Prev
Next

A left-wing protest against left-wing problems

David Penberthy

by David Penberthy

23 Oct 06:00am

Must Reads

Corby to be released - but does anyone still care? - this is a caption

Corby to be released - but does anyone still care?

61

Washington reacts to news of the Thomson saga - this is a caption

Washington reacts to news of the Thomson saga

36

You’d think she was a plant to destroy Facebook - this is a caption

You’d think she was a plant to destroy Facebook

85

Filed under: Banks, Capitalism, Occupy Wall Street

98 comments

One of the favoured chants of the Occupy Wall Street protesters is “This is what democracy looks like”. It’s an unusual definition of democracy, predicated on an impertinent belief that stopping people from going to work or abusing them for wearing suits is a central tenet of the democratic process.

Slumber party: OWS protesters in Martin Place this week. Photo: Bill Hearne

The protests, which started in Lower Manhattan two months ago as a demonstration against corporate greed, have now been replicated in many of the bigger cities throughout the world. In Melbourne protesters and police scuffled a couple of times, with dog squads and mobs coming face to face. Protest sympathisers say the cops have been too rough, while the cops say the crowds had fair warning they would be dragged away if they didn’t leave voluntarily.

Martin Place in Sydney has been another venue for occupation, albeit an occupation which sputtered to an early halt when the anarcho-syndicalist catering collective failed to lay on any food for the demonstrators, many of whom promptly called it a night and went back to Mum and Dad’s in Paddington for dinner.

At first blush it is tempting to feel a degree of sympathy for these protestors, even a frisson of excitement at the fact that young people are still prepared to take to the streets in protest at a form of capitalism which is rapacious and inhumane.

It was reported on Friday that the massive merchant bank Goldman Sachs, which in the corporate world rejoices in the cheery nickname “the vampire squid”, had set aside US$10 billion to for staff salaries and bonuses. That’s an average of $292,000 per employee. By the bank’s perverted logic this constitutes a form of restraint, as this time last year the bank’s employees were pocketing 25 per cent more. If this is belt-tightening, I’d like to sign on.

With this offensive level of largesse it is easy to see why young idealists will be attracted to this cause. The corporate scandals which beset Wall Street in the lead-up to the global financial crisis have created the foundations for these protests. On top of that, the financial meltdown across Europe has seen also the emergence of radical and often violent protest movements as governments cut services and public sector jobs to salvage their battered budgets.

While it is easy to understand what these protesters are upset about, it is much harder to get a handle on what they are proposing as an alternative. Hearing some of them interviewed in Sydney this week was like listening to Rob Oakeshott on LSD, with lots of air-headed references to the need for new paradigms and government framed around inclusiveness and compassion.

The key point which seems to be lost on these protesters, particularly in the European context, is that the root cause of the problems they are so agitated by does not lie with capitalism. In the European context the problems lie with a lazy and unthinking brand of socialism, whereby economies have effectively been killed with kindness as government spending has run unchecked, public sector wages have not been linked to productivity or performance, the need for sound credit ratings has been ignored. And ironically enough, the end result of years of sustained, derelict budget management is that governments are left with no choice but to implement the type of austerity measures which make scorched-earth economic rationalists giddy with excitement.

Of all the basket case economies in Europe, Greece provides the best example. Athens has been the venue for some of the biggest and most unruly protests, ostensibly against the application of conservative budgetary measures. It is completely lost on these protesters that the thing which got them there was a socialist budget strategy, an ambivalence towards maintaining the integrity of the tax system, and the total absence of a public sector wages policy.

Not only is tax avoidance a national sport in Greece, but public servant wages had exploded to the point where government workers were being paid on average three times that of a private sector employee. This would not necessarily be a bad thing if you had terrific infrastructure, great hospitals and brilliant schools, all of them run cost-effectively. The only trouble is that Greece doesn’t have any of these things. It ranks below most other European countries in terms of education and health care, and it is a testament to years of over-spending and misspending that it is now in a position where it can no longer spend anything at all.

In the United States, it is highly debatable whether the broader economic troubles are being caused by the kind of obscene and indefensible greed demonstrated by the likes of Goldman Sachs, or excessive government spending and sloppy banking policies which meant that hundreds of thousands of people were given money for mortgages which they could never repay. Policies such as President Obama’s plan to implement a unilateral rich tax might win plaudits from the Occupy Wall Street crowd and generate applause from blue-collar people on talkback radio, but they will do nothing to resolve the central problem of government ambivalence towards the proper use of public money.

To this end the Left is protesting against a set of circumstances which it has largely created.

Most commented

353"Gifting", "journey" and other words we hate
309Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
242They must pay for one's bitter disappointments
230Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...
230South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
224The most laughable, err, spoof since Einfeld
224Punch on: Open thread 17/05/2012

98 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • nihonin says:

      06:18am | 23/10/11

      Too intellectually weak to see the foibles in their preferred system of ‘money for nothing’ handout based nanny government policies.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      06:20am | 23/10/11

      ‘While it is easy to understand what these protesters are upset about, it is much harder to get a handle on what they are proposing as an alternative.’

      Perhaps they might have been slightly more ‘upset’, if the LNP had succeed in its belt-tightening stupidity, and our mortgage belt has collapsed.  The ‘alternative’ they might have found , could have given many of us a great big shock !

      Reply

    • Watcher says:

      07:19am | 23/10/11

      I was listening to Paul Murray Live on Foxtel the other night and I must admit I had to laugh. Gone are the old days where we protested and did it rough and had fun doing it. The protestors in Sydney asked the N’S.W Government and the Sydney Lord Mayor for tents and the internet and even a veggie garden and a compost heap and the tax payers expense!! Fortunately they had too much sense to give it to them.If your going to protest be a bit fairdinkum and don’t ask the rest of us to pay your living expenses

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      05:24am | 24/10/11

      @ Watcher
      ‘.If your going to protest be a bit fairdinkum and don’t ask the rest of us to pay your living expenses ‘

      It’s sort of like lobbying for tax breaks while copping government subsidies ?

    • MarkS says:

      08:19am | 24/10/11

      Protestors in Sydney? I walk though Martin Place every weekday in my Italian fine merino wool suit & not one protestor do I remember seeing. There is always some rubbish going on at Martin Place, so they may well have been there but if they were they were not bothering people in suits.

    • Robinoz says:

      07:28am | 23/10/11

      Well said David. Australian demonstrators should also be thankful that whatever they hate about Australia and our governments, they won’t be shot on the streets like dogs as they are in many other countries.

      They should be thankful to live in such a good country, vote for people who will run the country properly and contribute without expecting handouts from government.

      PS: Erick must have slept in today

      Reply

    • xar says:

      10:33am | 23/10/11

      being thankful for good things does not preclude protesting bad things - and yes, there are some really bad systemic problems in the country - take a look at the reports on disability services for one.

    • gobsmack says:

      10:36am | 23/10/11

      @Robinoz
      Shooting protesters “on the streets like dogs” didn’t turn out to be an incredibly clever tactic by Gaddafi.

    • Liz says:

      10:49am | 24/10/11

      Pembo really!!!What naive rubbish is this? Goldmann Sachs less repsonsible than the left?? Get a handle.

