Respectfully Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty-Guest Blogger
After the news over the past few months about the global uprisings against tyrannical and non-responsive governments, I have pondered why the United States has not had more people in the street protesting the economic inequality that we are facing here at home?
We have seen uprisings in Egypt, Libya, Spain, Greece and many more places, but at best we have seen large numbers in Wisconsin and Ohio protesting about State governments trying to remove collective bargaining rights away from state employees. One group of dedicated and non-violent protesters is especially interesting to me since they have taken to the streets and they have stayed there to press their fight. It is a group in Spain called the Indignados. They are camped out in various areas of Spain in an attempt to draw the country’s and the world’s attention to what they see as the Spanish government’s attempts to cater to the bankers and not to Main Street.
“Thursday night Madrid’s city centre offered a glimpse of what Western democracies have become, as thousands of unarmed nonviolent civilians with their hands up in the air shouting “these are our weapons” and “this is a dictatorship” were beaten by police commandos in full riot gear. This event was the culmination of a month of intense mobilizations across the country by the popular movement known as the ‘Indignados’. People, whom despite being ignored by the government have made their voices heard, as banking cartels, European bureaucrats, rating agencies and the country’s elites continue in their frantic push to sell-off Spain’s remaining public wealth, and persist in the implementation of drastic cuts to the welfare state. The ‘Indignados’ are fully aware of the fact that their government does not represent them, whenever they congregate they shout that loud and clear. They know that only popular unity will salvage them from the train wreck, which complicit speculators and politicians have created, and as they read the financial news, they know things can only get worse. When the EU announced today that the economic crisis is no longer restricted to the Euro-zone periphery countries, people in the movement understood that this could only mean bad news for them.” Truthout
Now, we have had some Tea Party protests, but their numbers were paltry in comparison to the Spanish protests. The numbers in Wisconsin and Ohio were the closest to the Spain numbers, but those protesters were not met with wide-spread beatings at the hands of the government and police and they are still not camping out in Madison and Columbus as they are in Madrid.
Would protestors in the United States ever commit to a continuing protest for months in Washington, D.C.? These Indignados in Spain, are continuing to protest what they see as government attempts to balance their budgets on the backs of the poor and the middle class. Why haven’t we seen tent cities springing up in Washington, D.C. and in state capitals across the country? Many progressives and liberals have claimed that Washington is working only for the bankers and Wall Street barons, so why aren’t our streets filled with dedicated people who are willing to nonviolently protest against the Rich getting richer, while the middle class and poor seem to get poorer? Is the claim of rising inequality between the rich and poor true?
Where is the evidence that the income disparity is growing in the United States? … “in dollar terms, the rich are still getting richer, and the poor are falling further behind them. The income gap between the richest and poorest Americans grew last year to its largest margin ever, a stark divide as Democrats and Republicans spar over whether to extend Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy. The top-earning 20 percent of Americans – those making more than $100,000 each year – received 49.4 percent of all income generated in the U.S., compared with the 3.4 percent made by the bottom 20 percent of earners, those who fell below the poverty line, according to the new figures. That ratio of 14.5-to-1 was an increase from 13.6 in 2008 and nearly double a low of 7.69 in 1968.At the top, the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans, who earn more than $180,000, added slightly to their annual incomes last year, the data show. Families at the $50,000 median level slipped lower.” Huffington Post
With those depressing numbers, why haven’t American “Indignados” taken over Washington, D.C. like their Spanish counterparts did in Madrid? Are Americans just too lazy or indifferent to their plight? Have they given up being able to make a real difference in Washington? Why aren’t you and I there in Washington pressing our claims for economic equality? Finally, what will it take for the American poor and jobless to stand up and say, enough is enough? Maybe you have the answer for these American Indignados!
Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty-Guest Blogger
And I’ll go to the Republic of Austin….Guess nal will have to move to Keller/Alliance….
They can pander all they want, legislation isn’t getting through. And, even if it did, control would just revert back to the states, and there is zero chance of anything changing here in PA. I’m not even sure there’d be support in TX.
Do you mean the 320 Market? I do. It expanded and moved.to the next shopping center down. Michael;s pharmacy closed and is now a Duckin Donuts. Other than that it is the same as it was back in the 80s.
Never been to Texas. PA is too hot and humid for me and I hear TX is worse. I’ll take Hawaii over both if I had to move.
