This sounds even-tempered, but it's inexcusable to toss the word "corporations" around that way.

Corporate ownership of business has done more than almost anything, perhaps more than literacy itself, to widely disperse wealth and power.

Until the OWSers, or anyone else, can say this FULL STOP –without whining or codicils or exceptions or pretense to unprecedented insight into human nature– then we're not talking seriously about economics. And were not talking seriously about the American miracle.

Politicians and bureaucrats have the power to write legislation and regulations in ways that favor their rich benefactors. As long as they have that power they will always have plenty of rich benefactors.

Big billionaires, big corporations, big bankers, big unions, lobbyists, special interests pay $$big money to politicians, both Democrats and Republicans, in exchange for even bigger $$paybacks and $$favors from the government, at the expense of American workers. They've been doing it in the U.S. for 200 years, and in Europe for even longer. They're greedy and selfish, but they're not stupid. They wouldn't keep paying if they weren't getting what they’re paying for. And they'll keep getting it as long as the government has the power to sell it.

Concentrating more power in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats is the surest way to concentrate even more wealth in the hands of the favored few.

Young conservatives and libertarians should be printing out that Venn diagram and heading to the protests - or to college campuses, etc.

That article - and the simple question "how will socialism solve cronyism?" - are very good crowbars to start prodding Gen Y to think outside of the socialist tropes they were brainwashed with during their "education".

This is a great time to do this - since the economic forecast is focusing many of these young people's attention.

Except that the OWS wants to "fix" things through socialism. That's about as incompatible with the goals of the Tea Party as you can get. James Sinclair should go back and read his own Onion insertion. He's missing the point entirely. If you ignore the lunatics in the OWS, there's no "movement." The whole point of the OWS is to install socialism/statism as the M.O. of our country. That's lunacy.

>> Except that the OWS wants to "fix" things through socialism

Bingo. It would be nice if they could come to some consensus on the corporate / governmental axis, but the OWS want even more state control, over pretty much everything.

I am up to here (here) with comparisons between the Constitution-defending Tea Party and the Constitution-burning OWS-ers. Our nation is by design a Republic of enumerated powers and the Marxists and their booger-eating footsoldiers are vehemently opposed to this. Because the structure of our nation has been quite well defined, it is possible to determine what is anti-American, and these Marxists "OCCUPYING" our public places, mooching, threatening, and issuing demands are indeed anti-American.

Not all soldiers support a given policy but when they march with the army, they are soldiers still. Likewise for patchouli-reeking hippies and Marxism.

The greatest threat to our economy is neither corporations nor the government. The greatest threat to our economy is both of them working together.

Sinclair is right about this. I'm not sure he's right about there being a significant philosophical overlap between the Tea Party and OWS (his Venn diagram strikes me as misleading. I do think that both groups are generally reactions to the sense that our current trajectory is both unfair and unsustainable, but they differ so widely in what they view as root causes and in culture that I don't see there being much likelihood of finding common ground.

@Christopher - Agreed - To describe Sinclair's Venn diagram as simplistic is to give him far too much credit. I would guess most Tea Partiers don't have any problem with corporations, per se, much more so with corrupt politicians who are willing to play ball. And to somehow whittle down the OWS to an anti-corporation movement is silly.

As for the common area in the Venn Diagram: the Tea Party believes the government/corporate cooperation is where capitalism goes bad, the Occupation believes that's what capitalism IS.

OWS thinks they will do better under a different system, but no matter where they go, there they are. They will be whining, self-absorbed bottom feeders under any system.

I read somewhere this morning that OWS has an internal uprising. The kitchen staff is tired of feeding the homeless and other indigenous freeloaders all day.

Capitalism goes bad at the point where govenment intervenes. When benefits are "free" is the problem. A Corporation cannot do this out of others' pockets without repercussion. Governments can.

The carnality of finance.

Now, before people start getting upset (like last time), let's be clear about something: The guy is MOSTLY KIDDING.

And the parts where he isn't shouldn't be too scary for those who're giving proper attention to their careers.

Corporations are collections of people organized to accomplish something. If you eliminate the idea of corporations, work through voluntary association, then the only remaining organizer is the State.

The largest corporations are tiny compared to government. Each one must defend itself against government control, and it gains favors at the same time, if it can. Each one attempts to capture part of the regulatory regime put over it. If the regulatory regime were light and driven by a philosophy of the least regulation is the best, there would be little to capture.

More regulation feeds into the plans of many large businesses. It imposes a complexity and cost that drives smaller firms out of business.

Larger companies don't mind the extra costs, as long as everyone has to pay them and there is a tariff against foreign imports. Then, these costs can be passed along in increased product prices. Also, larger companies can lobby for gentler regulatory treatment, citing their large emloyment in a particular congressional district.

Libertarianism is not anti-big business, but crucially it is not anti-small business. Keynesianism feeds into the idea that our wise social planners know best, and lulls the public into supporting regulation to protect against the "unplanned", free market. We get crony-capitalism along the way.

The best ideologies are simplifications of empirical observation and good policy. The worst ideologies (eg. Marxism) are plausible sounding constructions which happen to give power to the people proposing them.

Regulation of, by, and for Big Business
12/06/10 - Econlog by Arnold Kling
( econlog.econlib.org/archives/2010/12/regulation_of_b.html )

=== ===
Regulation in general, far from coming against the wishes of the regulated interests, was openly welcomed by them in nearly every case. As Upton Sinclair said of the meat industry, which he is given credit for having tamed, "the federal inspection of meat was historically established at the packers' request. ... It is maintained and paid for by the people of the United States for the benefit of the packers."

In any case, congressional hearings during the administration of Theodore Roosevelt revealed that "the big Chicago packers wanted more meat inspection both to bring the small packers under control and to aid them in their position in the export trade." Formally representing the large Chicago packers, Thomas E. Wilson publicly announced: "We are now and have always been in favor of the extension of the inspection."
=== ===

Consider this and this.

Full-on naked people sexual intercourse, depicted pornographically.

OK, I wouldn't have sold the link that hard if I'd known it was CNN.

But still.

Except that the OWS wants to "fix" things through socialism.

Lots of people keep saying this because they're getting their info from Fox News and other pundits. OWS doesn't actually have a unified message, let alone one with as strong a message as "embrace socialism."

That's what confuses me: Half the time people are bitching that OWS has no message, and the other half of the time they are bitching that OWS wants to make us socialists.

I went down to Wall Street last week to check it out. There were a couple of whackjobs floating around, but the people who were serious about this had no problem with business in general. They had a problem with the clusterfuck that is finance and government.

What is the clusterfuck that is finance?

OWS doesn't actually have a unified message,

yeah they do - student loan forgiveness. Oh and a nice glamorous career too.

@Haakon Dahl:

"these Marxists "OCCUPYING" our public places, mooching, threatening, and issuing demands are indeed anti-American."

Oh, how true. And you'll be happy to see that the Oakland cops fired a canister into the skull of one of these anti-American pieces of filth, breaking his commie skull, thank God!

The fact that he's a two-tour Iraqi war vet, a Marine no less, shouldn't dampen your hate for him now that he's no longer an 'American' in your patriotic eyes, right?

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/10/26/iraq-war-veteran-suffers-skull-fracture-at-occupy-oakland-rally/

Don't support OWS, couldn't care less about most of the 99%. That said the men and women of our armed services have earned the right to peacefully protest where, when and how they want. As far as I'm concerned if the want to drop a giant deuce on the white house lawn they get to. We are all granted our right by the constitution those men and women earned theirs.

The issue with OWS is that you have good and bad there. Some of those there have a legitimate gripe. Like prohibiting bailouts and shutting down crony capitalism. Some just want a free ride with student loan forgiveness and elimination of credit reporting, and lost more government benifits.

Just like the tea party. It started with limiting government and balanced budgets. Now all sort of right wing funder nutter jumped on the band wagon. The tea-party wanted to solve the illegal problem by just taking away the carat (no free healthcare, no federal benifits). Now some want to boost ICE to military police levels. Then add in all the fucking bigots and homophobes. A good idea turns into a fucking laughing stock.

"and lost more government benifits." Should be lots more government benifits.

The Oakland police officer did not aim the cannister and the soldier, bless his heart, knows that.

The soldier, bless his heart, volunteered to military service just as he volunteered to protest in Oakland. Knowing that both are dangerous activities, I think the soldier, bless his heart, knew the risks.

yeah they do - student loan forgiveness. Oh and a nice glamorous career too.

No. Some want student loan forgiveness. None of those people, when I was there, seemed to think the government should hand them a nice, glamorous career. One guy in his 50s or 60s was protesting the bank bailouts, and that seemed to be the most common theme. Overall, OWS is a band of people with lots of different beefs, some with Wall Street, some with government, some more out there, like the guy protesting Blackberry. One guy suggested shanking Barney Frank.

People keep inventing what the think OWS is trying to achieve because they have some weird need to pigeonhole everything, perhaps because our attention spans have become so short that we depend on slogans and bullet points to tell us what's going on.

What is the clusterfuck that is finance?

When average people get in trouble financially, we tell them to shut the fuck up and get jobs. When banks and large businesses get in trouble financially, the government opens its wallet and gives them a fat wad of our cash. We're supposed to manage our money wisely, but if you have enough money to buy a politician, you don't have to follow those rules, and you get tax breaks the rest of us can only dream about.

