Mia Love conviently forgets that "the content of their character" is
precisely what Occupy WallStreet is fighting against.Charlatains,
Cheats, and Robbers are what is being protested against - you know, the
Law of the Harvest -- not Fred or Bob who worked 12 hour days for 30 years
to finally make it big or an honest business providing an honest product.I call it Character Warfare.When an 80 year old woman can
got to jail for a parking violation, but a corrput CEO can bilk $Billions
from investors and the Government and never even be charged with a crime...I
have to wonder if the same rules apply.Equal and Justice for all?If the 1% don't see it that way -- the need to prove it.
Nice try Mia. You have spilled forward all the right wing wacko talking points.
These folks are not asking for equal results they just want a fair chance.
Furthermore, your class warfare complaint goes both ways. It is entirely
possible that class warfare can be fought from the top down rather than from the
bottom up. I am very happy that you and your family have done so well in this
country. Why do you begrudge others the same fair shot?
Every discussion turns into it is wrong to "take from the rich and give to
the poor" Sounds great, and most people would agree.We have all heard that "it takes money to make money". Anyone
disagree with that general premise?Isn't is just possible that the
playing field now so favors those with money that over time, the money has
collected at the top?Is this trend good for the country?Why do
you think it is happening?Do you think it will continue?If it
continues, what will ultimately happen?Until you answer these 4
questions for yourself, it is pointless to speculate on what, if anything should
"The answer to our current economic problems lies in preserving the
economic engine that made America what it is today."This is
what the OWS is fighting for. Today, we have massive oligopolies
from banking to energy to medical insurance that lock out competition to keep
their control of the market and exploit consumers who are "trapped" by
the few players in those industries. In short, the free market and economic
innovation has been choked out by the consolidation of these mature industries.
Because these profitable oligopolies dominate their industries, there's no need
to pursue innovation -- think about it: We're still using the same energy
technologies from the 19th and 20th centuries! Imagine if competition drove
innovation in energy; we wouldn't be suffering with $3.50 per gallon gasoline!
These same powerful oligopolies live by a philosophy of
"profits above all" where business interests lie above
citizen/national interests. So job outsourcing, polluting, lobbying to
eliminate tax obligations and regulations, etc., are key profit objectives to
serve stockholders at the expense of broader citizens.OWS is not
fighting for socialism -- this is a Fox News spin! Rather, they're fighting for
citizen freedom from corporate domination and exploitation.
Despite Mia Love's perceptions, the United States ranks lower than most
developed European democracies, in economic mobility, We rank very high in the
correlation between paternal income, and how much their offsprings earn. By the
measures I've found, countries with progressive tax structures, and government
legislated health care seem to have MORE opportunity than we do.
As an OWS supporter, I protest (!). The writer insists on mischaracterizing us
as demanding "equal results." That's not so. What we are demanding is
that the Wall Street powers who continually plunder our economy be held
accountable for their actions. These pirates repeatedly put the rest of us at
huge risk so they can reap huge returns, but they themselves don't actually risk
Protesting crony-capitalism and robber-baron behavior on Wall Street does not
mean you are a socialist.It means you've been paying attention.
LDS Lib, you did it again. Kudos.
For many decades the distribution of income held fairly steady with about 2/3
going to labor and 1/3 going to capital. Over the past three decades that has
shifted to 55% labor, 45% capital. This means that everyone who works for a
living has a much smaller share of the pie to split among themselves, while the
tiny minority of people who own everything have far more. This has
not happened because the wealthiest Americans started working harder. It has
happened because they used their wealth to influence the government to adopt
policies favorable to their interests.When I talk about economic
justice, I'm thinking Eisenhower, not Lenin, Stalin, or Mao.p.s.
Martin Luther King was a socialist.
Excellent commentary. People seem to think they'll get better opportunities by
getting more handouts from government. It's simply not true. Better
opportunities come when we make it easier for regular people to start a
business, borrow money, compete in the marketplace, etc. We do that by limiting
government, not by expanding it. Mia Love gets it.