    • Jarred says:

      08:10am | 23/10/11

      There is a differance between the protests in the U.S and the ones here and I think that many commentators to easily lump them together. The U.S protesters are from all walks of life and are protesting serious problems in the U.S banking, financial and political systems, The deregulation of the banking system that alowed savings banks and investment banks to be combined risking peoples money has not happend here, The fact that the U.S banks crashed the world ecconomy by selling sub prime mortgages that they knew were lousy and then packageing those mortgages selling them to investment funds and then betting against those investmens on the derivitve market is fraud and yet not one person has been charged. lobbyist and big buisness have way to much clout in the U.S political system because it is virtualy imposable to get elected to office without finacial support from big business, so questions arise as to just who the poloticians work for, the people who elect them or the business who pays them? Also the Middle class has been decimated in the U.S.
      Alot of the protesters in the U.S are not against capitalism they are for it but but they see a capitalism that has been hijackd by corperate monopoly that has strangled competition and moved jobs overseas. By contrast Australias banking system and the regulation imposed on it has served us well,  our economy is great unemployment is low and although the quality of our political leaders may be lacking there is not the same coruption by business and lobbyists in the U.S.
      the protestes in Australia are the usual suspects of green left weakly reading morons that have latched onto what they think is the world socialist revolution. Ther will get bored and go home to their comfortable middleclass lives. The protesters in wall street will not because they have no middle class lives to go home to they have been cheated out of a future by greed coruption and debt .

      Reply

    • AdamC says:

      09:27am | 23/10/11

      Jarred, I still think the original Wall Street Occupiers are, as Penbo notes, merely a grievance collective without a real agenda, but I do agree that the Australian occupiers lack the original movement’s authenticity. The group in Melbourne, which I walked past a couple of times, had ‘rent-a-crowd’ written all over it. That meant its message and goals were even less coherent than the actual OWSers in the States. And picking a fight with the cops also demonstrates that they don’t really have much of an idea of how to marshal public support.

      The problem for the OWSers is that the US doesn’t need a single big change, or changes, it needs a lot of little, often technical, ones. Which makes the sloganeering of the occupiers quite unhelpful. The fixation on high salariesa, etc, is also misguided. I don’t mind people doing very well, but I am concerned about are the ones that aren’t. Cutting profits or executive salaries won’t do anything to help people that are struggling.

    • LeonT says:

      09:51am | 23/10/11

      A wonderful summary, albeit virtually unreadable.

    • Richard says:

      10:35am | 23/10/11

      Good comment.

      But the problem in America wasn’t that they had “too little” regulation, it was that they had the wrong sort of regulation. When the government implicitly backs big Mortgage Insurers like Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, basically saying “you can do what you want, we’ll bail you out no matter what”, and then encourages a bunch of low-credit, no-job, no-hope losers to buy houses (in the name of “equality”), I mean what do they think would happen?

      If the US Government had made it clear from the start that there would be consequences for poor investment choices, and that there was a real chance investors could lose all their money, people would have been a hell of a lot more careful about how they invest their money. They wouldn’t have purchased all those tranches of low-grade, sub-prime mortgage securities, and there would never have been a bubble to crash in the first place.

      Every single mishap in the economy is always, at its root, caused by bonehead government intervention in the free market. True neo-liberal capitalism calls for limited government, because that’s the only way an economy can stay balanced and prosperous in the long-run.

    • Ged says:

      10:47am | 23/10/11

      Could not agree more, Jarred.

    • John A Neve says:

      11:03am | 23/10/11

      Richard,
      Surely if the banks in America had not made loans available to low income earners, the building industry would have gone into decline sooner?
      The fact is our whole society is built on the concept of “growth”, common sense tells one you cannot have continual “growth”.
      But you are correct “greed, corruption and debt” is and will continue to be our downfall.

    • Danielle says:

      11:07am | 23/10/11

      @Jarred, I completely agree with your initial point. The situation in Wall Street, the Eurozone and the replicated protests in Sydney and Melbourne are completely different circumstances. David draws conclusions from the Greek context and applies them to the Australian context, blaming social policies in Greece as the cause of economic meltdown and using that reason to criticise OWS and other movements even though they are completely different situations! The OWS movement have genuine grievances against corporate greed and capitalism in America; there is no need to lump in all the occupation movements into one. A poor piece of writing.

    • John the Zombie says:

      11:18am | 23/10/11

      Jarred I totally agree with you comments. There is a vast differemce between Aus and the US. The two main issues that happened in the US is that the govt allowed the banking sector to become so out of control it was able to bring a form of loan (the sub prime market) to increase thier profits but at the same time the banks knew that these loans were backed by the govt through fanny mae and freddie mac both of which were morgage issurance companies that were created to allow the middle class to buy homes but were later hijacked by these banks to back thier sub prime loans. Sadly there is a large number of sub prime loans in Australia but these were insured by private companies and not the govt so inturn putting a safety net on the housing market.

      The second issue revolves around the notion of free trade and protectionism. The idea of free trade is good but it does have it issues in that all countries do not play on the same even field. Hundreds of manufacturing jobs have been lost to china. The reason for this is the cheaper labor costs and also the fact that the govt in China keeps its rate exchange rate down allowing a unfair advantage in the market place. The US must adopt a small protectionism stance to allow the playing field to be even up. The US is still the highest consumer market in the world and by adopting this stance the govt will insure jobs and the future security of the US will be safe. An example is the Automobile industry. The US should reopen detroit and create it as the great manufacturing giant it was and the jobs will flow. It is said for every one job you create another 3 spring up as well from small suppliers and services such as cafes. This will require a huge change in the US govt thinking and also its position to change.

    • chris says:

      11:25am | 23/10/11

      No, Jarred, I think you will find that both protests are broadly anti-capitalist.  And no wonder, since capitalism is morally and spiritually bankrupt.  Few people (even among the educated) can speak the language of economics…they just know the system is inhuman. 

      People not profits.

    • simonfromLakemba says:

      11:49am | 23/10/11

      There was no such thing as regulation in America, when they tried lobby groups stepped in and rewrote it to suit them, look at what happened in Georgia.

      The government wanted to firms to have more money in the bank against what they had in debt, but that got watered down, so what you had was firms being leveraged 27:1, with exposure upto $55billion

      The fact that instead of going to jail all the big investment firms paid fines says a lot really, even some commentators on Fox news are saying the wall st protesters have valid points.

    • LeonT says:

      12:05pm | 23/10/11

      “Every single mishap in the economy is always, at its root, caused by bonehead government intervention in the free market.”

      Oh Richard, this is not the case. What about private information inducing moral hazard? What about the underprovision of public goods by private agents? The advent of game theory pretty much sent that line of reasoning quiet.

      The story of the US mortgage crisis was in large part a misalignment of incentives: Mortgage brokers don’t care if their clients can pay back their loans as they get their commission on sale. Mortgage divisions of banks don’t care if the loans go bad because they get their fixed margins and once the thing is on the book it’s risk’s problem if it fails. Risk sells off large swaths of stuff in exotic insurance contracts to investment banks who then, once they realise how likely this stuff is to fail, pretend that it is a good deal and sell it to their unsuspecting clients so that they aren’t caught holding the bad debt when it goes bad.

      This is a (lack of) regulation issue, regulation prevents people with huge informational advantages from lying about the products they sell.

    • Richard says:

      03:20pm | 23/10/11

      Now LeonT, I’m not saying you’re wrong: the situation whereby we had Goldman Sachs packaging up tranches of sub-prime mortgages and selling them off to investors in good faith on the one hand, and then dirtily betting against them in the secondary derivative markets on the other hand, was despicable. Out-right fraud.

      However, if the US government hadn’t lent their AAA+ credit rating to these sub-prime mortgage derivatives (implicitly through their backing of Fannie and Freddy), then these investors who were played for suckers by Goldman Sachs would have been much more likely to go into these deals with their two eyes wide open.

      The financial problems in America are caused by the way that Big Government and Big Business have become inseparably intertwined. There is actually a term for that, its called fascism. The only way to reduce the power of Big Business is to reduce the power of Big Government! They have a symbiotic relationship to each other, not the antagonistic relationship naive lefties would like to think.

      Onerous Government regulations, far from forcing corporations to do the right thing, only force smaller competitors to the Big Corps out of business, increasing the power of Big Corporations and giving them the wherewithal to get away with more. Free and transparent markets are the only force on earth that can truly keep the bastards honest.