Roco,
Your lexicon is twisted made up garbage and “for the most part” means “not accurate”. I’ll also call Occam’s Razor Occam’s Razor because the spelling Occam is also an accepted spelling of the man’s name. If you want to be real picky, you should call it by its proper name, lex parsimoniae. From Britannica: “Ockham’s razor, also spelled Occam’s razor, also called law of economy, or law of parsimony, principle stated by William of Ockham (1285–1347/49), a scholastic, that Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate; ‘Plurality should not be posited without necessity.’ The principle gives precedence to simplicity; of two competing theories, the simplest explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed ‘Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.’” It is a tool for triaging logic. It is not a standard of judgment. It’s not an assertion that simple is always best. It is rather a statement that complexity is compelled only by necessity, i.e. the desired level of complexity is the minimal required to reach a viable and valid solution. However, it really makes no difference as to what you want to call it as you’re still misusing the tool as a rationalization for simplicity because you don’t want to deal with complexity.
kd We should trade places. I will move to the republic of Swarthmore and you can move to Texas.
KD Why take the risk with a republican candidate that panders to the religious right? Do you go to the 360 market?
@SM there is zero chance of any anti-abortion legislation getting past a cloture vote in the senate, surviving a presidential veto, and/or surviving supreme court review even with the current court. It is all posturing by both sides.
GeneH:
every time I have looked at a complex problem the solution is usually fairly simple.
For the most part my lexicon is correct.
for your part would please spell the man’s name correctly.
William of Ockham.
“4.1 Ockham’s Razor
Still, Ockham’s “nominalism,” in both the first and the second of the above senses, is often viewed as derived from a common source: an underlying concern for ontological parsimony. This is summed up in the famous slogan known as “Ockham’s Razor,” often expressed as “Don’t multiply entities beyond necessity.”[31] Although the sentiment is certainly Ockham’s, that particular formulation is nowhere to be found in his texts. Moreover, as usually stated, it is a sentiment that virtually all philosophers, medieval or otherwise, would accept; no one wants a needlessly bloated ontology. The question, of course, is which entities are needed and which are not.”
From Stanfords Encylopedia of Philosophy
Spent a lot of time in your village. Abortion is an issue at the federal level and all the republican candidates are anti-choice including Huntsman.
SwM
The Philadelphia suburbs had been trending D for years since they had forgotten how poorly D’s govern when in power. That quickly got reversed in 2010 after 2 years of D rule. Trust me on this one, I live in the people’s republic of Swarthmore.
Obama is a Chicago pol. That means he’s a lefty, but a realistic lefty, since his ultimate goal is to to stay in power.
McCain is a maverick fro one simple reason, he often voted like D.
Abortion is a non-issue at the federal level.
Gay issues cut across party lines. Gay marriage passed in NY due to R support.
Women that supported Hillary did not support Palin. McCain certainly had a poor read on women. Palin’s candidacy guaranteed that suburban women in places like the Philadelphia suburbs voted for Obama. Obama is not a lefty. The liberal choice was not McCain. Liberals are not anti-abortion and anti-gay rights.
Hell, even Bush II pulled us out of the tech bubble mess fairly well.
Obama’s problem is himself. He’s trying to be FDR, and FDR’s econ policies didn’t work in the same way Obama’s aren’t working now. The other lesson is not to break the financial system (a bipartisan problem) pursuing idealistic social policies.
Look I am all about the capabilities of the person…Not some pretty puppet….You must admit that Obama’s hands have been tied….He was left a mess by Bush…but as you say he has not capitalized on the power…Ronald did so…Clinton did so….even during the Impeachment….You have to admire the man for being able to stand tall during that and still exercising the duties of the office as imposed…Didn’t RWR have some issues and alls he said was that he did not recall…he must be a greater golfer than we knew…There are Liar, Damn Liars and Golfers…
@AY
I was trying to say that Palin was a bit of a darling of the AK Dems and wasn’t exactly known for her conservatism until she was tapped by McCain. And, instead of being embraced as a somewhat moderate choice for the official who attends foreign funerals, she was attacked.
The Bush admin was awful. But, the Obama admin is even worse and that was readily apparent by the way the man legislated as opposed to how he campaigned. He is a lefty, not really a liberal. The liberal choice was really McCain. The Conservatives didn’t really have a dog in the last race.
@ Bob, Esq, the truth is stranger than the comedy:
Late-night comedian Conan O’Brien’s blog has a new post parodying Washington’s excessive spending. “Team Coco has found out why our government is so broke,” the blog explains, “They’ve been spending all our hard earned tax dollars on some pretty ridiculous programs.” The post contains a list of humorous fake programs and encourages readers submit their own.
But sadly, there’s no need to turn to a crack team of comedy writers to gin up examples of ridiculous government spending. Instead, one need only look to the shenanigans on Capitol Hill to find a list of absurd expenditures of taxpayer dollars. As Heritage has reported, in addition to long-term, substantive reforms, $343 billion of wasteful government spending could be cut immediately. And while Conan’s list is populated by a number of outlandish (but fake) programs, there are plenty of REAL government programs that are just as ridiculous. Conan, try these on for size:
Washington will spend $2.6 million training Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job.