Lofty words by Mia Love, but they don't measure up to our current national
challenge. By what mechanism(s) do we restore the American Dream?It
is conservatives who cry "class warfare" at the suggestion that the
small group that has done fantastically well the past 10 years be asked to
shoulder more of the common burden. Really, isn't this poisoning the well?In our nation, progress has appeared at acute stress points in our
history. Example: labor laws that "punish" employers by mandating
higher pay after 40 hours in a week. (Family values Utahns should relate to
this example of the majority extracting concessions from the minority. Just
sort of makes sense, doesn't it?)Nobody seriously believes we're on
the road to Soviet communism. Let's be real, leave all the tired talking points
behind for a moment. The Des News noted that *Canada* has passed
the US in terms of economic freedom, according to two indices, including the
conservative Heritage Foundation. How? Their tax structure is similar to the
US, except tax rates on higher earners and the wealthy are significantly higher.
Wealthy Canadians don't scream "class warfare".
Well spoken, Ms. Love.
Mia Love's view suffers from the same two-dimensional thinking that plagues most
politicized speech today. She sees capitalism and socialism as the only two
possibilities. Of course capitalism is right and socialism is wrong. In reality,
what she is defending is a system in which people do work hard but are not
compensated fairly for their labors. The corporate owners and executives are
taking more and more of the wealth while shipping jobs off to Third World
countries and hiring fewer Americans.Meanwhile, technological
advances enable the remaining American workers to be more productive (produce
more product in a given amount of time). This enables businesses to get by with
fewer workers. The problem with this system is that consumers have less
disposable income to buy all those glorious corporate products with. Wonder what
the source of our accumulating debt really is? It comes from government having
to prop up underpaid consumers and struggling corporations.The
solution, of course, isn't Socialism (whatever that means). The solution is to
get capitalism to become what it was intended to become--a system in which
wealth is balanced because consumers and producers have roughly equal power in
Mia Love doesn't get it.
Casual Bystander -- perhaps if you stop standing casually by and got out to
actively start looking and examining and seeking the truth, you would be singing
a tune differently. Instead, your casual listening to hate radio has simply
left you parroting thoughtless comments.Don't just stand by. Get
out and do. At least seek the truth.
So, it's OK to have class warfare if conducted by the mega-wealthy and powerful,
but if the poor (or even the middle class), and those without power and
influence, want to sit at the table, then it's a bad thing? I see....
Thank you, Mia, for having the courage to speak honestly about class warfare in
America! The way to truly help the disadvantaged in this country is
by helping them understand the opportunities that we still have to make our own
way. Freedom does NOT mean giving power to the government to provide jobs,
education, health care, housing and food for whoever demands it. In fact, the
more a government tries to redistribute the people's income, the more it takes
from everyone's freedom and opportunities. I know many small business owners who
would like to grow their businesses and hire more people, but their taxes are
too high. Why should we trust in bigger government to create more
"solutions" when this will only encourage more crony capitalism? The
temptation to play favorites with the people's money has already proven to
irresistible to our politicians.
What makes an 8-10 hour day working in a bank worth more than the same time
working in groceries; at any level? What motive could be cited for
"earning" more than one needs for expenses and reasonable savings for
when unable to continue earning? The answers given will illuminate how
individuals think and the degree of self-interest in the responders.Productivity used to be a major determinant of wage or salary, but recently
the process has begun to shift to rewarding questionable ethics. If I can
successfully perform some economic task, whether by fair means or foul, I will
have "earned" a larger salary. And I can let my ego overcome any bad
feeling I might have regarding the means. Implicit in this is the tendency to
think short-term because the short-term results drive any boost in income/ego.