    • Pando says:

      07:19pm | 23/10/11

      There may be a difference between the different protests when analysed by country, but this is how one particular international movement networks with media and tries to create the idea that it is dealing with global or even universal forces. It is fed by, and serves, its one-size fits all ideological description of environment and economy in a neat self-sustaining loop.  It also helps feed young idealists rebelling against money into the ‘Greenie’ political circuit.

    • I hate pies says:

      02:34pm | 24/10/11

      Generation Y? Your spelling is atrocious.

    • John A Neve says:

      08:41am | 23/10/11

      I feel David has missed one vital point. With the increase in population, not every one will in the future have a job. Certainly not a full-time job that keeps a family going. Competition and a free market system is bound to fail, true competition ends up being a monopoly (the big fish eat the little fish, then only the big fish are left).

      It must be remembered, we do not live in a Democracy and never have. We get to vote, but those we can vote for are selected for us! Once elected there is no practical means of electorate protest until the next election!

      Governments have for many years used every means in their power to circumvent our constitution and have succeeded in many cases. Too many, if not all GG’s, have acted on precedent rather than the word of our constitution.

      The time is fast approaching when the bulk of the people are awake to the fact that our current Democratic Captalism, just is not working. Unrest, worldwide is on the increase and sadly the change, when it comes, will be very messy.

      Reply

    • marley says:

      10:31am | 23/10/11

      Just wondering why you think that population growth will necessarily lead to unemployment.  And why you think that competition and a free-market system (not that we actually have one) is bound to fail.  Seems to me that, while there are plenty of big fish in the ocean, little fish still are more numerous.

    • John A Neve says:

      10:56am | 23/10/11

      Marley,
      I would have thought it fairly obvious that technology and mechanization have and are reducing the need for manual labour. Add to this an increasing population and you have your answer.
      Regarding competition; I believe that the increase in “one stop shops” in all fields, increased government controls, the benefits of bulk buying, which in turn requires large amounts of capital, is not to slowly killing small businesses. Sadly, in my view this is a world wide trend, multinationals are taking over, added and abetted by government policys.

    • simonfromLakemba says:

      11:51am | 23/10/11

      I don’t think population has a big role to play in things, more population means for demand for goods an services, which means more jobs.

      The thing in america is you have college grads who are $100,000 in debt and no jobs to take, or the jobs that were there are no paying less then they originally were, again a problem in Australia we don’t have

    • persephone says:

      11:54am | 23/10/11

      ‘Those we can vote for are selected for us!’

      untrue, you can vote independent.

      indeed, if you’re worried about the calibre of candidates, you can always stand yourself.

    • Gregg says:

      12:43pm | 23/10/11

      @John
      ” We get to vote, but those we can vote for are selected for us! Once elected there is no practical means of electorate protest until the next election! “
      Sounds a bit like democracy to me John and even Little Johnny would agree.
      If you do not like parties and that people join a party, get heard and eventually stand for pre-selection, you can always look for an independant or even look at standing yourself.

      Whatever happens in politics, the future may not be all that rosey.
      @marley
      ” Just wondering why you think that population growth will necessarily lead to unemployment. “
      Have a think about how countries have been developing and unravelling of late, the massive population increases of still developing and less developed countries, different cultures of living from ground/animal to mouth and many starving to death and many more living with far less than we have in a country like Australia.

      It is no wonder there is a massive global people movement because of famines and violence and then look at what has been happening of late in many developed countries and many having unemployment rates well in excess of twice that reported in Australia.

      Why is it so you may want to ask and so then look at where goods are now manufactured and you’ll find not only many cheap labour countries but also many using child labour.

      So, we have more people wanting into Australia and more and more products, even food being imported, all meaning we are likely to be producing less ourselves, that meaning unemployment!

    • marley says:

      12:50pm | 23/10/11

      @John A. Neve - well, a lot more people had jobs in the mass production of automobiles in the 20s and 30s than ever had jobs hand building horsecarts in the preceding few decades.  Mechanization and automation changes the nature of the work (more work for millwrights, industrial mechanics, and programmers, less for metal cutters, welders and spray painters) but it doesn’t necessarily mean less employment. 

      So, no, it’s not that obvious to me that there will be fewer jobs.  After all, massive population growth over the past few decades hasn’t meant fewer jobs, but more jobs worldwide. 

      And sure, there’s been globalization in some fields - economies of scale and all that - and that’s not necessarily a bad thing, either.  But there is still plenty of room for the small businessman and the niche market manufacturer.

    • John A Neve says:

      03:12pm | 23/10/11

      Marley,
      Your so called mass-production of the 20’s & 30’s produced less vehicles than one man-less production line of today.
      Yes, an increase in population does to some degree create more service jobs, but in the true sense of the term, they are none productive. Most “small business” today is self employed people in service industries and most don’t last long. Worse, most are working long hours fo shit.
      Service industries do not bring wealth into a country, take away the minning and we have nothing.

      I am still to be convinced that our current Capitalist Democracy isn’t killing our claimed way of life, “A Fair go” has long gone.

    • Warwick says:

      09:27am | 24/10/11

      Yeah, capitalism, that’s the problem. There is an alternative, it’s called “the dictatorship of the proletariat.” Check it out. Wherever it’s been tried the people have been prosperous, the intellectual and creative folk have enjoyed a robust and stimulating expression of new ideas and ways of seeing the world and the environment has been clean and well cared for.

      Capitalism is just a hotbed of conspiracies, secret societies controlling governments, and forces that make sure that no-one born on the wrong side of the tracks ever escapes to enjoy any of the wealth that the ruling classes keep to themselves. We must find all the people who run the corporations that employ the proletariat and then destroy those people.

    • jf says:

      10:46am | 25/10/11

      Warwick says:10:27am | 24/10/11

      “There is an alternative, it’s called “the dictatorship of the proletariat.” Check it out. Wherever it’s been tried the people have been prosperous, the intellectual and creative folk have enjoyed a robust and stimulating expression of new ideas and ways of seeing the world and the environment has been clean and well cared for.”

      I assume that you are being facetious.

    • David of Adelagado says:

      09:08am | 23/10/11

      ” in Greece, but public servant wages had exploded to the point where government workers were being paid on average three times that of a private sector employee.”

      We are not far from having the same situation in Australia. Public servant wages and benefits are often vastly better than many comparable jobs in private enterprise. I know a number of very well rewarded public servants who admit they do almost nothing. A few of them worked previously in the private sector and find their present workload in the PS embarrassing.

      Reply

    • Nick says:

      10:39am | 23/10/11

      We’re nothing like Greece. You’re talking nonsense.

    • gobsmack says:

      10:40am | 23/10/11

      The benefits may be better in the public service but for professionals the pay is usually a lot less than what they’d get working in the private sector.

    • Super D says:

      11:18am | 23/10/11

      @gobsmack - public sector wages aren’t that far behind, especially when you adjust for security of tenure.  Not a single public servant (or politician) lost their job over the pink batts debacle.  In the privatre sectore incompetence leads to unemployment.

      @nick - we are well on the way - the public sector as a proportion of the economy continues to grow as does the attitude that every problem should be solved with taxpayers funds.  Furthermore the proportion of net taxpayers decreases every year.  Government is increasingly simply a vehicle by which the resources of the few are delivered to the undeserving masses.  This is not to say that some income redistribution isn’t necessary, just that the majority of people should be contributing to the system not taking from it.

    • David says:

      12:43pm | 23/10/11

      Gobsmack. Really? How many people in the PS do you know who are earning under $35,000. None probably. I know of ‘office girls’  in the PS who earn more than their tradesman husbands.