The reason these people are sleeping in the park with signs is because they have no recourse for their grievances through the usual channels. Democrats and Republicans are too beholden to corporate money to fix any of this. Voting seems pointless because all of the options are the same, and the third-party options don't have a prayer.

People keep inventing what the think OWS is trying to achieve because they have some weird need to pigeonhole everything, perhaps because our attention spans have become so short that we depend on slogans and bullet points to tell us what's going on.

I think it's less a need for pigeonholing as it is a need for the OWS crowd to come up with a unified manifesto.

It was pretty easy to tell what the Tea Party stood for because the fringe elements that came along for the ride were basically silenced and the main message (fiscal frugality on the part of government) was hammered home repeatedly.

OWS hasn't yet reached a unified consensus beyond that they're all angry about something.

The Tea Party came along slowly, congealing during the Bush years and finding a public voice in the Obama years.

OWS is still pretty embryonic and its members are unwilling to alienate the fringe elements that came along for the ride - so the group's message is muddled.

Expressing their anger without presenting a unified message is hurting them.

OWS is coming across as spoiled children in the main and the fringe elements (who have a message) are pushing their message as if it were the whole movement's message. And, if the movement as a whole doesn't get its act together, it will be.

Stop spending now. No really.

There was a time when giving away taxpayers' money that was not specifically stipulated in the Constitution, those responsible would shortly see their careers ended, or preferrably just run out of town. Not now, and not for a long time.

I think tea party rallies work if they continue. The protests, not so much. Too many, me included for some sick reason, enjoy seeing our fine policeman clock a few heads of protestors.

"I think the soldier, bless his heart, knew the risks."

You forgot to add "Nine Eleven".

The one that I notice about the Tea Party is that out of the hundreds of rallies they have held, their have been maybe three-five arrests.

The OWS has over 700 arrests in the first few days. There is a difference between protesting and making your voice heard and civil disobedience.

The thing that made MLK so successful was that he, and his followers, basically followed the rules and let his opponents overreact. The hippies in the 60's instigated a response by not following the rules.

The OWS is doing the same thing. They are throwing rocks, bottles, paint, etc. at the police officers trying to disperse them. That is assault. If they did a sit-in, then I (and the majority) would view it differently.

The lack of a coherent message does not help either. The Tea Party did and does have a coherent message -- follow the U.S. Constitution as it was written. Yes, you have the outliers that want to conflate social issues. But they are made the minority. (Note that I'm not a Tea Party member but have listened to what they have said.)

"People keep inventing what the think OWS is trying to achieve because they have some weird need to pigeonhole everything..."

Or maybe it's because a book is expected to be about something. I can write a program that will generate a book of random words, but I doubt I will find many customers for it. If you're going to have a protest, there needs to be a subject for that protest. A protest that has no topic, other than seeking attention, is better described as a temper tantrum.

You forgot to add "Nine Eleven".

Posted by: Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at October 27, 2011 5:47 PM

?

The Oakland police officer did not aim the cannister and the soldier, bless his heart, knows that.

The soldier, bless his heart, volunteered to military service just as he volunteered to protest in Oakland. Knowing that both are dangerous activities, I think the soldier, bless his heart, knew the risks.

Posted by: Dave B at October 27, 2011 1:39 PM

WTF?!

Does it seriously (in your mind) mitigate the officers behavior that he just randomly tossed that device into a crowd trying to OBVIOUSLY help someone? And how do you know what that man with a cracked skull in critical condition is thinking and knows? Links please!

I think you project here just a little to much.

I'm not one for protesters or protesting, but that police officer, based on the video I've seen, acted callously and with disregard for human life and ought to taken to account. I don't believe in God but wish I could so that his nemesis could roast that bastard in hell.

@Dave B

I also want to say that I think your idea and my idea of a fine policeman is very different.

I think the main reason OWS has steam is because of the police brutality on display against women behind barriers in NYC. Those videos went viral. Those police are effectively useful idiots to the OWS protesters. If you don't get that then there is no help for you.

And you are seriously deranged in a bad way if you enjoy thinking about police cracking protesters heads at random but feel remorse as soon as a protester is a veteran. As if only veterans or only that one individual was noble and every other protester ought to consider themselves baton fodder.

I heard on the news that at some sites (I was thinking Oakland, but that is probably just sticking in my head from the canister issue) the protesters are getting angry with the homeless who are taking stuff - food, using the fires or whatever to warm up - and putting anything into the camp.

I also thought it was funny that the Occupy Portland group in corporate.

Isn't "Bless his heart" Southern for "He's nice but an idiot"? I've always heard it was an insult.

Lots of people keep saying this because they're getting their info from Fox News and other pundits. OWS doesn't actually have a unified message, let alone one with as strong a message as "embrace socialism."

That's what confuses me: Half the time people are bitching that OWS has no message, and the other half of the time they are bitching that OWS wants to make us socialists.

