"For what it's worth"
The suggestion of a "confluence" of the tea party movement with the nascent Occupy Wall Street onslaught is a thought that probably insults both groups. Frustration, resentment, and legitimate gripes are themes of both groups. They have momentum and are changing the political landscape.
For perhaps completely different reasons and mental constructs, the growing uneven distribution of wealth in this country is obvious to both groups. That the national political system, in particular Congress, is dysfunctional is obvious to both groups. That the declining availability of real middle class jobs, with a a wage that could support a family in a modest but sustainable way and has constructive health, job safety, and retirement savings benefits should be a significant tea party issue and may be, but may be in its own way be a more conscious Occupy Wall Street issue if OWS becomes more than just a passing moment. I have no idea how to digest this, but it is a serious issue.
Then there is the incendidary issue that affects both groups, which is the the conspicuous display of wealth by the 1% or really one half of 1% who have really benefitted from the gap in wealth becoming ridiculously wide. This phenomenon is not necessarily completely purposeful, although at times is and it can be seen as spiteful. It is at times just inherited and at times felt as a deserved reward, as in the cases of the laudable Warren Buffett and Bill Gates and their philanthropy or on the other side of the coin the hideous Donald Trump and quite a few members of the hedge fund community(I could name so many). There are almost certainly a very few members of Occupy Wall Street that come from that top 1%, revolting from their heritage but not any consequential part of their wealth. They may have their sleeping bags downtown but they have back-up. Whether some small fraction of the exceptionally wealthy is part of the protest is really inconsequential. The majority of the top group, top one half of one percent, is in general now back to displaying their wealth in Maserati's and an attitude of arrogance and entitlement that merits the Sun King's reign. Enough of this part of the rant, maybe New York City based.
Both groups, tea party and OWS, no doubt have some "thinkers" who have a conceptual constructs of what they want other than change, different types of courses of action, different policies, but neither group has an agenda that is in any way coherent. That may be the way the world works now, making the traditional political parties look out of touch.
The tea party movement has been nurtured and has built steam for almost two years, and it has been able to take credit for some electoral results that have been meaningful. Facts, research, and thoughtful insight rarely seem to have little to do with this amalgam of voters. It's opinion, right or wrong, that rules. It's resentment and it's fueled by the lack of jobs and the constant reminders from all media outlets and most advertising that this is not a fair system. There's also a sense of personal entitlement that does not translate into public entitlement. Then there's the evangelical side of the equation that creates a little righteousness, and then add in a dose of racism. That's our tea party and they are making their mark.
Occupy Wall Street is almost entirely different, other than the broad thematic attributes previously mentioned. It is based on the economy and the economy, the growing absurdity of the distribution of wealth in the U.S. and the feeling that the general public has been financially raped by the titans of the financial industry. Opportunities for the future seem limited for the young, and anyone who already doesn't have a job, young or old. That there is almost no focus so far on the government, some focus on the Clinton and the Bush administration's encouragement of Fannie and Freddie to build home ownership through "community relaxed credit standards" and to the mandate of Congressional oversight committees and leadership to commit to widespread home ownership at any opportunity in order to only approve mergers in agreement(as advocated by such groups as Acorn and accepted by Congress), is not an Occupy Wall Street issue at the moment. The Bush/Clinton SEC "oversight" is not on their party list either. Obama's lack of consequential leadership is ignored. As they grow into a more cohesive group it may be, and this is too early to see, there is the potential for the Occupy Wall Street and its open and more passive supporters to become a counterweight or moderator of the Tea Party's Sean Hannity obliviousness. At the moment OWS is just a strong sentiment that could become disruptive to targeted financial firms which are only one part of the whole deal here.
There is no doubt that Wall Street, a few firms in particular, created completely corrupt products and that some hedge fund managers kept their eyes shut(or wide open) and kept going to the bank. None of these people are respectable. There is no doubt that the government dropped most constructive oversight throughout most of the Greenspan years, and that some did so with the blind zeal of creating a more democratic home ownership society. There is no doubt that the majority of the "refinancing" lending at low or step up pawn shop rates was done by a couple of large thrift regulated banks and the almost totally unregulated brokers(not the major banks) who found certain firms on Wall Street and at a level below top Wall Street that would securitize completely untenable financial and in some case undocumented financial instruments.
For this writer, it is not possible to come up with some coherent summation of all of this, but I do know that "there's something happening here".