    • Markus says:

      02:03pm | 23/10/11

      @David, despite not knowing anyone working full-time who earns under $35,000 (even working night-fill for a major department store I made more than that), the answer is none, but that is mainly because there is no real public sector equivalent of a minimum-wage job.

      In the vein of your original question, how many people in the PS do you know who are earning $150,000+? Or even $100,000+?
      That is gobsmack’s point, the potential to earn big money in the public service is severely limited in comparison to the potential in the private sector.

    • John A Neve says:

      03:28pm | 23/10/11

      Super D,
      Said “in the private sector incompetence leads to unemployment”! Does it, a few fines for malpractice and the “pink batt” installers carried on carrying on.

    • gobsmack says:

      06:05pm | 23/10/11

      @ David
      Read my post once more.  I said “professionals’.

    • Chops says:

      11:53am | 24/10/11

      @ Gobsmack
      If you compare workload to pay, Public sector are all over Private sector.
      The Public Sector is an inefficient joke…

    • Zeta says:

      09:09am | 23/10/11

      I was sitting here wondering why I was up so early on a Sunday but now I realise, that part of the human brain that senses when someone is wrong on the Internet was tingling, forcing me out of bed, pouring me two fingers of breakfast whiskey, and responding to the ridiculous assertion that somehow the ‘Left’ is to blame for the Global Financial Crisis.

      There is no question left of the root causes of the financial shit f***ery the world now finds itself in. Blaming the Left is like blaming a rape victim because she dared to venture outside the house wearing a skirt above the knee.

      Clinton, who let’s face it, lost his Left wing credentials when he started wagging the dog on Iraq through the judicious use of Patriot missiles, deregulated much of the US credit market, allowing the banks to foist upon unsuspecting consumers more credit cards, loans, and mortgages then their welfare collecting arses could ever dream of.

      But somewhere between ramming giant phallic sized objects into Middle Eastern countries, tin pot Eastern European dictatorships, and his interns, (easy, easy joke), he also managed to increase employment and reduce national debt so that those consumer debts would have some chance of being paid back.

      Enter Bush - who decided that the national nightmare of peace, prosperity, high employment, and solvency was over. Bush didn’t really do anything to facilitate the shit fight that was to come, he just played enough rounds of golf and rode enough horses around his ranch for so much of the time he didn’t realise Greenspan, with an old pair of Ayn Rand’s panties clutched to his face, was ripping the guts out of what few regulations were left prohibiting the banks from the taking all that glorious debt the American underclass had racked up, packaging it up into exotic financial products, and flogging it to seniors, super funds, Greeks, and any one else stupid enough to trust them.

      You can’t even really blame those jokers for what happened, any more than you can blame the Left. They just built the gun, loaded it, and personally handed it to the guys who’d start a fiscal massacre. But ultimately, the banks, the trenchcoat mafia of Wall Street High School, must take responsibility for their actions, and pointing the finger at their enablers doesn’t detract from the fact they pulled the trigger.

      What makes me angry at the Occupy Sydney idiots is that they’re protesting outside the Reserve Bank of Australia as though they have some share of the responsibility as the US Federal Reserve does.

      The RBA, ASIC and APRA are three of the toughest, most responsible banking and financial regulators in the world. We are in the position, in Australia, we are in because of the sound management and regulatory practices of those agencies.

      On the very day the great unwashed descended on Martin Place, the RBA signed of on new rules that force Boards to disolve if shareholders vote down ridiculous pay rises. Meanwhile, the Greens, Socialist Alliance, and the Newtown Progress Society were bemoaning CEO pays as if we weren’t doing anything about it.

      And yet, if they took a walk just a square block north they could protest outside Morgan Stanely, State Street, Deutche Bank, and RBS - four banks with an actual share of the blame for the GFC, fingered specifically not by tin foil hat weirdos like me, but multiple Congressional inquiries.

      I don’t think the Occupiers realise just how terrible and hopeless the situation really is. If they did, they’d probably have set fire to the city a long time ago. Figures out of the US this week revealed the US financial sector spends $4 billion on lobbying each year (http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?showYear=a&indexType=c).  No one can compete with that. In Australia, where they only spend $1.4 million according to democracy4sale.org, they still comprise a significant chunk of total campaign finance.

      Fifty hipsters on yoga mats can’t compete with that. Especially if they don’t even know what they’re competing against.

      Reply

    • Richard says:

      01:07pm | 23/10/11

      Glen Stevens and his board have performed superbly over the years, but Alan Greenspan was a complete financial terrorist. However, you can’t blame Ayn Rand’s theories for that. Yes, Greenspan was an early follower of Ayn Rand, but by the 1980’s he had totally abandoned the core philosophical tenets of objectivism, and basically remoulded himself in the image of the very Statist Meddlers Rand despised.

      Alan Greenspan was/is no more of a Randian than Kevin Rudd was an economic conservative. You’d do well Zeta to read ‘The Fountainhead’ and ‘Atlas Shrugged’ with an open mind, Zeta, instead of automatically dismissing them out of hand.

    • Super D says:

      02:18pm | 23/10/11

      Nicely said Zeta - I had wondered why they didn’t select Chifley Square, perhaps they thought it was private space, perhaps they thought it would be portrayed as a stand against Chifley - or far more likely they are utterly clueless as to the nature of the beast they seek to slay.

      Also the left would never have come up with a banking scam that allowed the resources of the poor to be diverted it to rich bankers.  They’d appropriate them for themselves or more likely ensure no one had anything

    • dms says:

      12:56pm | 24/10/11

      TLDR

    • Richard says:

      10:14am | 23/10/11

      This is exactly what I commented yesterday on Laurie Oakes’ column, and the moderator didn’t publish it!

      But I’m glad David you’ve come to this conclusion as well, because there is a core fallacy at the heart of these “occupy” protests. They mainly say (although its very hard to gets sense out of them) that they are protesting against “neo-liberal economics”. But like Laurie Oakes said yesterday, these protests haven’t really caught on in Australia like they have everywhere else in the world. Hell, in Australia, the anti-carbon tax protests were FAR bigger than these ‘occupy’ nuisances.

      The reason for this is because Australia has the best economy in the world. I mean, even our hapless Wayne Swan, despite being an innumerate bungling fool, was awarded the “World’s Greatest Treasurer” Gong the other week. Talk about being in the right place at the right time!

      Does any one else apart from Penbo see the irony here? The one country that has followed ‘neo-liberal’ economic policies most emphatically for the last 30 years, first under Paul Keating, whose reforms were in every instance about de-regulation, free-ing up markets, dropping tarriffs, free trade, privatisation, floats etc.; and then continued under Peter Costello, who was faithful to all these themes, as well as de-unionising, introducing flexibility into labour markets, cutting government spending, delivering surplus after surplus, and giving back 6 tax cuts in a row.

      Now, after all these decades of “neo-liberal economics” average evreryday Australians are the richest people in the world. Contrast this to Greece, which has been governed by their ‘Panhelenic Socialist Party’ for more or less the entire last 30 years. Compare this to Spain, who followed the “green-jobs” fantasy all the way down the rabbit-hole, and now have an official unemployment rate of 20%. Look at the state of England’s public finances, after being ruled by New Labour for 15 years, look at the problems in America from pursuing Corporatist Crony Oligarchic economic policies for the last 30 years instead of truly embracing neo-liberal economics.

      The resulting conclusion is clear. Far from protesting against “neo-liberal economics”, these ‘occupy’ guys ought to be protesting expressly FOR “neo-liberal economics”. It is the most sure-fire way to create and spread prosperity through an entire economy, bar none.

      Reply

    • Mayday says:

      03:51pm | 23/10/11

      Very nicely put Richard.

    • Kipling says:

      10:26am | 23/10/11

      Um I think the referrence to what democracy looks like is along the lines of the right to civil disobedience and protest. Don’t let that facet get in the way of your other coloured baubles to distract the natives.