That trend is the real problem and is what needs our focus in any
attempted change. If government has any role, it is limited to defining the
field. The larger role in society is to educate our children, and discuss with
our neighbors, that fairness does matter. Let's stamp out "taking
advantage" in our dealings.
So let me get this straight, the OWS crowd does not want to punish all rich
people equally. They want to only punish those who have somehow earned their
wealth through what they perceive as immoral behavior.They don't
want to take money from the hard working guy who works long hours and builds a
successful business and now finds himself in the top 1%. They only want
confiscatory taxes imposed on bankers and hedge fund managers. Did I get that
right?Because that is news to me. I have heard nothing of the sort
in any of the protest movements, only from comments on this blog. Everything I
have heard is how EVERYONE in the 1% (except of course Michael Moore, Barak
Obama, and most of the Hollywood crowd) is evil and deserves to have even more
taxes heaped upon them.
Americans are not demanding we "throw out" the capitalistic system. We
are just opposed to the excesses and recklessness which were major contributors
to the recession that has left over 9% unemployed. We have not had laissez-faire
capitalism since the establishment of Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887.
More agencies came later and with oversight and reasonable regulation there was
a tremendous growth of the middle class in the 20th Century. But since
deregulation began in the 1980's the top 1% have double their wealth, the middle
class has been shrinking and has only made modest gains and the percentage in
poverty has increased.There needs to be "shared sacrifice"
in bad times, but the super rich are not being asked to share any burden or take
any responsibility for their speculative excess.
According to banking data by economic research firm Moebs Services, the
uncertainty plaguing the American economy has nothing to do with government
regulations or taxes on millionaires. It's uncertainty driven by consumers and
small-businesses who are worried about their short-term financial prospects. And
it's been going on since well before Obama became President.Since
the end of 2007, bank customers have pulled over $900 billion out of
certificates of deposits at major U.S. banks, parking their money in checking
accounts and money market deposit accounts. Banks pay customers interest to park
their money in CDs, but pay out next-to-nothing for money market accounts, and
usually nothing for checking accounts."These are enormous
shifts," said Chairman Mike Moebs. "We haven't seen stuff like this
since the 1930s."Money market/checking accounts offer consumers
the ability to withdraw their money quickly. CDs require the funds to be locked
up for years. The heavy reliance on short-term cash indicates a tremendous
amount of uncertainty about the future, people with jobs are uncertain about
whether they will have one in a year, people without jobs don't know how long
their unemployment checks will keep coming in.
Most commentors above seem to think Mia is wrong. Let's then move in the
direction of Haiti! I think she has a great deal more wisdom and personal
experience than most people realize.
I think Ms. Love has laid out the present situation much closer than most of the
comments have. We cannot judge our economy by what it is today because mostly
government is to blame for where we are. If you go back about 20
years you will see that Ms. Love's comparisons of what America's government
should be, where Haiti's went wrong, and why the OWS thinks it is protesting, I
believe you can better understand what she is saying.A Free
Enterprise Capitalistic system with limited government still champions other
forms of government. Our problem is that we seem to have forgotten the 'limited
OWS so far has proven to be nothing but a gathering of folks with no solid
platform, no consensus (unless everyone in the group wiggles their fingers), and
no forward movement that anyone can grab onto and DO something about! It's nice
that all the commenters here seem to know the reasons for OWS, some of which I
could agree with - but they are not the ones "occupying". Seems the
protestors forgot to bring along those who can elucidate on the real issues,
rather they have managed to be a magnet for criminals, druggies, and those who
seem to be stuck eternally in the 60's. If someone here can tell us all WHAT TO
DO about the issues - without creating a socialist society "of give to me
because I want it and you have it" mentality, I'd be happy to listen!
@spark | 11:10 a.m. Nov. 13, 2011 Saratoga Springs, UT I know
many small business owners who would like to grow their businesses and hire more
people, but their taxes are too high. ============ So
then, You must be part of the 99% -- and support the OWS movement.Small businesses don't get the tax breaks and subsidezes that the
uber-wealthy Corporations get. Most of them not only never pay a single penny in
taxes -- they actually recieve $Billions of Government dollars to line their
Golden pockets.Coporations have rigid the system, so little guys can
never grow.Welcome to OWS.
