So here is another video, FROM 2010 (last year) that went into what Occupy Wall Street is about.  It is not a prediction, because the person from AmpedStatus did input into the Occupy protest before it happened.  I would expect this video to either be ignored, mocked, or diced up with a dozen rationalizations on why there isn't a problem.  Prior to this, it was Operation Empire State Rebellion, but then became Occupy Wall Street:

More to raise a voice in anger at:
http://www.truth-out.org/77-trillion-wall-street-anything-keep-banksters-happy/1322841741

Over $7 TRILLION in low interests loans to the big banks by the Federal Reserve, without any oversight by congress. Do feel free to ignore this and not get upset. It is easier to yell about an unclear message, taking a bath and getting a job.

I really thought you'd of been more knowledgable about the Fed.

To say there was no oversight by congress isn't really true.

First off, the Fed's board of govonors are NOT technocrats.  Well unless you consider the Supreme court, Department of Justice, FBI, the Secretary of State and like 95% of the government as technocrats.  What this article overlooks is the fact that the board of govonors is a feederal agency and they are all appointed by the President and approved by Congress for something like 10-14 year terms.   Additionally, the regional govonors have VERY little control and can't do much in the way of fiscal policy and loans without support of the head govonor... who is apointed at the start of every presidents term and can be removed at will... he's a guy you might be familiar with.

Ben Bernake. 

Furthermore, the Federal Reserve is beholden to the GAO... and Bernake gives annual yearly reports to congress detailing all of their actions.

As for giving loans to troubling banks... that was the exact reason the federal reserve was founded.  To loan banks money as a creditor of last resort when liquidity markets are tightening up to ensure banks don't fail.  They did exactly what they were created to do.  If the plan is to have congress vote for every loan you should get behind Ron Paul to end the fed.

As for owenship of the fed.  The commercial banks with a stake in it hold no proprietary rights.  Essentially it's more like a volentary tax to get on the Federal Reserve system.  The tax money used to fund the federal government agency.  The board of govonors. 

While anyone paying attention to Greece can tell you it's Sarkozy and Merkel who were against the referendum, and the ECB was going to deny funds only because Merkel and Sarkozy made the austerity a part of the deal.  Enough of his own party caused the greek government to collapse and forced the prime minister's abdication however.  Largely because his government didn't want responsibility of making the needed cuts required of them.  Which is what the refferendum plan was as well.  A way to try and skirt responsibility.  He thought the people would vote for it and then he could fall back on "I did what you said!  You didn't want to leave the euro."  However, a lot of his allies were afraid they would vote against it, and essentially destroy greece.

 In otherwords, the writer of the article is either ignorant of the very basics of the federal reserve system or delibritly mistating things.

Before shooting "Night of the Living Dead" George Romero did not know about Martin Luthor King's assassnation.  However that movie is still seen as evocative of the assassnation and speaking to a whole lot of social issues George Romero did not intend to be speaking on.   The main character being chosen soley because he was the best actor who applied for the part.

It wasn't until the film was in the can and they heard the radio on the way home did they realize what was happening.

The point?  Intention doesn't always translate into meaning.

There are plenty of political examples too, but the NOTD one is a sentimental favorite.

maybe you took it out of context. Just a thought. The point was clear in the graphs. So take what you want. I remember why I don't like this site, people here are so far up there own ass.

Here is a legitamite question.  Have you ever taken a class in corelation and causation.  If you have... it's likely you'd understand Happysquirrels point.  Either way if you take some classes in sociology you'll need to take one eventually to get a degree, specifically to avoid the kind of mistakes in logic your making currently... and likely will look back a little ashamed about comments like the above.

If you can't debate in a sceintific way and know how to credibly apply statistics, you probably shouldn't be debating politics on policy specifics and instead focus on loose things you would like to see happen.

To put it simply though... in a graph where there is significant correlation there are three main possibilties.

For example, take the sales of chips and salsa.

1) The X axis is caused by the Y axis.  The Sales of Chips also spurs the sales of salsa.  As chip sales go up, so do salsa... because people like salsa with their chips thereby

2) Y is caused by X.  The Sale of salsa also spurs the sales of chips because people who buy salsa need something to eat it on and chips are preferable.

3)  X&Y are caused by Z.  Social events increase the sales of chips and salsa which are mostly a social food.  Therefore the correlation is actually based on a third variable that the graph does not take into account, or even multiple variables.

Hence when providing stats you need to control for outside variables.  For example in the gini coefficent/illegal immigration stats...  Gini coefficent being higher logically can't increase illegal immigration because illegal immigration happens because people want to improve their lives.  Furthermore a third variable can't be causing both because again, the two goals are conflicting.  However, Illegal immigration CAN cause a higher gini coefficent because Gini coefficent takes into account illegal immigrants salary in it's calculations.

The point of social ineguality is what I brought up. This was the point I was making. Let me fill you in on who and what I came out of. I lived near chicago broke and poor. So I know what it's like to steal because your starving. I also know what it's like to live in my car while attending high school, Sometimes sleeping at friends and slipping in shower after school at different people's houses. 