@MonicaP - I haven't watched Fox News in about eight years. I get my info from numerous newspapers including the New York Times, WaPo, the Post, the Daily News, WSJ as well as numerous blogs and online sources. Your stereotyping is just a way of ignoring the fact that my "bitching" (bite me, BTW) is based on the numerous banners, signs, t-shirts, etc I've personally seen at these rallies that express support for socialism or socialist policies. It's not my fault that the message that is consistently dominant at these protests is one of socialism. If these people don't actually that message, their doing a terrible job of conveying that.

WTF?!

Does it seriously (in your mind) mitigate the officers behavior that he just randomly tossed that device into a crowd trying to OBVIOUSLY help someone? And how do you know what that man with a cracked skull in critical condition is thinking and knows? Links please!

I think you project here just a little to much.

I'm not one for protesters or protesting, but that police officer, based on the video I've seen, acted callously and with disregard for human life and ought to taken to account. I don't believe in God but wish I could so that his nemesis could roast that bastard in hell.

Posted by: Abersouth at October 27, 2011 10:47 PM

The officer was doing his job - I think. If he did it incorrectly he should be punished. Too date I have seen no evidence of that. If you have it please provide. I am open minded to both sides.

You seem to know much about what the officer was thinking. If I were you I'd ask for links. I am not you.

You think I am projecting. OK. Is it not dangerous to join the military? Is it not dangerous for someone to ignore, or toss things at, people who are armed (people who are armed, not necessary to police)? Are you saying the soldier was too dumb to know these things?

"I also want to say that I think your idea and my idea of a fine policeman is very different."

OK - I guess we all project some.

"I think the main reason OWS has steam is because of the police brutality on display against women behind barriers in NYC. Those videos went viral. Those police are effectively useful idiots to the OWS protesters. If you don't get that then there is no help for you."

I think OWS is loosing steam. Too each his own. Oh, and how bout the brutality of the women at OWS by actors of OWS. Eating their own.

"And you are seriously deranged in a bad way if you enjoy thinking about police cracking protesters heads at random but feel remorse as soon as a protester is a veteran. As if only veterans or only that one individual was noble and every other protester ought to consider themselves baton fodder."

I didn't say I enjoy thinking about protesters heads getting cracked. I said I enjoy seeing it. I said it was sick, so what is your point. I feel no remorse about a veteran getting cracked - why would I? In the 60's, protesters were baton fodder and they earned it - most did so proudly. Throwing things at armed people is never a good idea in my mind. That is, unless you want to fodder, baton or otherwise.

Isn't "Bless his heart" Southern for "He's nice but an idiot"? I've always heard it was an insult.

Posted by: NicoleK at October 28, 2011 1:25 AM

I am not from the South. I have heard Southern ladies use it, but not exactly like you are inferring. I never quesion the motives of someone who stands in front of a bull expecting it to be safe.

Everything changed on Nine Eleven, we're told, as we drop our pants and abandon our Constitution. Every cop and fireman is now automatically a hero, for instance.

Here, we have New York City's finest heroes protesting the continuing indictments of their corrupt brethren. How dare we them?!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/29/nyregion/officers-unleash-anger-at-ticket-fixing-arraignments-in-the-bronx.html?_r=1&hp

Nine eleven.

How dare we JUDGE them, of course. JUDGE being the missing word in that sentence.

You know what I love about that cell phone video of the soilder with the cracked skull?

It bounces aruond so fucking much you cant see who is doing what, you see some images of people throwing stuff but you cant tell if its the protesters or the cops and after the guy runs over to the group carring the guy and gets video of his face e are supposed to belive the not only the claim that the cops shot him in the face(it may hve been a ricochet) but we are also supposed to beleive the infered undertones that it was done 'ON PURPOSE'

Also, whos genius idea was it to carry a guy with a head wound AWAY from the athourites, EMS, and syndicated news crews?

I agree, lujlp. Most likely that so-called "war veteran" (ha! we never even DECLARED war!) cracked his own skull just to make the cops look bad.

Yeah lujlp, we know the OWS would never rape their women, steal from each other, piss and shit on other peoples proterty, stop a guy from driving to work or home, fight each other, threaten new media. Why they are pure as driven snow. Why, I don't need to find out facts before blaming the police - we know they are "always" in the wrong.

Tell L about your ear plugs if catching sleep is a problem. I have to have an oxygen generating machine in my room attached to my CPAP machine when I sleep. With the noise keeping me awake, I felt just as bad in the morning as if I didn't get the oxygen. Then I remembered Amy and the bar patrons story and the ear plugs. Now I don't hear a thing at night and sleep like a baby.

Only problem, if I need the alarm clock, I don't hear it, and will sleep until 10am until my Lab licks my ear to wake me up.