OWS has succeeded on one level at least. They have diverted the obsession with
the deficit (which needs to be addressed long term) to jobs, excesses of Wall
Street/banking system, high cost of tuition etc. Mia fails to
recognize that the growing inequality in this country is a threat to the
American Dream, and the failure to recognize that will create conditions where
the middle class disappears. Capitalism works where corruption is not allowed
to flourish, where money does not equal power. "The real
difference between democracy and oligarchy is poverty and wealth. Wherever men
rule by reason of their wealth, whether they be few of many, that is an
oligarchy, and where the poor rule, that is democracy."Aristotle
I think it's safe to say Mia Love and the OWS protesters have a common goal of
America not becoming another Haiti. However, the protesters think
it's important to point out our deteriorating distribution of income. The CIA
ranks nations' economic (and hence political) stability using a ranking called
the GINI coefficient, which is a measure of income distribution. nations where
there are large extremes in income and wealth tend to be less stable. Well, the US ranking has been sliding toward third world status.Is
it anti-American to point that out?
Mia Love, your article was spot on. We are a nation of Americans free to work as
hard as we want. Some believe wealth has to do with an abundance of money.
Wealth is actually the right to work, to enjoy labor, and live within the means
one's labor provides. Excessive living, huge credit, greed exhibited by some
rich and some poor coveting the rich have weakened our economy. Let's quit
fighting amongst ourselves and restore the American Dream that has sparked a
patriotism most profound, even in the hearts of those who yearn to be American.
Wow, a potential candidate for the 4th district that appears to be someone I can
Jon Huntsman is misleading people when he speaks of the wonders of his flat Utah
tax. But then, he is the former governor who walked away from his job and left
us with Gary Herbert. He is not a good choice for president.
Ok liberals, since you have collectively decided that capitalism is bad and
evil, tell us, what is the alternative?I know that many of you want
a capitalist-socialist system, but here is the problem with that. Why do you
need the capitalism portion, why can't the socialist portion work on its own?
RedShirt | 9:05 a.m. Nov. 14, 2011 USS Enterprise, UT Ok liberals,
since you have collectively decided that capitalism is bad and evil, tell us,
what is the alternative?I know that many of you want a
capitalist-socialist system, but here is the problem with that. Why do you need
the capitalism portion, why can't the socialist portion work on its own? ================= Pure capitalism without out Government
regulations best exampled by Mogadishu, Somalia, and Columbia.Pure
Socialsm would mean the Government then owns and operates the business.Capital-Socialist economies such as Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, Korea,
ect. mean that Businesses are heavily regulated by the Government so they can't
exploit the citizens, and are allowed to be privately owned and operated.Governments are referees, not the players on the court.They are
not meant to run businesses, only make things fair for all the players.
@LDS Liberal: What do you call it when business owns and operates the
government?Our Captains of Industry don't care about the good of
this country, they only care about the good of themselves.With great
power comes great responsibility, and the super rich aren't being responsible.
What was it that Christ said about being a good steward?Our corporate leaders have quite literally sold the future of this nation in
order to make another buck.
To "LDS Liberal | 9:50 a.m." ok, lets look at what you said, and see
if we can make sense.You said that "Governments are referees,
not the players on the court." Yet you support a socialist aspect to
government. If there is socialism, then there WILL BE government run
businesses, or else the government will have a large interest in the
businesses.I hate to tell you this, but the only system where the
government is only a referee is pure Capitalism. (Your examples of pure
capitalism are wrong. First, Mogadishu is the capital of Somalia, and that is
Anarchy with no referee, capitalism requires a referee. Columbia is not purely
capitalist, it is more capitalist than most South American nations. Their
problems are not due to capitalism, but to corruption.)So again, if
governments are only referees, how can you support socialism? Socialism to any
degree, results in the government becoming a player on the court.
