessive, but then all this is unconstitutional to begin with. We even started chanting "we have a permit, it's called the Constitution" - but of course the manager and the high ups at WPD don't care.
Oh, the two highest paid officials in Worcester: police chief at just over 200k a year, city manager at 183k. Hmmm, I wonder why they might be afraid... crooked politicians serving crooked business, using crooked law enforcement to help them out. And I don't blame your average officer on the street, they're in the 99% - I'm talking about those doing the bidding of the city manager and sending these low level officers out with the transport vans to round us all up.
The final total of arrested: 17 occupiers, one of our legal observers, one innocent bystander just trying to see what was going on, then three people in the march on the WPD headquarters.
Depending on how this Sunday goes, we're probably gonna raise a lot of hell and start demanding he be fired or quit. Sunday we created the "New England Solidarity March", where all Occupy supporters in the region can come out, network with each other, and support the Worcester movement. And since the 13th is also the date when the Lake Park permit gets pulled - we'll probably try and take the Common for a third time. Except I expect Mr. Burns (City Manager O'Brien) to release the hounds (WPD) and arrest a bunch of people again.
Does Worcester happen to be a place where there is home rule? I'm just poking around Google and it appears that there are limited powers of recall there, in places that have home rule. I can't find whether or not that applies to Worcester just yet. You and yours out there know better than I would. I haven't yet found anything myself to neither confirm nor deny that you can do it out there.
yes, I tend to agree you’re a bully and caustic as well I will not afford you another of my expressions I refuse dialogue LOW MEN = flanzonyc and Badass Barry Hall I mean really Badass Barry Hall, what the hell, that’s just seriously quacking sick. Your approach is what gives me the strength to fight my fight another day. I refuse dialogue with either of you.
Settle down, I wasn't bullying anyone. I just offer my opinions.
For the record, I didn't feel bullied at all??? I thought the misunderstanding was quite funny. I can imagine some smoked up hippie saying something like that. "Man, Google is the square in front of City Hall, man."
I like having FLanzo in this tread because he knows a hell of a lot more about finance/ Wall St. then me. That's what we should be doing. Having an open discussion with each other trying to come up with the best solutions for the problems we face. Except for Fishing Manic, I'm going to give him hell because I know he'll just give it right back.
I would actually like Juggs to way in on the First amendment/occupying public spaces debate. I find it so interesting how different cities are dealing with it.
Last Edit: Nov 9, 2011 0:49:59 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
I can imagine some smoked up hippie saying something like that. "Man, Google is the square in front of City Hall, man."
That statement is extremely condescending
We are at completely different wave lengths here
whatever...
May peace be with you
Dude, I totally support the movement and I don't understand why you are upset. That wasn't meant to be condescending towards anyone. It was clearly a joking response to the misunderstanding Flonzo and I had. For my part, a joke based on the biased coverage of Fox news and other sources that try to disparage the movement by showing footage that serves their interest. Which is made easy for them because there is definitely people hanging around the area to take advantage of. It's an inevitability. The right wing are going to stereotype people as dirty hippie anarchist commie socialist jobless good for nothings.
I still don't know what they want other than for all corporations to burn in hell and anyone with a shirt and tie in the financial district to be tarred and feathered.
Hey now, it's more nuanced than that... corporations obviously can't burn in hell, since they're not people and have no souls... and I while I want to see numerous suit and tie wearers tarred and feathered, that list does not include finance workers merely for being finance workers.
You want a list of demands? I'll throw some out there.
I want the American Dream to remain possible, and I fear for its fate in this age of social immobility.
I want growth with equity, something which has been sorely lacking for generations.
I want it clearly stated in our body of law that corporations are not people and that money is not speech. It is a shame that this cannot go without saying in this day and age.
I want recognition that calling the wealthy "job creators" is a myth. I want recognition that the wealthy's tax cuts have not created jobs. I want an admission that Reaganomics is a supply-side solution to a demand-side problem, and its subsequent abandonment by our policy makers.
I want public financing of campaigns to remove undue influence on democratic processes by wealthy special interests. Government cannot be of, by and for the people unless sponsored by we the people.
I want the investigation into and/or resignation/impeachment of Clarence Thomas for having such a relationship to these wealthy interests as to undermine judicial impartiality. Supreme Court justices facing similar situations have resigned in the past.
I want a tax system which treats work and wealth at minimum, equally. I think our current system favors wealth over work, which I feel contradicts the very ethos of the American Dream.
I want the United States to withdraw from or renegotiate free trade agreements like NAFTA which have led to the hemorrhaging of jobs. I want the United States to withdraw from or alter international non-governmental organizations such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization.
