What are they and why? Here's some quick googling..
Occupy Wall Street is a people-powered movement that began on September 17, 2011 in Liberty Square in Manhattan’s Financial District, and has spread to over 100 cities in the United States and actions in over 1,500 cities globally. #ows is fighting back against the corrosive power of major banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process, and the role of Wall Street in creating an economic collapse that has caused the greatest recession in generations. The movement is inspired by popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, and aims to expose how the richest 1% of people are writing the rules of an unfair global economy that is foreclosing on our future.
***
What do they expect to accomplish?
Well, here's what they want.
Or do they know what they want?
inspired by Egyptian protesters
How did it get started? Adbusters
The 99%
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
pepper spray
Fox News commentator Megyn Kelly appeared on Bill O’Reilly’s show Monday night and seemed to downplay the impact of pepper spray while commenting on the UC Davis protests. She said of the substance, “it’s like a derivative of real pepper. It’s a food product essentially.”
***
The active ingredient in pepper spray is capsaicin, which is a chemical derived from the fruit of plants in the Capsicum genus, including chilis.
Now, a petition is calling for Kelly to test her theory by ingesting pepper spray on television. More than 11,000 people have signed the pledge.
It’s a road other newscasters have trod before. Rick Sanchez and Erich “Mancow” Muller both took it upon themselves to demonstrate the effects of the police crowd control. Sanchez allowed himself to be Tasered, while Mancow opted to be waterboarded.***
The active ingredient in pepper spray is capsaicin, which is a chemical derived from the fruit of plants in the Capsicum genus, including chilis.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Super-Committee agrees
that they cannot agree..
The congressional supercommittee charged with coming up with $1.2 trillion in deficit reductions gave up the task this afternoon, saying it could not resolve ideological differences to find common ground.
The committee's statement came after stocks had another miserable session, with the Dow Jones industrials ($INDU -2.11%) falling as many as 342 points in the morning before recovering to finish down 249 points.
"After months of hard work and intense deliberations, we have come to the conclusion today that it will not be possible to make any bipartisan agreement available to the public before the committee's deadline," Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, said in a statement. The committee ended their deliberations firm in the belief that the "nation's fiscal crisis must be addressed."
The committee's failure sets up a year of uncertainty on taxes and spending that could further rattle investors.
Congress is likely to engage in another round of brinksmanship over the coming weeks as Democrats scramble to extend economy-boosting measures like a payroll tax cut and enhanced jobless benefits that are due to expire at the end of the year.
The congressional supercommittee charged with coming up with $1.2 trillion in deficit reductions gave up the task this afternoon, saying it could not resolve ideological differences to find common ground.
The committee's statement came after stocks had another miserable session, with the Dow Jones industrials ($INDU -2.11%) falling as many as 342 points in the morning before recovering to finish down 249 points.
"After months of hard work and intense deliberations, we have come to the conclusion today that it will not be possible to make any bipartisan agreement available to the public before the committee's deadline," Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, said in a statement. The committee ended their deliberations firm in the belief that the "nation's fiscal crisis must be addressed."
The committee's failure sets up a year of uncertainty on taxes and spending that could further rattle investors.
Congress is likely to engage in another round of brinksmanship over the coming weeks as Democrats scramble to extend economy-boosting measures like a payroll tax cut and enhanced jobless benefits that are due to expire at the end of the year.
Republicans have vowed to shield the military from the automatic spending cuts and will also try to lock in low tax rates for the wealthy before they rise at the end of 2012.
Republicans were blaming Democrats on Sunday for stubbornness on cutting entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare. Democrats have blamed Republicans for demanding that the Bush administration tax cuts be made permanent.
The committee's failure, however, will not trigger another downgrade from Standard & Poor's Corp. S&P downgraded U.S. debt on Aug. 5, setting off a market sell-off the next week.
Doing nothing at all, as Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne noted last week, would actually result in $7.1 trillion in deficit reduction. The Bush tax cuts would expire at the end of next year. Estate-tax cuts would expire.
So would tax extenders, like allowing residents of Washington state, Texas and others to deduct sales taxes, which would also boost revenue. There will be a move to extend those tax breaks.
Congress can and likely will try to override triggers designed to impose $1.2 trillion in cuts if Congress won't act. The triggers would impose half the cuts on defense spending and the balance elsewhere in the federal budget. However, President Obama said late today that he would veto any attempt to change those formulas and exempt defense.
The supercommittee did manage before today's close to suggest that it might try one more time to find a deal. Stocks trimmed their losses substantially when Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., said, "There's always hope," as he joined a meeting of committee members in the office of Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.
But the statement that came out at around 4:50 p.m. ET ended those hopes.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Job Creators?
Congressional Republicans recently passed on President Barack Obama’s offer of $4 trillion in cuts in federal spending over the next decade, including changes in expensive entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
Why? Because Republicans across the land have signed anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist’s pledge never to vote for a tax increase. From South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint to former Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle, those who call themselves “Rs” have gone dry on taxes, even taxes on the richest among us who can most easily afford to pay them.
People like Phillipi Dauman, the CEO of Viacom, who received $84.5 million in compensation in 2010, a 149 percent raise over his previous year’s salary. And Occidental Petroleum’s Ray Irani, who was paid $76.1 million for his labors, a 142 percent raise from 2009. And Leslie Moonves of CBS, who took home $56.9 million, a pay raise of 265 percent.
So why do congressional Republicans insist that these exorbitantly compensated CEOs should not pay more in taxes to deal with the nation’s growing national debt?
Because, Republicans argue, they are “job creators” and should not be discouraged in a bad economy.
Nonsense and balderdash.
“Job destroyers” is the proper term. According to Marketwatch.com, “The CEOs of the 50 firms that laid off the most employees in the past two (recession) years earned 42 percent more in salary and perks than the average boss of an S+P 500 company.”
In other words, it pays to fire people.
How well did these job destroyers do? Verizon’s Ivan Seidenberg fired 21,308 workers in 2009; his board of directors paid him $17.5 million for his job-destroying skills.
Frank Hassan of Schering-Plough couldn’t match Seidenberg in distributing pink slips. He only reduced his work force by 16,000, but it was enough to earn him $49.5 million from his shareholders’ compensation committee.
The top 10 job-destroying CEOs in the country fired a total of 107,448 workers in 2008-2009. Their companies rewarded their knifewielding CEOs with an average compensation of $23.4 million per year.
The nation’s CEOs have, in short, made out fabulously while the rest of us not so well. As a nation, we’ve compensated our CEOs two times as much as comparable industrial nations. Our median executive income has risen 430 percent since 1970. Our corporate profits have grown 250 percent. The wage of the average American worker since 1970? Try a meager 26 percent.
In 1975 the top 0.1 percent of the population who earned $1.7 million or more held 2.6 percent of the nation’s earnings. Today it’s 10.4 percent and growing.
-- Dan Boylan, Midweek
***
That sort of makes sense. If more and more money is going into their pocket, there would be less money to pay for more jobs.
And WTH needs that much money anyway?
Why? Because Republicans across the land have signed anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist’s pledge never to vote for a tax increase. From South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint to former Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle, those who call themselves “Rs” have gone dry on taxes, even taxes on the richest among us who can most easily afford to pay them.
People like Phillipi Dauman, the CEO of Viacom, who received $84.5 million in compensation in 2010, a 149 percent raise over his previous year’s salary. And Occidental Petroleum’s Ray Irani, who was paid $76.1 million for his labors, a 142 percent raise from 2009. And Leslie Moonves of CBS, who took home $56.9 million, a pay raise of 265 percent.
So why do congressional Republicans insist that these exorbitantly compensated CEOs should not pay more in taxes to deal with the nation’s growing national debt?
Because, Republicans argue, they are “job creators” and should not be discouraged in a bad economy.
Nonsense and balderdash.
“Job destroyers” is the proper term. According to Marketwatch.com, “The CEOs of the 50 firms that laid off the most employees in the past two (recession) years earned 42 percent more in salary and perks than the average boss of an S+P 500 company.”
In other words, it pays to fire people.
How well did these job destroyers do? Verizon’s Ivan Seidenberg fired 21,308 workers in 2009; his board of directors paid him $17.5 million for his job-destroying skills.
Frank Hassan of Schering-Plough couldn’t match Seidenberg in distributing pink slips. He only reduced his work force by 16,000, but it was enough to earn him $49.5 million from his shareholders’ compensation committee.
The top 10 job-destroying CEOs in the country fired a total of 107,448 workers in 2008-2009. Their companies rewarded their knifewielding CEOs with an average compensation of $23.4 million per year.
The nation’s CEOs have, in short, made out fabulously while the rest of us not so well. As a nation, we’ve compensated our CEOs two times as much as comparable industrial nations. Our median executive income has risen 430 percent since 1970. Our corporate profits have grown 250 percent. The wage of the average American worker since 1970? Try a meager 26 percent.
In 1975 the top 0.1 percent of the population who earned $1.7 million or more held 2.6 percent of the nation’s earnings. Today it’s 10.4 percent and growing.
-- Dan Boylan, Midweek
***
That sort of makes sense. If more and more money is going into their pocket, there would be less money to pay for more jobs.
And WTH needs that much money anyway?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)