      Economic mismanagment is certainly a problem, that is a given. I think the problems are poorly applied socialist ideas like welfare and public care and the demonstrated avarice of the BIG money end of town. Both of these contribute, probably fairly equally. To lump it all together in one neat package and simply blame the left is a far too brain dead approach lacking merit, credibility and good judgement…

      Reply

    • marley says:

      11:44am | 23/10/11

      @Kipling - you think that the problems are a product of poorly applied socialist ideals and of the avarice of the big end of town in equal measure. Isn’t that exactly what Penbo is saying?  That’s how I read the piece, anyway.  And I have to say, I agree with him (and you.) 

      The thing is, the protesters are all over the place on identifying the problems and nowhere at all on identifying solutions.  Clearly, the US needs tighter regulation of banking.  Equally clearly, Europe needs better management of its social welfare and public service spending.  But neither of these remedies is likely to appeal to the protesters.

    • Danielle says:

      01:10pm | 25/10/11

      Thanks for the responses! @Richard, I take your point and I should clarify that I’m coming from a background in international studies. My education of neoliberal policies has been in the context of international structures of inequality. Slightly off topic, but you only have to look at neoliberal policies in the last couple of decades (particularly the post- Washington Concensus and IMF/WB policies) to see how neoliberal economics can induce inequality between states, and is not merely a by- product.
      If you’ll indulge me in going off topic a little more, neoliberal free market policies have had adverse affects on resource rich countries- most of the items you have named contain minerals (eg coltan) that are the centre of bloody civil wars as groups compete for market control.. So no,  competition does not always bring out the best in humanity.

      Anyway, back on topic and I strongly agree with your point that we should be working to provide equality of opportunity, economic access is key! But I don’t think we shouldn’t offer assistance to those that don’t quite make the cut.

      @LC I agree with you, if the banks had not been bailed out it would have been disastrous for the American population… But, I didn’t say I disagreed with banking bailouts I just think it’s wholly unjust that the big executives pocketed massive bonuses after a period of relative stability.

      Oh and yes, the Occupy movements in Australia are a joke… at least the OWS movement has genuine grievances.

    • Richard says:

      11:01am | 23/10/11

      These ‘occupy’ protesters say they are protesting against “neo-liberal economics”. The core fallacy at the heart of their position is that the financial problems in the world stem from following this economic philosophy.

      But infact, when we take a closer look, we see that the true situation is precisely the opposite . In Australia, new data shows that average Australians are now the richest people on Earth. Even our hapless Wayne Swan, despite being an innumerate bungling fool, was awarded the “World’s Greatest Treasurer” Gong recently. Talk about being in the right place at the right time!

      Yet Australia is also the ONE country in the world to have implemented neo-liberal economic policies the most persistently and emphatically. Starting with Paul Keating, whose visionary reforms were in every instance all about de-regulation, free markets, free trade, privatisation, floats, etc.; and then continued by Peter Costello, who also introduced flexibility into labour markets, cut government spending, delivered surplus after surplus, and gave back tax cuts to the people six years in a row.

      Now compare the legacy of this campaign in Australia to implement neo-liberal economic policies (i.e. our current status as the richest country in the world) to the situation in say Greece, who have been ruled by their ‘Panhellenic Socialist Party’ for more or less the last 30 years. Compare this to Spain, who followed the “green-jobs” fantasy all the way down the rabbit-hole, and who now have an official unemployment rate of 20%.

      Compare this to the UK, who were ineptly ruled by ‘New Labour’ for the last 15 years, or to the United States, who pursued Corporato-Crony/Oligarchic economic polices over this time instead of embracing true neo-liberal economics. When we put it in this context, its becomes clear to us that, far from protesting against “neo-liberal economics”, these ‘occupy’ guys ought to be protesting FOR neo-liberal economics, if they want to do the right thing by the common people.

      Reply

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      01:48pm | 23/10/11

      Bunch of crap. Australia is a middle class welfare state where everybody has handouts and rorts the system from the highest politician down to the lowest unemployed person on a disability pension. Australian tax evasion and tax minimization is an art form (although not quite on par with Greece). It is a country where the Victorian Governor-General’s travel expenses are a state secret, where the department of defence bureaucrats stuff up every project they touch yet can successfully spend money on themselves and where the start of winter is heralded by MPs flying north for the winter on “study trips”

    • Richard says:

      04:09pm | 23/10/11

      I never said Australia followed purely neo-liberal economic policies, I said that Australia followed neo-liberal economic policies MORE persistently and emphatically than any other country in the world.

      Clearly, you think that our Government should pursue this agenda even more rigorously than before, and redouble their efforts to slash Government spending and welfare entitlements, and I agree.

      The evidence is irrefutable, the less neo-liberal a country’s economy is, the more bankrupt they are. The more neo-liberal a country’s economy is, the wealthier they are.

      Obviously, we still have a long way to go in fully liberalising our economy, especially now in 2011 after all the backward steps we’ve taken recently under the Labor Left/Greens Alliance Government.

    • Danielle says:

      08:45am | 24/10/11

      The success of economic policies cannot be judged solely by macroeconomic indicators. While the assertion that “the more neoliberal a country’s economy is, the wealthier they are” may be true when using indicators like GDP and average wealth per person, it does not tell the whole story. The real tragedy of neoliberalism, and the point that OWS is trying to make is that national economic indicators hide social impact effects. Capitalism thrives upon competition and creates inequalities.
      In the case of the US, such inequalities heavily impacted upon middle income earners (among others) causing national, and then global financial crisis. It’s an understandable reaction and cause when the American public have watched their financial security crumble while banks and corporations receive bail outs then line their own pockets.

    • Richard says:

      04:08pm | 24/10/11

      Competition brings out the best in humanity, Danielle. It causes us to strive further and harder in pursuit of noble ideals. Economically, competition creates technological advances which ultimately benefit everyone. Look at the sectors of the economy that have the highest levels of free market competition:~ mobile phones, plasma tv’s, computers etc. The price keeps dropping and the quality keeps rising.

      Now lets look at the sectors of the economy which are subjected to the highest levels of government intervention: electricity, water, health, education, etc. The prices keep rising and the quality keeps dropping.

      Have a look at this video to get a deeper understanding please Danielle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIGmU2wJm-A

      Inequality of outcome in and of its self is not a bad thing. Some people deserve to be rewarded more than others, because what they produce is of more value than the contribution of others. The world would be unjust if this were not so. We should strive to provide equality of opportunity to all people, but then lets let the chips fall where they may.

      And as for the American corporate bailouts, well that’s not neo-liberal economics, that’s not capitalism, that’s fascism! That’s Corporate Cronyism, and everyone should oppose that. But the reason they should oppose that is because TRUE capitalism is far better, not because of some fuzzy wuzzy socialist ideals that don’t work in the real world.

    • LC says:

      08:22pm | 24/10/11

      @Danielle

      The alternative to bank bailouts would mean that the banks would go into bankruptcy, and have to liquidize their assets, including those owned by them through loans or mortgages. Meaning lots of people would end up thrown out onto the streets. If it weren’t for that, I’d be right there with you on that one. And I also believe that the banks should be made to repay every cent of the bailout when they are back on top of things, with interest.
      Regardless, that’s an American issue, not an Australian one. Australian banks and industry came through the GFC relatively unscathed. Protesting against that here is pretty fruitless.

      Inequality is a fact of life. Sorry. After you have the basics required for life (food, water, shelter, basic healthcare, clothing and education) inequality is something you have to live with. People who help produce the goods or provide the services is more valuable to society than the contributions of other, and they reap the just rewards for doing so. If you join these people yourself you’ll be able to reap those rewards too.