Because of overstaffing, the U.S. Postal Service selects 1,125 employees per day to sit in empty rooms. They are not allowed to work, read, play cards, watch television, or do anything. This costs $50 million annually.
Stimulus dollars have been spent on mascot costumes, electric golf carts, and a university study examining how much alcohol college freshmen women require before agreeing to casual sex.
Washington will spend $615,175 on an archive honoring the Grateful Dead.
The Securities and Exchange Commission spent $3.9 million rearranging desks and offices at its Washington, D.C., headquarters.
Congress recently gave Alaska Airlines $500,000 to paint a Chinook salmon on a Boeing 737.
Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties.
The Federal Communications Commission spent $350,000 to sponsor NASCAR driver David Gilliland.
Washington has spent $3 billion re-sanding beaches—even as this new sand washes back into the ocean.
Taxpayers are funding paintings of high-ranking government officials at a cost of up to $50,000 apiece.
The Conservation Reserve program pays farmers $2 billion annually not to farm their land.
And the list goes on and on. When it comes to government spending, the truth is often stranger than fiction.
@AY
“an attempt to deflect support from Hillary….don’t you see that?”
I do. I also saw how the left shifted gears and attacked just to gain power- power they’ve failed to use effectively so far.
Please explain….Shifted gears….and failed to use effectively….Part I agree with…part, I do not understand your usage….
From Conan O’Brien
The Terrible 20: Stupid Government Programs That Should Be Cut
20. The “What’s Up With Owls” Fact-Finding Commisson ($6 billion)
19. Keep The Kardashians On TV Legacy Loan Program ($499 million)
18. Supplementary Assistance to the NAACP (National Association for the Assembly of Cat People) ($40)
17. Senate Investigative Sub-Committee on Owning Outer Space ($2 trillion)
16. Dept Of Defense Exploratory Report: “Why Are Clowns Scary?” ($600)
15. Tourism Earmark: Construction of Mt. Asbestos Kiddie Park (Helena, Montana) ($54 million)
14. Federal Funding for the Second “Secret” NASA That Deals With All That Weird Alien S*** Like In Those Will Smith Movies ($78 billion)
13. Dept Of Defense: Sea Monkey Super Soldier Project ($48 million)
12. The “Big Ol’ Capital Building” Moat Fund ($62 million)
11. Jurassic Park Prevention Program To Keep Dinosaurs Extinct ($200 million)
10. Federal Funding for the “Bring Waldo Home” Search Committee (Number Unknown)
9. The Sub-Committee to determine who in congress has the best planking/owling picture. (86 billion)
8. The 50 Stars Program: Preventing North Dakota and South Dakota from settling their differences and becoming one Dakota. ($427 Million)
7. Federal Subsidies for Truck Nuts Manufacturers ($16 million).
6. Federal Funding To Ensure That All CD And DVD Packaging Remain Pointlessly Difficult To Open ($79 billion).
5. FCC: Anti-Indecency Measures to Cover Up Liberty Bell’s Crack ($179,000).
4. “My first Nuclear Reactor” Kids Program (50 million)
3. The Search Team Responsible for Finding Carmen Sandiego ($100 million)
2. Congressional Night Out At Dave And Buster’s Fund ($10 million)
1. The “Maybe Our Deficit Will Disappear If We Cover Our Eyes” Initiative ($1,407,487,395,186)
@AY
“an attempt to deflect support from Hillary….don’t you see that?”
I do. I also saw how the left shifted gears and attacked just to gain power- power they’ve failed to use effectively so far.
@Roco
GeneH is wielding Occam’s butter knife again. At least it explains why he is confused so often.
Gene H.,
You wouldn’t expect anyone of the right to know History would you? I think that they like the sound of “Right” better than having shinny objects….They like those as well….but the problem with shinny objects…you just don’t know what they are until you get too close….and then the damage is done….
Was listing to APM and people were pretty upset with the new strategy of the GOP is to use bells when they are trying to make a point….apparently people are able to ignore them and listen….but not when the have dogs….they were going crazy….
Ding Dong….
Roco,
“In your lexicon”. That just goes again to show you how wrong you can be when you make up your own definitions. Do you even know the history of the terms right-wing and left wing? That’s a rhetorical question because you clearly don’t based upon your simplistic “labels”.
Simple minds are satisfied by simplistic explanations. Complex minds are satisfied by functional explanations. Not all problems are simple and not all problems have simple solutions. Given that you use your own made up terminology elsewhere, it is no surprise that you are using a made up and backward version of Occam’s Razor as your rational for being simplistic. An inability or unwillingness to deal with complexity is not a positive trait. The universe is a complex place. If people through out history hadn’t been willing to understand and address that complexity, we’d still be living in cave, gathering food and hunting with pointy sticks. Instead, we’ve got anti-septic surgery instead of blood letting, antibiotics instead of exorcism and we’ve harnessed fundamental forces of nature to work for us.