So the point I was getting to is until you are desperate will you know what and where you might end up. When I was young I was involved in a gang, My friend ended up shooting someone and lucky at the age of 12 I decided it was a bunch of BS and got out. I worked for everything I got. I own my own production company and am a Class A CDL driver. For me to just get to where I'm at was hell. America is a place of dreams and it's people or used to be . Now It's profit, profit, profit, profit. Some things are more important than profit, LIke jesus shit. Which I'm not a christain but do agree with his Ideals.  GO to canada, it's people are taking care of, happier and there crime rate is way down. Go to detroit and then cross the bridge into canada, they give a sh-t about there people. Yes they have problems but not how bad we have made it for our people. However I put up a clip that shows statistics and he pulls some negative shit right off the bat but when you get pampered  like most of you have on this site, I can understand. 

I bought my xbox as well as the 55" samsung I play on. I don't have mommy to pay a bill if it gets late. I don't have the background that so many of you take for granted. I have failed and failed hard. Lucky I got friends that give a whole lot of shit about me or I would be F'ed. It shouldn't be that bad to where you work your arse off and that isn't enough. That was america's promise years back, not anymore. How much money is enough, there is never enough and thats why we need to regulate and tax. Greed never dies, I know I watched bad sh-t happen over greed. But all you with all your life experience on the VGCHARTZ got it all figured out even though most of you have never really seen suffering. Once you really do and live it, come talk politics with me.  You don't cut social programs and then give to the rich, thats f'ed and if you can't  understand, Your souless and should maybe be the one to look in the mirror or the toilet after a big sh-t.

Peace.

So again you resort to emotions vs rationality.  Which generally is the problem. 

You lived through some tough times, it sucks.  Yet your dwelling on it, and blaming it on those that had more then you when you were a kid... without actually bothering to look at the REAL causes of your problem.  In attempting to fix a problem you care about, you instead are making it worse by focusing on issues that aren't the problem.

To use another example... who knows more about cancer.  Someone who survivided it, or someone who has studied cancer like a doctor?

Money is NOT a zero sum game.

Where i'm from and Canada, the people aren't different at all.  You cross the border, and you don't notice a difference, outside of the popularity of hockey in anycase. 

You act as if there aren't poor in canada, yet it sounds like you've been there before?  Have you never walked the streets and seen the homeless, and shelters in canada, or been in a poor neighberhood in canda?   It's no different... the worse areas in canada are just like the worst areas in the US.

If you want to REALLY find out how to help prevnet poverty you've got to ask yourself some questions about why you were poor, what was your family life like, why didn't your parents didn't have money (if your parents were around).   Furthermore, why you got out of it.  You owned your own company for a while, how many people can say that?

Additionally a question would be why you didn't make full use of the social programs we have available.  Afterall you shouldn't have to live out of your car to go to highschool... like literally, if you read any report on homelessness you find that chronic homelessness tends to only inflict those who refuse or ignroant of homeless services and that bed utilization is well below 100%.

Also... no one is talking about cutting social programs to give money to the rich?   I mean if your talking about the Wallstreet bailouts...(which being OWS i'd think  you would be) it's worth noting that it was largely a democrat endevor, that was foiled by republicans until the democrats got on them and forced them to vote for it through public appeal. 

Regardless though.  Noone is saying there aren't problems.  Just the solution to those problems are a LOT different then you think... and should be focused on prevnetion... and for those who need it, rather then a giant web of government handout programs that wastes billions in administration and is so confusing that nobody actually fully knows all of the things they qualify for and can get.... we should have something instituted like a Negative Income Tax.

Remove all the social welfare plans we have now, and simply put in a system that says "If you make less then the povery line the government will pay you X Amount of money."

The IRS already keeps track of our Medicaire and medicaid stuff by directly taking it out of our checks, so the government knows what we make week to week.

Kasz already pointed out what my point from my last post was, so I won't reiterate that ...

There are many problems within the economy of the United States of America that create unfair barriers and contribute to high levels of inequality, and are also causing a significant portion of the problems people associate with inequality.

The poor state of primary and secondary education in the United States is a contributing factor to increased inequality as well as crime, teen pregnancy, and many of the other factors people (incorrectly) blame on inequality. The welfare system, while built with the best of intentions, has built a culture of dependence and destroyed the family unit in many communities and is a contributing factor in increased inequality as well as crime, teen pregnancy, and many of the other factors people (incorrectly) blame on inequality. Illegal immigration has resulted in a massive population of individuals living in the United States without any real rights or status, and the exploitation of these workers results in negative outcomes for them as well as the least skilled (and usually poorest) American workers who compete for jobs; and this leads to increased inequality as well as crime, teen pregnancy, and many of the other factors people (incorrectly) blame on inequality.

I haven’t even addressed the 1000 pound gorilla in the room and brought up crony capitalism or corruption yet and, if you’re being reasonable, you will probably see that the underlying problems need to be addressed not the inequality.

There is nothing wrong with inequality, but there is something seriously wrong with the current rigged system ...

I read recently that statistically if you are in the lowest quntile you need to do 3 main things to have over a 70% chance of leaving that group.

Graduate Highschool, Avoid Teen Pregnancy and get a job out of highschool.

So really, if we were to start anywhere, those three areas would be the ones to target.

Likely by totally rehualing the highschool system, putting more out there about just how badly teen preganancy can screw you up and loosening IPO laws.