@Red"...capitalism requires a referee...".Capitalism requires a referee that "winners" and "losers"
can trust."...problems are not due to capitalism, but to
corruption...".Non-believers would simply counter: problems are
not due to socialism, but to corruption.How do you bring two sides
together when neither side has any trust for a "referees'" decision,
let alone trust in each other?
To "There You Go Again | 2:04 p.m." you are wrong. It doesn't matter
if the referee can be trusted or not, having a referee to enforce the rules is
the key factor, otherwise you have anarchy, which was my original point.The problem is that even under ideal conditions, socialism does not
work. Supposing that there is no corruption at the highest levels, the workers
have no incentive to do better or to work harder. If there is no incentive for
working or producing, things will stagnate.With capitalism, if you
stagnate, you will be overtaken by somebody with better ideas.
As someone who was present & heard the president speak at the MLK Memorial
Dedication let me be perfectly clear: Mia Love's opening claim is fictitious.
She made it up to make her points about being anti-socialist and all the rest of
the right wing agenda she espouses. While not a fan of Occupy, they have never
claimed to want to murder the rich! While Love's fabrications &
exaggerations might endear her to an extremist segment of Utah's voters, the
majority can easily see her spurious & unwarranted claims for what they are.
The opening salvo of a run against the founders of the Patrick Henry Caucus who
are already in the 4th district race. She's trying to establish her extremist
bona fides. Good luck to any Democrat who is willing to jump in and tell the
@Red"...It doesn't matter if the referee can be trusted or not,
having a referee to enforce the rules is the key factor...".So,
if the "referee" has been bribed, the bribe is not a key factor?
When the wealthy and powerful lobby to reduce their responsibility and protect
their position in America at the expense of the Middle Class, they see it as a
normal outgrowth of their American rights. However, they neglect to acknowledge
that protecting their position of special interest necessitates the reduction of
opportunity for others not of their economic class.When people point
out the unfairness of the system, they yell, "class warfare!" They
refuse to see the warfare made upon the Middle Class in order to protect their
interests. In order to maintain their economic and political strength, they
attempt to reduce the economic and political opportunities of those outside
their world.The Occupy Wall Street message is: The system is rigged
against the Middle Class and people are being pushed out of the Middle Class and
into poverty because their interests are not seen as worthy by the rich and
powerful. The wealthy (generally speaking) have gamed the system to their
advantage and fight to maintain the inequities lest they give-up some of what
they've acquired.Many of the ultra-rich now see that they don't need
America anymore because they have moved onto a global society of
Redshirt:Conservatives repeatedly paint themselves into a fallacy.
Taxation and government regulation are socialism, and socialism always results
in laziness, lack of productivity, economic failure. There is no incentive to
do anything productive or to strive toward excellence. These are conservative
articles of faith, unquestioned pillars of truth and wisdom.Except
nobody told the engineers and workers at Airbus, who are soundly whipping Boeing
in the market with an excellent product. Evidently the economy of Canada didn't
get the memo, as they surpass the US in economic freedom, with a balanced budget
(but higher taxes on upper classes).Conservative mythology
continues, unabated, reality not withstanding.
"We must work within the current economic model to address the challenges
we face."=============What's that saying? Doing
the same thing, over and over, and expecting different results is the definition
of insanity?Or is it that Ms. Love is advocating for more of the
same?Trickle down economics is a proven failure. The
OWS protesters don't want a free handout from the rich. We want out jobs back
from India. We want Citizens United repealed. We don't want lobbyists buying
our politicians. We don't want tax laws passed that only benefit the top 1 or
2%. I want to know who thinks it's ok that a CEO (with tax breaks
the rest of us don't get) make 400 times what his average worker makes when we
have 1 in 6 Americans living in poverty? And don't give me that malarkey that
the poor aren't 'poor' because they have refrigerators and sneakers. I want to know who thinks it's ok for the people on Wall Street who crashed
our economy, and were then bailed out by our tax dollars, to receive millions in
bonuses after the fact? But we have to raise the S.S. eligibility age? Please!
