You want 'common ground'? Here you go. At present, the very rich pay less than half the income tax of your average middle class citizen. Politicians aside, the actual PEOPLE on both sides of this fight believe this needs to be fixed. Most people want this changed. The disagreement is between telling the govt. to FIX THINGS or telling them to just STOP BREAKING THINGS MORE!
There is the common ground. Money has corrupted regulation. The only debate is shoot the horse or take it to the vet.
@jpjscott The 1st 1/2 of your comment is total bullshit. "...the very rich pay less than half the income tax of your average middle class citizen."(WTF is an "average middle class citizen", and where did you come up with your phony income tax figures?) I'm sure someone will come along who thinks your comment is intelligent, I thought it was cliche and sophomoric...and 99% of the time, when a horse gets sick, the vet comes to the farm.
Mitt Romney pays roughly 15% income tax, and this is pretty normal for those in his tax bracket. Average US salary is $47,000/year, which carries a 25% tax rate. I admit I wrote my response without checking my numbers, so the exceedingly wealthy pay more like 60% not under 50% as I originally stated. They ALREADY pay no more than an individual who makes at least $8700/year, significantly less than many. Tax info taken from Forbes. Your response is superannuated.
Your title is missleading, your arguments have holes in them, and your call to action is a call to disaster. Do you even know what both groups stand for in actuality? Your ideas would be perfect if only we lived in a reality where people where honest and people could be trusted to always do the right thing. Since we don't, your call for "classical liberalism" crumbles down.
All this labelling things is misleading, no-one completely falls into one catagory or another for political philosophy. The economic game is rigged and I'm not hopeful as population increases resources dwindle.That means a smaller slice for everyone planetwide. Resources = real wealth because services and products depend on resources. You can bet your ass that wealthy people are the least effected and it's the poor that suffer most. We could feed everyone but choose to ignore the solutions.
I liked it until the very end. Large progressivism and wealth redistribution may lead into a downward spiral of financial loss, but free market libertarianism leads into a similar spiral of wealth inequality where money is funneled away from where it could help the most people and stimulate spending and into the hands of a minority who gain both wealth and leverage from it.
The problem is both sides can spiral out of control when left unchecked.
Wow, the power elite must be more worried about the Tea Party and OWS joining up than I thought if they're churning out this pointlessly divisive propaganda. Again, what was the point of this video and who gains? Not the tea party, not OWS. Outside political forces gain by this.
So what's the benefit in saying that there's no middle ground? What's the benefit to polarizing the argument?
Excellent video and it got me thinking about the right things. But I can't get over why they wanted to say that there is NO MIDDLE GROUND. What's the danger in thinking there is a middle ground?
@apple7945 Well, let me answer your questions with a question: What could these two groups agree upon? I think it's pretty clear that they're irreconcilable. These two worldviews are polarized; there's no way to describe the conflict that will polarize them further.
wow this video made tea party members look like saints...i came to this thinking it would be an unbiased expository explanation on the two groups but i guess that's too much to ask
This video is mis titled. It should be Progressivism v. Classical Liberalism. It generalizes and mischaracterizes both movements. I think he'd be surprised how many libertarians and classical liberals are involved and support OWS. The MSM likes the new deal progressive portrayal because it is convenient and fits their two party narrative. OWS is much less about people doing something that is unfair than it is about people getting away with breaking the law.
Government coerced forgiving of debts is not and cannot ever be part of Classical Liberalism. Being seen with people advocating such does Libertarian activists no credit and fouls their message. It's a hard thing to know you might have to rethink your activities or who your support.... It is also not popular to change your mind. But this time it might be prudent.
@salbal777 That's only because the tea party is the only group practicing "classical liberalism." Would you rather they be biased towards the occupy crowd and support the continued progressive decline in our economy?
Like the Individualism of Pres. Herbert Hoover that lead us directly into The Great Depression. The truth is none of these "ism" really work at all by itself. Also true is that the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street actually have more in common than differences. I respect the video's opinion I still disagree with some of its points.
its important to understand that the individualism of pres Hoover did not cause the great depression, it was a combination of inflation fueled by the homecoming of troops from WWI, the collapse of the agricultural industry as the international war market disappeared (since Europe could now produce its own food) and the social climate of the 20's which was actually largely based on the "progressivism" ideals Whittle describes (think about the bonus army, the rise of unions etc)
@Mrkika1 I wouldn't say individualism alone was the reason that caused the great depression, but it had its part as much as progressivism did. Unions were much needed in that era. You can thank them for a 40 hour work week and having a weekend. As far as today's union, they're just as corrupt as corporations.
Collectivism(progressivism, socialism, etc.) is the death of individualism. The death of individualism always leads to the death of individuals. Can't be any other way. Individualism=individuals
@maddogmp9 Wow, you are misinformed. These people want neither of those things. Do some damn research. These people simply want a government that represents the 99% of people in this country. You are ignorant if you think these people would actually try to promote things that would hurt this country even more. Wake up and turn off the mainstream media. They want wealthy people to stop influencing our politicians and they want a government that listens to us over these wealthy people.
You want 'common ground'? Here you go. At present, the very rich pay less than half the income tax of your average middle class citizen. Politicians aside, the actual PEOPLE on both sides of this fight believe this needs to be fixed. Most people want this changed. The disagreement is between telling the govt. to FIX THINGS or telling them to just STOP BREAKING THINGS MORE!
There is the common ground. Money has corrupted regulation. The only debate is shoot the horse or take it to the vet.
jpjscott 2 weeks ago
@jpjscott The 1st 1/2 of your comment is total bullshit. "...the very rich pay less than half the income tax of your average middle class citizen."(WTF is an "average middle class citizen", and where did you come up with your phony income tax figures?) I'm sure someone will come along who thinks your comment is intelligent, I thought it was cliche and sophomoric...and 99% of the time, when a horse gets sick, the vet comes to the farm.
wideawake123 1 week ago
@wideawake123
Mitt Romney pays roughly 15% income tax, and this is pretty normal for those in his tax bracket. Average US salary is $47,000/year, which carries a 25% tax rate. I admit I wrote my response without checking my numbers, so the exceedingly wealthy pay more like 60% not under 50% as I originally stated. They ALREADY pay no more than an individual who makes at least $8700/year, significantly less than many. Tax info taken from Forbes. Your response is superannuated.
jpjscott 1 week ago
this is bullshit.
hooping2Freedom 1 month ago
Your title is missleading, your arguments have holes in them, and your call to action is a call to disaster. Do you even know what both groups stand for in actuality? Your ideas would be perfect if only we lived in a reality where people where honest and people could be trusted to always do the right thing. Since we don't, your call for "classical liberalism" crumbles down.
xx9933yyzz 1 month ago
Why does the guy's voice sound like Steve Jobs?
alanleongjl 2 months ago
You guys seem to have alot of paragraphs to read... LOL
Ckelldo 2 months ago
All this labelling things is misleading, no-one completely falls into one catagory or another for political philosophy. The economic game is rigged and I'm not hopeful as population increases resources dwindle.That means a smaller slice for everyone planetwide. Resources = real wealth because services and products depend on resources. You can bet your ass that wealthy people are the least effected and it's the poor that suffer most. We could feed everyone but choose to ignore the solutions.
MrROTD 2 months ago
I liked it until the very end. Large progressivism and wealth redistribution may lead into a downward spiral of financial loss, but free market libertarianism leads into a similar spiral of wealth inequality where money is funneled away from where it could help the most people and stimulate spending and into the hands of a minority who gain both wealth and leverage from it.
The problem is both sides can spiral out of control when left unchecked.
OlasDcrazy 2 months ago 4
Wow, the power elite must be more worried about the Tea Party and OWS joining up than I thought if they're churning out this pointlessly divisive propaganda. Again, what was the point of this video and who gains? Not the tea party, not OWS. Outside political forces gain by this.
RookOfOnyx 2 months ago
free market=freedom?
duhaxenhase 2 months ago
"The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen."
-Dennis Prager
koyunbaba73 2 months ago
So what's the benefit in saying that there's no middle ground? What's the benefit to polarizing the argument?
Excellent video and it got me thinking about the right things. But I can't get over why they wanted to say that there is NO MIDDLE GROUND. What's the danger in thinking there is a middle ground?
Can someone answer that for me?
apple7945 2 months ago
@apple7945 Watch the video all the way through. He lays out the case in the second half of the video.
wideawake123 2 months ago
@apple7945 Well, let me answer your questions with a question: What could these two groups agree upon? I think it's pretty clear that they're irreconcilable. These two worldviews are polarized; there's no way to describe the conflict that will polarize them further.
koyunbaba73 2 months ago
wow this video made tea party members look like saints...i came to this thinking it would be an unbiased expository explanation on the two groups but i guess that's too much to ask
connektion 2 months ago
Socialism sucks- no need for long dissertations!
mizerlad 3 months ago
This video is mis titled. It should be Progressivism v. Classical Liberalism. It generalizes and mischaracterizes both movements. I think he'd be surprised how many libertarians and classical liberals are involved and support OWS. The MSM likes the new deal progressive portrayal because it is convenient and fits their two party narrative. OWS is much less about people doing something that is unfair than it is about people getting away with breaking the law.
Maristreynard 3 months ago
@Maristreynard
Government coerced forgiving of debts is not and cannot ever be part of Classical Liberalism. Being seen with people advocating such does Libertarian activists no credit and fouls their message. It's a hard thing to know you might have to rethink your activities or who your support.... It is also not popular to change your mind. But this time it might be prudent.
AUScorpion 2 months ago 2
Excellent video, except the last few seconds where you show yourself as bias to tea party.
salbal777 3 months ago
@salbal777 That's only because the tea party is the only group practicing "classical liberalism." Would you rather they be biased towards the occupy crowd and support the continued progressive decline in our economy?
PJ916 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PJ916 Do you consider the Koch Brothers a "classical liberalism"?
The Tea Party has been hijacked by the cooperation and no longer relate to liberalism.
The only classical liberalism exist today in Dr. Ron Paul.
salbal777 2 months ago
Like the Individualism of Pres. Herbert Hoover that lead us directly into The Great Depression. The truth is none of these "ism" really work at all by itself. Also true is that the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street actually have more in common than differences. I respect the video's opinion I still disagree with some of its points.
dynamicmaxwell120 3 months ago
its important to understand that the individualism of pres Hoover did not cause the great depression, it was a combination of inflation fueled by the homecoming of troops from WWI, the collapse of the agricultural industry as the international war market disappeared (since Europe could now produce its own food) and the social climate of the 20's which was actually largely based on the "progressivism" ideals Whittle describes (think about the bonus army, the rise of unions etc)
Mrkika1 3 months ago
@Mrkika1 I wouldn't say individualism alone was the reason that caused the great depression, but it had its part as much as progressivism did. Unions were much needed in that era. You can thank them for a 40 hour work week and having a weekend. As far as today's union, they're just as corrupt as corporations.
dynamicmaxwell120 3 months ago
Collectivism(progressivism, socialism, etc.) is the death of individualism. The death of individualism always leads to the death of individuals. Can't be any other way. Individualism=individuals
carcabe 3 months ago
Why can't they both just come together to fight the corrupt government as one?
StratoBlaster420 3 months ago
@StratoBlaster420 Because one group (OWS) wants Totalitarian Government, redistribution of wealth, which is corrupt
maddogmp9 3 months ago
@maddogmp9 Wow, you are misinformed. These people want neither of those things. Do some damn research. These people simply want a government that represents the 99% of people in this country. You are ignorant if you think these people would actually try to promote things that would hurt this country even more. Wake up and turn off the mainstream media. They want wealthy people to stop influencing our politicians and they want a government that listens to us over these wealthy people.
StratoBlaster420 3 months ago
I say NO government. Voluntary Society. No State Project. Adventures in Legal Land by Marc Stevens.
MrDromaeosaurid 3 months ago