Postscript #1 : here in NYC, Occupy Wall Street is part of a deal that is mainly just a party at the moment, hey, 1960's, should I say that I remember that. On Saturday the 8th we were in Manhattan doing some normal shopping in the Flatiron district(Paragon for one, Miramekko or however you spell it for my other) and and after a hamburger and fries lunch at Shake Shack at Madison Square Park we could not succeed in trying to cross the street at huge 23rd and Broadway intersection. There was an unending wave of skateboarding(mostly) and bicycling young people barreling down Broadway ignoring all stoplights, crosswalks signs, and people. ME. Seeing this as a party for Columbia students heading to the rally at Washington Square and after ten minutes of waiting I became tired of waiting, at least 100 people on each side of the street waiting for this barrage of entitled young people to pass, WELL, as in Paris at major roundabouts I just walked in. In that country the idea is just to walk sensibly and predicitably and you are safe. I had to dodge a few and then a young man, maybe 18, with a some since of consciousness or conscience, I think as scared as me, came right at me. He yanked his board left at the last second and lost it, but thankfully kept his balance and did not fall on his face. I twisted my knee. After that at least ten or fifteen people on each side, including my wife, crossed and continued to accept our right to cross a street legally. POINT - - most of this parading young crowd was just having a lot of fun, ignoring people who may even support them even if they were not civil. They had no real cause, other than to show their power and exert their existence and have a good time, "have us a time" as in "Choctaw Bingo".
Postscript #2: Despite the plight of our current economy, there are more opportunties for entrepreneurship in this country than exist in most. Sarbanes Oxley, passed under Bush, did the most damage to this opportunity, and Dodd Frank could be the icing on the cake. Even with these, the OWS crowd has more opportunity in this country than almost any other, in my uninformed opinion. Ridding the immigration code of rejecting foreign graduates of our finest schools for employment here would not only build on this opportunity significantly, and correct an obvious sign of U.S. xenophobia and inbreeding, but would also simply amplify the opportunity that already exists. To further insult others in this post, the OWS crowd often expects to start out doing jobs that meet their skill levels. That was rarely the norm in any past, except for the well connected or silver spoon set. There are so many examples. You work, you have ideas, you prove yourself, and sometimes things work out. There are not guarantees, unless you are part of the OWS crowd from the elite, taking a break from the inheritance that awaits you.
Sure, I await my next challenge or opportunity even at this age. I'm not pointing fingers at any specific group(except maybe FOX). I did ok, as Meschiya might say I was a "Lucky Devil". I admire some of my peers that have reinvented themselves as I have sort of stagnated. Is that society's fault, is it the environment's fault, is it my fault - mine. Doesn't matter really, but a reliable and sound government and an honest business system would at least be a foundation to promote confidence.
For perhaps completely different reasons and mental constructs, the growing uneven distribution of wealth in this country is obvious to both groups. That the national political system, in particular Congress, is dysfunctional is obvious to both groups. That the declining availability of real middle class jobs, with a a wage that could support a family in a modest but sustainable way and has constructive health, job safety, and retirement savings benefits should be a significant tea party issue and may be, but may be in its own way be a more conscious Occupy Wall Street issue if OWS becomes more than just a passing moment. I have no idea how to digest this, but it is a serious issue.
Then there is the incendidary issue that affects both groups, which is the the conspicuous display of wealth by the 1% or really one half of 1% who have really benefitted from the gap in wealth becoming ridiculously wide. This phenomenon is not necessarily completely purposeful, although at times is and it can be seen as spiteful. It is at times just inherited and at times felt as a deserved reward, as in the cases of the laudable Warren Buffett and Bill Gates and their philanthropy or on the other side of the coin the hideous Donald Trump and quite a few members of the hedge fund community(I could name so many). There are almost certainly a very few members of Occupy Wall Street that come from that top 1%, revolting from their heritage but not any consequential part of their wealth. They may have their sleeping bags downtown but they have back-up. Whether some small fraction of the exceptionally wealthy is part of the protest is really inconsequential. The majority of the top group, top one half of one percent, is in general now back to displaying their wealth in Maserati's and an attitude of arrogance and entitlement that merits the Sun King's reign. Enough of this part of the rant, maybe New York City based.
Both groups, tea party and OWS, no doubt have some "thinkers" who have a conceptual constructs of what they want other than change, different types of courses of action, different policies, but neither group has an agenda that is in any way coherent. That may be the way the world works now, making the traditional political parties look out of touch.
The tea party movement has been nurtured and has built steam for almost two years, and it has been able to take credit for some electoral results that have been meaningful. Facts, research, and thoughtful insight rarely seem to have little to do with this amalgam of voters. It's opinion, right or wrong, that rules. It's resentment and it's fueled by the lack of jobs and the constant reminders from all media outlets and most advertising that this is not a fair system. There's also a sense of personal entitlement that does not translate into public entitlement. Then there's the evangelical side of the equation that creates a little righteousness, and then add in a dose of racism. That's our tea party and they are making their mark.
Occupy Wall Street is almost entirely different, other than the broad thematic attributes previously mentioned. It is based on the economy and the economy, the growing absurdity of the distribution of wealth in the U.S. and the feeling that the general public has been financially raped by the titans of the financial industry. Opportunities for the future seem limited for the young, and anyone who already doesn't have a job, young or old. That there is almost no focus so far on the government, some focus on the Clinton and the Bush administration's encouragement of Fannie and Freddie to build home ownership through "community relaxed credit standards" and to the mandate of Congressional oversight committees and leadership to commit to widespread home ownership at any opportunity in order to only approve mergers in agreement(as advocated by such groups as Acorn and accepted by Congress), is not an Occupy Wall Street issue at the moment. The Bush/Clinton SEC "oversight" is not on their party list either. Obama's lack of consequential leadership is ignored. As they grow into a more cohesive group it may be, and this is too early to see, there is the potential for the Occupy Wall Street and its open and more passive supporters to become a counterweight or moderator of the Tea Party's Sean Hannity obliviousness. At the moment OWS is just a strong sentiment that could become disruptive to targeted financial firms which are only one part of the whole deal here.
There is no doubt that Wall Street, a few firms in particular, created completely corrupt products and that some hedge fund managers kept their eyes shut(or wide open) and kept going to the bank. None of these people are respectable. There is no doubt that the government dropped most constructive oversight throughout most of the Greenspan years, and that some did so with the blind zeal of creating a more democratic home ownership society. There is no doubt that the majority of the "refinancing" lending at low or step up pawn shop rates was done by a couple of large thrift regulated banks and the almost totally unregulated brokers(not the major banks) who found certain firms on Wall Street and at a level below top Wall Street that would securitize completely untenable financial and in some case undocumented financial instruments.
For this writer, it is not possible to come up with some coherent summation of all of this, but I do know that "there's something happening here".
Postscript #1 : here in NYC, Occupy Wall Street is part of a deal that is mainly just a party at the moment, hey, 1960's, should I say that I remember that. On Saturday the 8th we were in Manhattan doing some normal shopping in the Flatiron district(Paragon for one, Miramekko or however you spell it for my other) and and after a hamburger and fries lunch at Shake Shack at Madison Square Park we could not succeed in trying to cross the street at huge 23rd and Broadway intersection. There was an unending wave of skateboarding(mostly) and bicycling young people barreling down Broadway ignoring all stoplights, crosswalks signs, and people. ME. Seeing this as a party for Columbia students heading to the rally at Washington Square and after ten minutes of waiting I became tired of waiting, at least 100 people on each side of the street waiting for this barrage of entitled young people to pass, WELL, as in Paris at major roundabouts I just walked in. In that country the idea is just to walk sensibly and predicitably and you are safe. I had to dodge a few and then a young man, maybe 18, with a some since of consciousness or conscience, I think as scared as me, came right at me. He yanked his board left at the last second and lost it, but thankfully kept his balance and did not fall on his face. I twisted my knee. After that at least ten or fifteen people on each side, including my wife, crossed and continued to accept our right to cross a street legally. POINT - - most of this parading young crowd was just having a lot of fun, ignoring people who may even support them even if they were not civil. They had no real cause, other than to show their power and exert their existence and have a good time, "have us a time" as in "Choctaw Bingo".
Postscript #2: Despite the plight of our current economy, there are more opportunties for entrepreneurship in this country than exist in most. Sarbanes Oxley, passed under Bush, did the most damage to this opportunity, and Dodd Frank could be the icing on the cake. Even with these, the OWS crowd has more opportunity in this country than almost any other, in my uninformed opinion. Ridding the immigration code of rejecting foreign graduates of our finest schools for employment here would not only build on this opportunity significantly, and correct an obvious sign of U.S. xenophobia and inbreeding, but would also simply amplify the opportunity that already exists. To further insult others in this post, the OWS crowd often expects to start out doing jobs that meet their skill levels. That was rarely the norm in any past, except for the well connected or silver spoon set. There are so many examples. You work, you have ideas, you prove yourself, and sometimes things work out. There are not guarantees, unless you are part of the OWS crowd from the elite, taking a break from the inheritance that awaits you.
Sure, I await my next challenge or opportunity even at this age. I'm not pointing fingers at any specific group(except maybe FOX). I did ok, as Meschiya might say I was a "Lucky Devil". I admire some of my peers that have reinvented themselves as I have sort of stagnated. Is that society's fault, is it the environment's fault, is it my fault - mine. Doesn't matter really, but a reliable and sound government and an honest business system would at least be a foundation to promote confidence.
posted by John Borden at 9:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home