    • Danielle says:

      01:34pm | 25/10/11

      Oh no, I pressed the wrong reply button. Please see my response above smile

    • Super D says:

      11:20am | 23/10/11

      I completely agree with the right to protest and in some instances civil disobedience can gain my sympathy.  The appropriation of public spaces for private political purposes is not fundamental to our democracy.

      Reply

    • Nathan says:

      11:29am | 23/10/11

      I find it bizarre that this kind of writing passes as quality journalism. That rhetoric is allowed be used to gloss over the fact that you haven’t actually made an argument. That the points that are actually made fail to recognise past policies instituted by previous governments and fails to see the complexity of current economic, social and political circumstances; that current circumstances are contingent upon past policies and procedures brought into fruition by right-wing governments. That you can conflate events from around the world as a singular event, failing to contextualise and appreciate the complexities of each individual movement and the movement as a whole. It is writing and journalism like this that legitimates right-wing praxis and fails to properly critique either the right or the left.

      Reply

    • Uncle Buck says:

      11:36am | 23/10/11

      David, was it really that easy to suppress the nostalgia from your uni newspaper days?

      Reply

    • mick says:

      11:37am | 23/10/11

      In the US 40% of the nation’s wealth is owned by 1% of its population.  Half of the people pay no tax because their income is so woefully low.  On the other end you have Goldman Sachs, CEOs who earn tens of millions of dollars and sports stars who earn even more.

      It is long overdue that working people say enough.  Use the political system to effect change I hear you say?  Given that politics take bucket loads of money guess who is putting this up?  The 1% of course.  So in the end poverty stricken people all over the world have only 2 choices:  protest or do nothing.  Don’t expect governments to look after the interests of the poor.

      Reply

    • Markus says:

      02:23pm | 23/10/11

      I did not see a single person at the Australian Occupy protests who looked anything even remotely close to poverty stricken. The pictures I have seen of the US OWS movement looked mostly the same.

    • Kate says:

      11:40am | 23/10/11

      Good point. I don’t think the messages of the Wall Street protest can be transferred easily to the Australian context. People in the US are upset not only at the banks’ mismanagement, but also at the fact that they can’t get state-subsidised health care and have to take out expensive student loans just to get a tertiary education. Our HECS and Medicare systems may not be perfect, and yes, people fall through the cracks on occasion, but it’s a far better system than what the US has.

      The Occupy Melbourne protest didn’t appear to have a point much deeper than “capitalism is, like, so evil”. They were agitating for change but not providing solid alternatives to the system they claim is deeply flawed. And it’s hard to take them seriously when they’re drinking Starbucks coffee and tweeting on their iPhones. I guess not all big corporations are evil, then?
      It also annoys me that when people bring up the inconvenience they have caused to small business and commuters, the protesters claim “we’re representing you!”. No, you’re not. I may be in the so-called 99%, but if I believed in what they did, I’d be out there myself. Instead, I was missing classes at uni on Friday because the protest stopped all the trams on Swanston Street.

      Reply

    • julian thomas says:

      11:42am | 23/10/11

      the funny thing about the right movement is that they will never admit they are anti-right i.e. wrong, no apologies, just a resolve based on radical philiosphy with no practical political examples in society, therefore they are dangerous because they say individual rights are important but they mean “only my rights are important to me” without compromise they are absolutists ala Hitler, Stalin, Mao thou they will blame it all on the left thinkers

      Reply

    • P. Darvio says:

      11:57am | 23/10/11

      Can someone explain - as I can’t figure out why - they camped outside the Reserve Bank? - I mean its not a real Bank in the normal sense - are they that stupid or have I missed something? - is it because its close to a railway station and toilets perhaps?

      Reply

    • nihonin says:

      12:01pm | 23/10/11

      Disappointed Mr. Penberthy!  All opinions are equal, some are more equal though it would seem.

      Reply

    • Farkin says:

      12:15pm | 23/10/11

      its good they are protesting out in the open air .i bet the tax payer is footing the bill for there toilet needs

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      01:38pm | 23/10/11

      Yes it is a bit clumsy, all those sleepers who don’t go to work and join the competition.
      But they have a point : the wasteful public monies spent are still and all, outside the realms and influences of the filthy rich, so, do they complain for us, (that is, the filthy poor) or against us ?
      What the throng should add is, the aberrant governance of the half-rich, is neither here nor there ; that giving money to pink-batted employees and the like will assist already rich tradesmen and shonky dealers in trade, (if Persephone, on this site 3 months ago felt in defense of this government that job creation was the point of the stimulus, then why the hell didn’t they get 5000 jobless into direct work via seperate job programs ?)

      This, perhaps, is what those on grassy-knolls in capital cities are bitching about : money - public and otherwise - that only goes round and round round, never reaching the good few.

      Reply

    • GWS says:

      02:19pm | 23/10/11

      So… there’s no such thing as corporate greed? And the problem with capitalism is that it has socialists in it? You’re about as incoherent as the knobs in Martin Place. Neither of you offers much in the way of insight. Where they don’t offer a “solution,” you simply deny that there’s a problem! Did it ever occur to you that the one form of greed “the socialist greed” was compounded and enabled by the other, “the capitalist greed”? Where did Greece get all the money from to pay such lavish wages? Where did the money come from for all the sub-prime mortage loans? Do the words “mortgage-back securities” and “collateralised debt obligations” mean anything to you? These are the primary sources of the Global Financial Crisis and they were capitalist instruments that were used to fulfil the socialist something-for-nothing desires of lower and middle income people. The root-cause is not left-wing or right-wing shortcomings, its greed. Some, however, are in a better position to act with restraint, rather than, say, give money to people or countries without investigating whether or not they can pay it back. That something-for-nothing attitude exists at the top of the food-chain too, only with greater consequences!

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      08:00pm | 23/10/11

      A week ago, rich greeks displaces about 300 million euros from the local banks to swiss banks.
      May I say that greed is not only local but geographical (and therefore, personal) and that the rich have more to lose and indeed more then to gain, if they can maintain the quo - the same one - which has caused the current dillema.
      If local Greeks want to protest, then why don’t they attack the root of the problem ... the wealthy scavengers who have since abandoned their people ?

      And really, if the EU would have sense, they would let Greece cook, and save Italy, Spain, and now possibly France.

    • Kipling says:

      02:29pm | 23/10/11

      @Marley, sorry mate, the reply bit aint working for me. When I say poorly applied socialist ideas, I am referring to the habit of throwing money at the problem and naming that as welfare. To my mind, this is actually not appropriate, whilst I would not label it as left or right necessarily, the concept of welfare is to provide appropriate services to assist those in most need to become independent and functioning. Throwing money at the problem creates dependency, as we see, this promotes an ongoing “industry” in a sense, which, if we are truly honest starts to look a lot more like a free market. Given it is a growing “industry”.
      As to solutions, well, the problem is apparently so comlex (I am inclined to think deliberately so) that there is no single silver bullet solution. Yet this is exactly what is expected. I don’t disagree that the protesters have no coherent solution in mind there are, after all so many different aspects to address. That said, the big money crowd are not exactly actively seeking solutions, they are too busy seeking public funded bail outs…. Further to this, no two countries have identical scenarios creating the Global Financial problems, yet added together it is our collective singular problem.
      Perhaps the problem is having a World Bank idea, with so many countries economies so tightly locked together, individual countries can not possibly address their own economic problems without either interferring with, or being interferred with (economically). I think the outrage demonstrated by these protesters (with no coherent answers apparent) is on the basis that the big end of town still comes out on top after its stunning contribution to the Global Financial issues. Then of course it comes back to Governments not managing economics effectively, not being able to actually govern even if they had some economic controls. Look how subservient to the mystery that is the economy our own Government is and we are, apparently, pretty well off. Clearly we are not starving en masse, however, we have significant health and welfare issues all too often pushed out of site so we still have the veneer of being completely the “lucky country”.
      I think we are seeing the beginning of non sustainable capitalism occuring. In fact, it is most likely time for a completely new look system of socioeconomicpoliticalism to be created. Of course, the problem with any system, be it capitalism, socialism or some new as yet uninvented ism is the human component. It seems there is no getting away from little tin pot empire builders whose one purpose is their own benefit regardless of the costs to others. These types occur in politics frequently on both sides of ideological divide and in big business of all types. Sure, they occur as well in workplaces, neighbourhoods, social groups etc etc because these are all made up of people.
      Mayhap Mother Nature will sort it eventually regardless of human constructs…

      Reply

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      02:49pm | 23/10/11

      It’s funny though how the Murdoch hacks support the right wingers in their deranged little protests about taxes they won’t be paying and the delusions of the US tea party without abusing them.