I want an end to tax credits for businesses that outsource American jobs, companies headquartering in offshore tax havens, and other loopholes which deprive us of revenue.
I want a STET tax (in the neighborhood of a quarter of a percent) applied to stock transactions. I seek this to deter those whose computers are capable of millions of transactions per minute, squeezing every last bit of profit they can from stock trades - but also capable of exaggerating market trends.
I want government oversight into unregulated financial instruments like derivatives or collateralized debt obligations. The financial industry has shown they can't be trusted to self-regulate them... or much of anything.
I want hearings and/or investigations into the American Legislative Exchange Council. I want their claimed tax-exempt status to be reviewed and changed and I want their influence on our legislative process investigated.
I want to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act, recreating walls of separation between investment and commercial banking.
I want legislators in every single state to implement recall provisions, and I want those citizens who do not presently have them to clamor for them. What good is a politician who's afraid of increased accountability?
I want the outsourcing of jobs, inequitable tax policies, harmful trade policies, and preferential treatment of the wealthy to be deemed the treason that it is, considering their negative impact on our country. As such, those who supported/advanced such policies should be treated accordingly.
I think we need more enforcement of the Alien & Sedition Act. I think we need more enforcement of the Sherman Antitrust Act. I think we need more enforcement of the RICO Act.
I want some accountability on the world stage for those who instigated the war on Iraq.
I want Congress to actually declare war when it wants it, unlike their actions of the past 50-60 years.
I want our so-called leaders to resist the influence of Grover Norquist, whose rigid anti-tax pledge has proven itself to run contrary to our national best interest. I feel this pledge directly contradicts a more important oath, the oath of office. (He has 41 Republican senators and a majority of the House majority on board.)
I want our politicians to spend as much time in town hall meetings as they do fundraising.
I want our Senate rules to actually require filibusterers to filibuster to stall a bill. I want our Senate rules to no longer allow a single Senator to anonymously hold a piece of legislation. These and other such rules are entirely at the chamber's discretion.
I want an expanded House of Representatives, keeping those members closer to the people in accordance with the Founding Fathers' intentions. Our current representation cap resembles something like a racket to me.
I want our elections to transcend the single-member districts which presently embody them. These districts create systems with only two viable parties, and we have seen how well that works. I want at-large representation and instant-runoff voting to better reflect the will of the people.
I want us to move toward a renewable energy conversion, and I can leave the global warming controversy out of it: for decades, our economy relied on cheap energy which is no longer so cheap. Alternative energies, once instituted, can lower the cost of power and thus reverse negative economic impact from rising oil prices.
I want the profit motive to be removed from sectors which are necessary for the general welfare. Yes, I'm talking about health care, a universal human necessity. Treat it as a utility, not a business. Not every collective endeavor needs to have every possible bit of profit extracted from it, and this is one of them.
I want to reinvest in our national infrastructure. I do not feel we have fully learned the lesson of the Minnesota I-35 bridge collapse or other similar incidents. This means a smart electrical grid, this means rebuilding roads and pipes, this means increased broadband access, this means high-speed rail connecting major cities...
I want to convert to the metric system. To standardize with our trade partners, to align with scientific practice, because we can't completely avoid it as things are, because we should have done so already. A New Deal-style program of metric conversion would have a fixed, defined, limited-term goal and create work hours and employment opportunities across numerous sectors of the economy.
I want extended school years for our children, who are falling behind their international counterparts and no longer need all that summer time off to work in the fields.
I want comprehensive immigration reform, as I feel it is not an issue of border security versus integrating illegals into our system - but a matter of how to best achieve both simultaneously. Legalizing illegals expands our tax base; heightened border security and language education can provide more employment opportunities.
I want marriage to be recognized for the contract between two of-age individuals that it is; it is not solely a religious institution but a civil one which should not discriminate.
I want to just legalize it, regulate it, and make revenue off it already.
I want a top-to-bottom efficiency review of the federal government. I want a nonpartisan, not bipartisan, approach to recommending spending cuts similar to the one which insulates military base closures from political pressures.
To summarize, I want us to strive for greater accountability, transparency, efficiency and honesty from our government as we take on the challenges of the 21st Century.
I want evolution, even if it takes a revolution to get it.
I still don't know what they want other than for all corporations to burn in hell and anyone with a shirt and tie in the financial district to be tarred and feathered.
Hey now, it's more nuanced than that... corporations obviously can't burn in hell, since they're not people and have no souls... and I while I want to see numerous suit and tie wearers tarred and feathered, that list does not include finance workers merely for being finance workers.
