TO THE MARINE:
I'm an American-Canadian, and have family in both countries. Being a marine might have taught you a lot, but not necessarily much about Canada. This country sells the U.S. more oil than any other nation on Earth, by far. It is more deeply enmeshed with the American economy than any other nation. Americans get more legal perks here than citizens of any other nation. And importantly, Canada weathered the economic collapse WAY better than did the States.

And yet you find it troubling that a critique of the current economic system started here? Like you can't even begin to accept wisdom that doesn't come from an American mouth?

Sometimes it's really disturbing to see the narrow kind of patriotism that says only America can offer anything of value. Americans pay more than anyone in the world for healthcare, and yet rank something like 37th in health-care outcomes. Americans hold more wealth than any other nation and yet the standard of living there ranks behind Canada's (and well behind the standard of living enjoyed by many northern European nations). Maybe, just MAYBE, it's time to look to the rest of the world to see what's working out there, and what's not, and learn from it?
Americans have always been innovators, but they've also too often been bullheaded in their unwillingness to accept that they aren't the only ones with good ideas.

Try to be a good neighbor, and what you'll find is a whole lot of people who want Americans to succeed, who want to work cooperatively for a better, shared future. We are in this together, so stop acting like you can go it alone -- you can't; the global-economy is already here.

Now about your service in the Marines: I typically disagree with the wars America wages, but so what, you the soldiers don't get to make those decisions; you still give your all, risk your lives, and get so little in return, all with the faith that service to corps and country will make the world a better place. That kind of dedication and selfless-sacrifice is an example to us all. Thank you!

All due respect to a fellow veteran. The TARP money to the banks was a loan - not a bailout, which requires the banks to repay the money with interest to the government.

The banks, once they had our treasury money in their hands, did what...? They paid themselves bonuses for their stellar efforts in nearly causing a worldwide financial collapse. What kind of people do this?

Bottom line... it's the banks. Not the government. The 99%-ers are right on the mark.

Right now, the banks and large businesses are hoarding cash, and are not lending to business or investing at a rate that would make even the slightest dent in an economic recovery. This is all by design.

Rich businessmen and bankers (all republicans) are in lock step with McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor - whose only objective is to make Obama fail, and thus be a one-term president.

In order to do this, they are deliberately manipulating the economy so that it will not recover before the 2012 elections... all at OUR expense.

I have no use for any bank, business, or politician who uses the American people as sacrificial lambs for the sole purpose of pushing a selfish, greedy agenda to put their paid cronies back in power.

Republicans brought us to this dance. I haven't forgotten this, and neither have the 99%-ers.

Our entire future is at stake, which is why we need to pay close attention and stop allowing ourselves to be influenced by people with an agenda.

Ask yourself, the next time you hear a proposition like, "...reduce Medicare benefits"...

"Is it good for the country?"

Good post Marine.

I live in Canada. Here's my thoughts on OWS movement. I support what they are doing. Like you I believe the problem lies more with our governmnets (G20 governments in particular). I'd love to get some feedback from you on my thoughts.

Agreement needs to be reached about the PURPOSE of the movement - if support for the movement is to be consolidated and if real progress is to be made.

I've no doubt that the purpose relates to the loss of democratic control over our governments - which have become preoccupied with imposing POLICY agendas rather than with upholding fundamental PRINCIPLES ..

.. What is more, if the serious failings of government institutions were to be fixed .. then the problems with Wall Street and related groups would inevitably be brought under control.

Focusing on Wall Street without looking at the deeper failures in government that allowed Wall Street to go so badly wrong would be a mistake, because it would not fix the underlying problems.

The preoccupation of those in government with IMPOSING partisan policy agendas has led to the most vital institutions of government act in ways that are in direct opposition to the fundamental purpose OF GOVERNMENT:

- That fundamental purpose OF GOVERNMENT relates to PRINCIPLES rather than POLICIES ..

.. and THE core purpose of government is connected very directly with upholding the principle of fundamental justice.

That principle dictates that no person or institution will act in any way that violates the fundamental rights and just interests of ANY other person.

That is, the core purpose OF GOVERNMENT is to uphold the principles of fundamental justice - equally and for every single citizen.

.

I believe that the widespread support for the OWS movement comes from a feeling among many that the movement is seeking some fundamental change in the way in which our society "works" ..

.. so as to restore the principle of fundamental justice to its proper place as THE PRINCIPLE that guides and controls our society .. and to get government to do its essential job in upholding that principle .. as the institution with the duty to uphold that PRINCIPLE .. and to prevent the doing of harm by any person or party in our society.

Effectively, the movement draws its support from the perception that it is more concerned with correcting the deeper failings in government that allowed Wall Street to go so seriously wrong in the first place, than with the failings in Wall Street itself.

.. Put another way, support for the OWS movement arises from the fact that many believe or hope that it is directed by a commitment to restore the principle of fundamental justice to a proper place in our society ..

.. and that the movement, in seeking to move towards that principle, is dedicated to bringing about essential changes in the most critical institutions in our society that have a duty to uphold that principle .. the institutions of government - which have increasingly strayed from THEIR most essential purpose:

.. of protecting the rights and just interests of every citizen against the self-serving desires of those who want to bias the rules of society so as to create privileges for themselves.

In effect, I believe that the OWS movement gets its support from the fact that the movement is seen:

.. to stand behind the PRINCIPLE that governments must protect the rights and just interests of every citizen against the potential for abuse by any other citizen..

.. and to undo any POLICY, programme or regulation that would compels any citizen to provide unjust privileges or benefits to any other.

More narrowly, the OWS movement gets its support from the sense that it is attempting to take back democratic control of the vital institutions of government.

That is, the movement draws a great deal of its support from the perception that it is concerned with the fact that those who occupy positions of public trust have lost their legitimacy ..

.. by abusing the immense powers of the public offices that they hold so as to impose partisan POLICY agendas that grant privileges to the members of certain sub-groups in society ...

.. through the imposition of statutes, regulations and practices that grant privileges to some, at the expense of the rights of others..

..

And the hope that lies behind the support for the movement comes from the perception that it is intent on trying to find ways to ensure that governments take all necessary steps to uphold the PRINCIPLE of fundamental justice equally and for all.

That said, the embryonic support for the OWS movement comes from a sense that the PURPOSE OF THE MOVEMENT is to take back control of our government and its institutions ..

.. so that governments begin to do their most essential job - begin to live up to THEIR actual purpose - of PROTECTING the rights of each and every citizen.

So, if the PURPOSE OF THE MOVEMENT was to be articulated along the lines of taking back control of OUR governments from those who have perverted institutions that are essential to the operation of a sound and civil society, that would attract much deeper and wider support ..

.. enough support, one might hope, that it would create sufficient pressure to force those who occupy positions of public trust within the vital institutions of government .. to act in accordance with the actual purpose of their positions within the overall purpose of government - and so move towards restoring the legitimacy of governments:

.. by putting PRINCIPLE ahead of POLICY;

.. and by protecting the rights and just interests of every citizen.

If the PURPOSE OF THE MOVEMENT was to be concisely articulated – along the lines of the above - I believe that that would serve to consolidate support for the movement - and enhance the role of the movement as an effective agent of essential change.

Once a clear statement of PURPOSE is articulated it would then be possible to move on to discussing policies and prescriptions for achieving that PURPOSE.

Without the clear statement of of such a uniting PURPOSE, it would be impossible to evaluate any of the many policies and prescriptions that might be proposed by those who are associated with the movement . or who might want to use the movement to their own ends.

It is necessary to articulate the PURPOSE.