      I guess protests against Rupert and his rotten sons were bad too hey David?

      Reply

    • Jarrod says:

      04:20pm | 23/10/11

      I just lost a whole lot of respect for you on this pathetic straw man argument, Penbo.

      The people in Sydney and Melbourne aren’t Greeks or Europeans who are protesting against the results of socialist policies gone overboard.  Neither are the Occupy Wall Street protesters.

      The anti-Austerity protest movement and the anti-Corporate-Greed protest movements are at best superficially related.  Your attempt to call them the same thing just makes me sick.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      08:02pm | 23/10/11

      That’s billion, not million, too.

      Reply

    • Henry says:

      09:32pm | 23/10/11

      The irony of Penberthy bagging left wingers when he endorsed Kevin Rudd over John Howard as the clear choice to lead Australia!

      Reply

    • Eastern Trisha says:

      10:09pm | 23/10/11

      We need to get past black and white – polarising rhetoric. It’s not about capitalism versus socialism. It’s about weak governments and the rise of self interest over and above national (or social) interest – ie self interest and privilege manifesting as both overpaid public servants and overpaid bankers.

      What both Greece and the US have in common is the growth of an elite who make rules that privilege themselves at the expense of the stability and security of the broader community.

      David Penberthy’s analysis provides another piece to this complex puzzle, but it still misses a key point. There is a growing elite, amongst capitalist, socialist and communist societies that continue to amass wealth (with and without explicit Government support) and the community has had enough.
      All power to them I reckon.

      Reply

    • Fots says:

      12:15pm | 24/10/11

      If people have worked hard enough to amass that wealth, then good on them…

      Granted there are times when people get an easy run, but for the most part it’s the people who put in the hard yards that get the results - and then these clowns turn around and complain because they didn’t do the same thing. Tough luck I say.

    • Eastern Trisha says:

      08:40pm | 24/10/11

      Fots, I was saying “all power to them” meaning the community who has finally started to stand up and voice opposition. I don’t believe that people work hard enough to amass the kind of obscene wealth protesters are objecting to. When the average wage is $55,000 pa, how can we justify paying some poeple millions (or hundreds of millions) of dollars per annum? Are we saying they work so much harder? Or they are so much more valuable? Are financial engineers many, many times more valuable then structural engineers, or biologists?

      People are able to amass obscene wealth because of institutional arrangements that benefit particular activities disproportionately. They are not necesssarily more valuable or more clever. I’ve worked as a stock trader and I can tell you now, many of the young bucks in there are as sharp as a bowling ball.

    • LC says:

      06:16pm | 25/10/11

      Fair enough Trisha. CEOs did not earn What about…say…a surgeon? They spend the first 13 years of their adult life studying for that role, and the best ones can earn a salary of over $200k a year, around 4 times the avaerage wage. Do they deserve it? You probably don’t thinks so, perhaps they should have their pay docked to say, a more reasonable 45k/year?
      How about the prime minister? She earns a salary of around 350k a year for, oh y’know, RUNNING THE COUNTRY. She should have that knocked down a more reasonable amount, how about, 67k/year (the average wage in 2010)?
      Or what about someone who only gains money through luck rather than work, like the winner of a lottery. Nope, an obscene amount of wealth for someone who did literally nothing to earn it (he/she only got it through luck) it should be all taken away and redistributed. Same with inheritance, they didn’t earn it personally, they were lucky to A. Be born to rich parentage and B. Not dying before their parents. No effort involved there. Just luck. ALL of it should be redistributed.

      People can earn big salaries or get their hands shit-tonne of money without getting into big business. Oh, and one last thing, don’t know how things are run wherever you come from, but in Australia, the rich are taxed 45% of what they “earn”. People who earn less than $35k (I think) are not taxed at all, and some are eligible for extra government support.

    • Billy Hill says:

      06:45am | 24/10/11

      If these people had learnt a trade rather than a useless arts degree they would be sharing the wealth. Too lazy for that though.

      Reply

    • Bill says:

      07:19am | 24/10/11

      They should bring in the water cannon and blast these morons off the streets.

      It would be beneficial to throw some bars of soap in the top of the tank before blasting these people too. Give them a much needed wash.

      Two birds with one stone!!

      Reply

    • Uncle Fester says:

      07:24am | 24/10/11

      Why don’t they sit and protest outside a detention centre. That’s where all the obscene waste is happening ....

      Reply

    • Noddy says:

      07:53am | 24/10/11

      When we have democracy I’ll write and let you know OK?

      What we have is an oligarchy or numerous oligarchies counting States.

      This is where govt is dictated by a small group of usually old men, rich old men. Some not even in govt, and usually not in govt a la Rupert.

      Democracy is defined as govt by the people for the people. Where does this exist? A vote doesn’t mean democracy. Russia had votes when there was one Party. Is that too included in your idea of democracy?

      Our MP’s lie to the electorate, use the image of the leader to get elected and then vote as they are told or they lose pre selection and get to sit on the back benches.

      Now and again a “conscience vote” is permitted. Whoop e Doo! What is that, really? Whose conscience is plumbed for the vote? Why, the MP’s of course despite the fact his or her conscience decision may be totally opposed by “the people” that elected them.

      Democracy? What a load of old cobbler’s.

      The protestors are starting something the oligarchists don’t understand. It’s happened throughout the Arab natiuons and is starting here now and all Western countries.

      Those in power say “But what is their message?” SHows you how slow and dumb they really are. The message is simple. All you greedy bastards bugger off and leave governing to the people, in the interests of the people.

      Example. How many people actually support toll roads when they already own the road and have paid for it to be built? Only to see govy flog it off to their mates for piles of cash and destroy our daily lives.

      Reply

    • Blind Freddy says:

      08:51am | 24/10/11

      Nothing makes a right-winger happier than seeing the authoritarian state attack its own people. Unionised thugs in uniforms doing the dirty work of the vested interests.

      Welcome to the police-state Aussie style. The violence was excessive and unnecessary.

      Reply

    • Average Joe says:

      12:28pm | 24/10/11

      You have the right to protest and he right to be heard. But after a while turning our public areas into filthy tent-squats wears a tad thin.

      They were given a fair go and they were given fair warning: move on or we’ll have to move you on. The protesters chose the latter and then physically resisted, so please don’t whine about them being dragged away. When faced with a resisting force the police needed to choose a higher level of force to counter that. I think the vast majority of people would support the actions of the police.

    • Borderer says:

      03:10pm | 24/10/11

      It was when they publicised that if the did not leave by the morning the police would move them that the problems really began, people began turning up, obviously with the intent of confronting the police.  You are given fair warning, you are then told again and then told yet again to leave or there are consequences. Arrests begin and they fight back, assaulting police, was there a batton charge? Rubber bullets? Water cannon? Tasers? Excessive force, you’re dead set kidding yourself. Mule headed stupidity doesn’t make you martyrs, it just means you’re dumb. If you think we live in a police state, Google “Syria” and “Protest”, then you will know you’re talking out the wrong end of your anatomy.