How Can The American People Ever Trust Congress Again After Learning Of The
Rampant Insider Trading That Has Been Going On? Will the shocking
insider trading revelations that have come to light in recent days finally be
enough to motivate the American people to start throwing all of the con men and
charlatans out of Congress?Members of Congress have been using
secrets that they have learned during the course of their duties to make huge
amounts of money in the stock market. If you can believe it, during the
financial crisis of 2008 some members of Congress were making huge stock moves
that would only pay off if the stock market crashed really hard at a time when
they should have been focusing on creating legislation that would help the U.S.
financial system survive.It is hard not to feel sick after learning
how low some of our leaders have stooped to enrich themselves. Now that the
American people are learning the truth, how can they ever trust Congress again?
There is a widespread feeling in this country that our political system simply
does not work any longer.Nearly all of our leaders seem to be
wealthy elitists that are rapidly becoming wealthier. Today, the average net
worth for a member of Congress is approximately 3.8 million dollars, and the
collective net worth of all of the members of Congress increased by 25 percent
between 2008 and 2010.It would be one thing is they were
accumulating all of this wealth legitimately. However, it is just not right for
members of Congress to use government secrets and inside information that is not
available to the general public to make huge profits in the stock market.If any of the rest of us engage in insider trading, it could get us
thrown into jail.But as a recent CNBC article noted, members of
Congress can pretty much get away with it as much as they want to.
To "10CC | 9:21 p.m." ok, if socialism is so great, name one nation
that has fully tried out socialism that has had the economic prosperity that the
US has been able to have.To say that Airbus is doing well against
Boeing is wrong because that is a capitalist company working within socialist
nations. There are some government that own a portion of the company, but the
majority of the company is owned by private companies and stockholders.You are living the liberal lie. The countries that have significant socialist
policies are living off the work of the capitalists within those societies.So, if socialism is so great, why did Russia fail? Why is Cuba so poor?
Why is it that China wasn't much of an economic power until they adopted
Redshirt,Using the broadest definition conservatives have provided
us, Socialism is merely any nation with higher taxes and more government
regulation than the US. Well, there are many examples where quality of life,
economic mobility, economic freedom and equality of opportunity have surpassed
the US: Canada (not European), Germany, Finland (which is a perrenial top 3
nation in education), Sweden, etc.If you want to use the definition
of Socialism leftists have used historically, Cuba does 2 things fairly well -
healthcare and education - and everything else is a miserable disaster. But no
Americans are calling for the elimination of private property, so that
comparison is moot. "Everyone turn in your IPods for redistribution".
Yeah, right.Your question can be cynically reciprocated - how has
gun control and lack of government regulation benefitted Somalia?A
more serious question, what nations are more capitalistic than the US?
Conservative darling Chile? Major social unrest, after 25 years of brutal
dictatorship. Guatemala? Very low taxes on the rich. Cayman Islands? Tax
haven, but nothing else. Remember, China's government went on a stimulus binge
of $2Trillion, compared to our $700B.I can answer your question, but
I'm afraid you can't, reversed.
To "10CC | 10:01 p.m." actually I can.Capitalism is the
lifeblood of those nations that in Europe that you mention, along with China.Capitalism created the middleclass in Europe over 400 years ago.Capitalism historically has been the best system for bringing people out
of poverty.Lets look at Chile. Once the government divested itself
of major industry, they bloomed.Before we had the big push of
Socialism within our own government, we had greater income equality than we
currently have.The US leads the World in innovations and research,
you don't see that in the countries where failure is rewarded.