You want a list of demands? I'll throw some out there.
I want the American Dream to remain possible, and I fear for its fate in this age of social immobility.
I want growth with equity, something which has been sorely lacking for generations.
I want it clearly stated in our body of law that corporations are not people and that money is not speech. It is a shame that this cannot go without saying in this day and age.
I want recognition that calling the wealthy "job creators" is a myth. I want recognition that the wealthy's tax cuts have not created jobs. I want an admission that Reaganomics is a supply-side solution to a demand-side problem, and its subsequent abandonment by our policy makers.
I want public financing of campaigns to remove undue influence on democratic processes by wealthy special interests. Government cannot be of, by and for the people unless sponsored by we the people.
I want the investigation into and/or resignation/impeachment of Clarence Thomas for having such a relationship to these wealthy interests as to undermine judicial impartiality. Supreme Court justices facing similar situations have resigned in the past.
I want a tax system which treats work and wealth at minimum, equally. I think our current system favors wealth over work, which I feel contradicts the very ethos of the American Dream.
I want the United States to withdraw from or renegotiate free trade agreements like NAFTA which have led to the hemorrhaging of jobs. I want the United States to withdraw from or alter international non-governmental organizations such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization.
I want an end to tax credits for businesses that outsource American jobs, companies headquartering in offshore tax havens, and other loopholes which deprive us of revenue.
I want a STET tax (in the neighborhood of a quarter of a percent) applied to stock transactions. I seek this to deter those whose computers are capable of millions of transactions per minute, squeezing every last bit of profit they can from stock trades - but also capable of exaggerating market trends.
I want government oversight into unregulated financial instruments like derivatives or collateralized debt obligations. The financial industry has shown they can't be trusted to self-regulate them... or much of anything.
I want hearings and/or investigations into the American Legislative Exchange Council. I want their claimed tax-exempt status to be reviewed and changed and I want their influence on our legislative process investigated.
I want to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act, recreating walls of separation between investment and commercial banking.
I want legislators in every single state to implement recall provisions, and I want those citizens who do not presently have them to clamor for them. What good is a politician who's afraid of increased accountability?
I want the outsourcing of jobs, inequitable tax policies, harmful trade policies, and preferential treatment of the wealthy to be deemed the treason that it is, considering their negative impact on our country. As such, those who supported/advanced such policies should be treated accordingly.
I think we need more enforcement of the Alien & Sedition Act. I think we need more enforcement of the Sherman Antitrust Act. I think we need more enforcement of the RICO Act.
I want some accountability on the world stage for those who instigated the war on Iraq.
I want Congress to actually declare war when it wants it, unlike their actions of the past 50-60 years.
I want our so-called leaders to resist the influence of Grover Norquist, whose rigid anti-tax pledge has proven itself to run contrary to our national best interest. I feel this pledge directly contradicts a more important oath, the oath of office. (He has 41 Republican senators and a majority of the House majority on board.)
I want our politicians to spend as much time in town hall meetings as they do fundraising.
I want our Senate rules to actually require filibusterers to filibuster to stall a bill. I want our Senate rules to no longer allow a single Senator to anonymously hold a piece of legislation. These and other such rules are entirely at the chamber's discretion.
I want an expanded House of Representatives, keeping those members closer to the people in accordance with the Founding Fathers' intentions. Our current representation cap resembles something like a racket to me.
I want our elections to transcend the single-member districts which presently embody them. These districts create systems with only two viable parties, and we have seen how well that works. I want at-large representation and instant-runoff voting to better reflect the will of the people.
I want us to move toward a renewable energy conversion, and I can leave the global warming controversy out of it: for decades, our economy relied on cheap energy which is no longer so cheap. Alternative energies, once instituted, can lower the cost of power and thus reverse negative economic impact from rising oil prices.
I want the profit motive to be removed from sectors which are necessary for the general welfare. Yes, I'm talking about health care, a universal human necessity. Treat it as a utility, not a business. Not every collective endeavor needs to have every possible bit of profit extracted from it, and this is one of them.
I want to reinvest in our national infrastructure. I do not feel we have fully learned the lesson of the Minnesota I-35 bridge collapse or other similar incidents. This means a smart electrical grid, this means rebuilding roads and pipes, this means increased broadband access, this means high-speed rail connecting major cities...
I want to convert to the metric system. To standardize with our trade partners, to align with scientific practice, because we can't completely avoid it as things are, because we should have done so already. A New Deal-style program of metric conversion would have a fixed, defined, limited-term goal and create work hours and employment opportunities across numerous sectors of the economy.