    • LC says:

      07:31pm | 24/10/11

      They had their chance to make their opinions known, and they were allowed to camp there on the proviso that they left without fuss upon request. When the request came, the ones who did not leave as legally required face the consequences. You think the way they were treated was police brutality?
      Here, let me show you what real police brutality looks like.
      And while you’re at it look up what happened to protestors and dissenters during Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia and Gaddafi’s Libya, and what still happens to them in China, Syria and North Korea. That last sentence demonstrates how little you know about life under a totalitarian/communist regime.

    • RyaN says:

      09:08am | 24/10/11

      So according to the “occupy” protestors, democracy is where YOU go to work, YOU start businesses, YOU run the economy and finally YOU give it all to me for nothing!

      Reply

    • Ttraxster says:

      10:18am | 24/10/11

      ‘It is the most sure-fire way to create and spread prosperity through an entire economy, bar none’.
      I doubt that that is what the people,‘the greedy gutses’. want,I think it suits their purpose to keep us great unwashed down here at the bottom of the s***pile
      otherwise who would do all of the crappy jobs that them ‘up there’ can’t and certainly don’t want to do?.
      BTW…..
      re. Goldman Sachs…...are they the same people who,when President Obama bailed them of the financial s***thole they gotten themselves into,the first thing they did with the money,the taxpayers money,was pay themselves bonuses ?....were they part of that greedy display of ,‘f*** you jack I’m alright ‘?

      Reply

    • Shama says:

      12:05pm | 24/10/11

      “While it is easy to understand what these protesters are upset about, it is much harder to get a handle on what they are proposing as an alternative.”

      Maybe they aren’t looking for an alternative. From the Arab Spring to the anti-corruption movement in India to OWS people aren’t looking for a complete overthrow of the present system (except for the Arab spring but that is because they had folks who have had the countries in a tight grip for decades) as much as serving notice to their leaders that they had better clean their Augean stables and that they are accountable to the public. An accountability that seems to have been thrown out of the window in the last decade, including in this country. Surely that is not difficult to understand?

      Harping on the capitalism/socialism divide is a furphy and terribly lazy journalism.

      Also whatever one’s opinions about the OWS, being anti OWS seems to suggest a partisan approach to the fat cats and is amazing to find journos falling over themselves to support poerful and rich lobbies. Try and accept that the skewing of wealth isn’t a good outcome for any society and believing this does not make one anti-capitalistic and perhaps reporting will be less partisan.

      Reply

    • The Guardian says:

      12:11pm | 24/10/11

      Pembo,I have to say mate once again you have missed the point.Your article is littered with assumptions,stereotypes attempts at humour that to be brutally honest could have been written by a member of the young Liberal’s. Keep it up Pembo but remember Mirrabella wants the baton back!

      Reply

    • Jay says:

      12:36pm | 24/10/11

      Goldman Sachs has raped the American tax payer for decades. Goldman Sachs paid how much in Corporate tax last year? Guess. 14 million dollars. Their executives were earning well over 30 million. How does that work? They even have their executives in positions of power within the US Govt and can force through Govt policies that will benefit Goldman Sachs to the detriment of the tax payer. Allowing countries like Greece and Spain into the Euro was akin to giving a gambling addict an unlimited credit card and trusting them not to use it. The Greeks thanks to company’s like Goldman Sachs made sure that the Greeks economy looked strong when it was a basket case. They ofcourse charged hundreds of millions of dollars in fees for their service. These Corporations have no interest in humanity only to make sure they get their bonusses irrespective of the damage they have done to oridnary people. The carange is not over as they have recommenced their fraudent activites that caused the meltdown.But you people keep supporting them and like company’s. In the end it is your money that will bail them out.There is a sucker born every minute and we are all it.It is just a matter of time before people take matters further.

      Reply

    • PaxUs says:

      12:49pm | 24/10/11

      Hang on a mo..aren’t we blaming the wrong people?  Since when has protesting been anti democratic?  Who is responsible for blowing out the budgets of these nations? Surely not the majority of citizen’s?  Citizen’s don’t make war, Governments do.  Citizen’s don’t spend beyond their nation’s means, Governments do.  Who offered the easy credit and encouraged unbalanced spending in these nations? IMF, Bilderberg, CFR, World Bank, G20 and all the other ‘think tank’ institutions who hold their secretive meetings, have a lot to be held to account for.  This is supposed to be a Sovereign democracy, why are our leaders attending secret meetings with private Institutions and corporations?  Also, on the need for accountability table, are the blatantly greedy financial organisations, many of whom have been bailed out by taxpayer dollars. The Gillard Government is exactly following the waste trail that other failing nations have incurred. By the end of their term, we also will be struggling to pay hefty interest repayments on a vast deficit.  Yes it is a whopping deficit for Australia. Comparisons to other nation’s debts are not valid nor a rational way of interpreting the data.  Mass Immigration does not work, as proven in the UK and Euro zones, including the UK.  Citizen cash cow revenue systems are immoral and unethical to say the least.  We are being assaulted at every corner by charges and fees, ever growing rates and taxes, the privatisation of our ESSENTIAL services, the ballooning of Government size, vast increases in Government/Fat Cat Public Servant wages, expensive consultant’s and advisor’s to our over paid, moronic politicians, who seem to nowadays be completely unaccountable, having secured themselves beneath the Corporate mantel and outsourcing or privatising the responsibility to the Corporate sector, who remain beyond the affordable, legal reach of the average citizen.  Justice has become a black joke, our rights are continually being eroded and mocked.  I don’t think the protester’s need a manifesto, they are merely highlighting the many problems in this rotting system and beginning to say they’ve had enough with corporate greed and government incompetence and treachery! You will be held to account!

      Reply

    • OPA says:

      07:29am | 25/10/11

      “The key point which seems to be lost on these protesters, particularly in the European context, is that the root cause of the problems they are so agitated by does not lie with capitalism.”  Wrong!
      “The fact is the system is not working right.  It is not right to have so many people without jobs when we have so many needs that we have to fulfill.
      It’s not right that we are throwing people out of their houses when we have so many homeless people.
      Our financial markets have an important role to play.  They’re supposed to allocate capital, manage risks.  But they misallocated capital, and they created risk. We are bearing the cost of their misdeeds.  There’s a system where we’ve socialised losses and privatised gains.  That’s not capitalism; that’s not a market economy.  That’s a distorted economy, and if we continue with that we won’t succeed in growing and we won’t succeed in creating a just society.” ~ Joseph Stiglitz, Economist and Nobel Laureate, speaking to protestors in Zuccotti Park.

      Your key point is a fail, you have done no more than demonstrate your ignorance and bias.

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

ToryShepherd

ToryShepherd 23 May 12 11:28AM

@KateEllisMP Cheers, this tight arse journo is trying to work out a way around the members-only content!

ToryShepherd

ToryShepherd 23 May 12 10:44AM

Does anyone, anywhere, have access to the audio of Isobel Redmond at the @ceda_news shindig?

tory_maguire

_Tors 23 May 12 09:40AM

"If there was no Schapelle Corby there, in a Balinese prison, we'd still be doing it."...

tory_maguire

_Tors 23 May 12 09:39AM

Bob Carr says releasing Indo kids convicted of people smuggling has nothing to do with Corby...

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Schapelle has done her time

by Daniel Piotrowski

16

Schapelle has done her time

Schapelle Corby has served more than seven years in Kerobokan prison for attempting to import 4.2 kilos…

Do women need to know when to walk away?

by The Punch Team

0

Do women need to know when to walk away?

Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond has sparked controversy over her advice that young women should sometimes…

Who murdered the Arts degree?

by Lucy Kippist

154

Who murdered the Arts degree?

Have we murdered the liberal arts education? That was the final question on Monday night’s Q&A…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

242 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed