[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I thought you were for the bailout? Some disaster was supposed to happen without it? Is it the HUGE risks and the miserable failure that you object to? Then why bail them out? Why reward the miserable failure? Do the bonuses put tens of thousands out of work?

I think the bailout was probably necessary to stop a cataclysmic chain of events. Even I didn't realize the degree to which our economy was channeled through so few bottlenecks.

That being said, the bigger issue seems to be the one way valve attached to the system. Taxpayers bail out the banks, but seem to have little leverage after the fact.

The protesters not only don't like the banks, or the bailouts that you approve of, but they also don't like capitalism. They want to eliminate capitalism. To them, apparently, the essence of capitalism is the creation of a 1% which sucks the life out of the 99% simply because that is their goal. Capitalism isn't about private property ownership, private investment to promote private business, a symbiotic financial relationship with free market enterprise for them-- it is the destruction of all that. I don't think they have a clear concept of what the word means. People use "capitalism" to mean all sorts of things, good or bad. Like most "systems," it depends on who use them and to what ends that create good or bad outcomes. Capitalism, for the most part, has facilitated some of the greatest economic good. Some "miserable failures" have resulted from its misuse. I don't know, nor do I suspect many of the prostesters know, what economic/financial method they want to replace capitalism. It sounds like they want more government control--some form of socialism.

I don't think there's really a desire to destroy capitalism. The debate in this country isn't about free markets vs socialism. It's more like a fantasy free market vs a managed market. Even the most liberal of proposals don't look much at all like real socialism. Given a Republican President and Congress our economy will still look more like a managed market than a true free market.

If anything, this movement -- in the US at least -- is fueled by a simple frustration as is the Tea Party. Like the Tea Party the crazies get most of the attention, but the undercurrent is very similar.

Wha??? How did the so-called "American Dream" get involved with all this mess? What the heck IS the American Dream? What is your idea of the American Dream? Do the protesters have the same vision of an American Dream that you do?

Somewhat tongue in cheek, but still to the point. I think the protesters think that the game has become increasingly rigged. Some of this might be to naivety of those just entering the workforce and some could be the expectations we put on ourselves.

I guess the bottom line is if you believe our current system (government and private) is really best positioning our resources and people to achieve in this century. It can't all be left to the free market, much of which has long since sold out a lot of the USA in the name of shareholder value.

The bottom bottom line is that we need transformative leadership. While not the disaster some would make him out to be, Obama has not lived up to expectations and the GOP field isn't offering anything really new.

-spence