I want extended school years for our children, who are falling behind their international counterparts and no longer need all that summer time off to work in the fields.
I want comprehensive immigration reform, as I feel it is not an issue of border security versus integrating illegals into our system - but a matter of how to best achieve both simultaneously. Legalizing illegals expands our tax base; heightened border security and language education can provide more employment opportunities.
I want marriage to be recognized for the contract between two of-age individuals that it is; it is not solely a religious institution but a civil one which should not discriminate.
I want to just legalize it, regulate it, and make revenue off it already.
I want a top-to-bottom efficiency review of the federal government. I want a nonpartisan, not bipartisan, approach to recommending spending cuts similar to the one which insulates military base closures from political pressures.
To summarize, I want us to strive for greater accountability, transparency, efficiency and honesty from our government as we take on the challenges of the 21st Century.
I want evolution, even if it takes a revolution to get it.
We can and should do better than we are now.
Honestly, when I asked "well, what's the message here?" at OWS, if they handed me a pamphlet with this on it, or even pieces of this, I would have left feeling a LOT better about the people down there. Instead I literally had people just throwing stuff against the wall to see who agreed with them.
As for your points, most of them I can fully get behind.
One thing that is overblown is the "our children are falling behind scholastically" argument. Yes, we fair worse on standardized testing than, say, China. But the reality is that the United States has the highest level universities in the world. While we (and when I say "we" I mean this country) may have a harder time with mathematics and reading/writing, but in terms of functionality and applicable use of education the United States is far ahead of any other country. I can't find the link, but I stumbled onto a story written by a Chinese professor who came to teach here and she basically said that from the time a person is 5 or 6 in China, they are basically being programmed to do one job, and it's all based on standardized test scores. So Albert Einstein could take one of these tests with the flu, do poorly, and be thrust into a life of the custodial arts all because he had a bad day as a 7 year old. The education system needs to be re-worked, certainly, but it's not the length that needs to be addressed. It's standardized testing (enough, already, it's a failed system and has been failing since I was in high school), parents who refuse to take accountability for their children, and a lack of funding. Should schools that perform extremely well get rewarded with additional funding? Probably. But what about the school that does poorly? They get nothing and it perpetuates a cycle of "failure" and struggle. As the son of a teacher, I see my mother's frustrations with the system constantly. She's actually directed not to intervene with her student's personal lives, even when there are serious neglect and/or abuse issues. Staggering, but schools are now too worried about getting sued to get involved.
/end education rant.
One thing I'm not sure many people realize is the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world, by far. I feel offering tax exemptions in exchange for bringing business back to the US would be a constructive way to keep all parties happy. People get jobs, corporations get to say they're being "taxed less", but in reality are still taxed at a much higher rate than they would anywhere else, the US gets increased tax revenue from increased domestic business/production. This is obviously a very vague and broad summary of what would inevitably be an incredibly detailed and complicated piece of legislature, but these are the type of "deals" I feel need to be hashed out to bring productivity and revenue back in-house.
The fact that marriage isn't allowed for all of-age people, regardless of the sex of their partner, is insane to me. It's 2011, almost 2012, and Kim fucking Kardashian just had a fake wedding to make $17 million. If the government recognizes that monstrosity of a "marriage" as legal, then I can't understand why they won't let Chuck & Larry get hitched.
The "STET" or stock tax is a great idea, unfortunately the finance industry has fought this for decades, even before the introduction of computer-automated trading. It's actually a joke, but as they say "those with the money make the rules".
The campaign funding/lobbyist issue is probably the one that makes me the most furious of all. The rampant, unchecked, irresponsible, money-grubbing behavior of certain people in power is clearly evident. The American public may be a lot of things, we may not be book smart, we may be drunk and fat, we may be ignorant and/or arrogant, but we're not gullible. We're not going to see Rick Perry dishing out deals in Texas like he's selling shares of the state gov't to his buddies and just go "...oh, well he's just a family-and-friend-oriented guy!". I was hoping the OWS protest would have a clear message, with this near the top of that list. I guess I'm merely frustrated that this message is being overrun by the wrong types of people.
I actually had my first genuinely interesting and informative conversation down there last weekend. My friend doesn't live far from there, so I was going to grab lunch with her and stopped by the protest. I finally found some "Originals" (what I'll call people there before it became "cool" to OWS) and they did have a pretty concise message. It just gets muddied up with the rest of the nonsense people are spewing out. I actually gave one of them my dad's copy of Rules For Radicals, which I found to be a great read and something people down there should all read at least once. I would like to see these protests end with wide-sweeping change, I just don't see how that's possible with the current organizational structure and lack of a manifesto of some kind.