No, DeSantis isn't "winning" against Walt Disney World

Jeff:

How much financial regulation was reestablished because of the collective?

They inspired a generation of progressives and changed the way we talk about wealth inequality.

It never solidified around a specific set of demands, nor did it generate a concrete platform. There’s no significant flesh-and-bones organization to point to as its heir. And it never anointed a leadership team.

There’s a big problem with that conclusion, however: Occupy’s messaging just won’t go away. It permeates political discourse about the global economy. It has cemented notions of economic inequality squarely in D.C. policy debates. Ideas that were thought to be too socialist since the demise of the Eastern Bloc—class struggle, wealth distribution across social strata, or even flaws in the capitalist system—were suddenly aired loudly and frequently for the first time since the Great Depression.

https://time.com/6117696/oc...ars-later/

There's a lot more writing out there about their influence by people significantly more smart than me.

eightdotthree:

They inspired a generation of progressives and changed the way we talk about wealth inequality.

Who in turn haven't changed anything because those folks framed the argument wrong. Bernie Bros have been doing it ever since.

The problem with "wealth inequality" is that you can't define what's right, and that's mostly because income has a range of zero to infinity. So what's an appropriate top? And how do you make that argument so that people who have the money will self-impose change? The answer is that you won't.

But it's also because the argument comes from a place of unfairness, and the incorrect belief that rich people cause poor people. It's the tired CEO argument, which is really popular now with the Hollywood strikes. Rich CEO's and fairly paid writers and actors are not mutually exclusive. Diluting the executive pay means pennies extra for the line workers. That isn't logical, it's about feelings.

The better argument, which is boring and harder to get people to talk about, is to treat the disease instead of the symptoms. That means fair taxation. That moves toward resolving government debt, and a side effect is a smaller wealth gap. It means reinstating victims of deregulation like Glass-Steagall to reduce risk that ends up landing on consumers (the mortgage crisis).

It's no secret that I'm fairly liberal, and pro-labor, but Occupy did nothing positive. It had no cohesive voice, no specific demands.

It's the tired CEO argument,

We have found ways to clearly show this, and yes fair taxation, and structural changes, and also explaining to the right just how much "corporate socialism" there is would help explain the **** show we are all saddled with.

But when wages are flat since 1970, housing is up 30%, college is up 60%, and CEO salaries are now a multiple almost near 400x base worker pay. It is the biggest number shift, and when cost-cutting and corporate tax breaks eliminate thousands of jobs, its clearly the most ludicrous thing.

the incorrect belief that rich people cause poor people

Ummm Jeff, how exactly do you explain the wealth gap at its worst since the depression, two generations of Americans will now have less money than their parent's generation, yet the American billionaire list is multiplying, and 4-5 men are more valuable than about 15 million people in the world?

The problem with "wealth inequality" is that you can't define what's right

Ummm we all know what's about right, and what's disgusting at this point.

Why should any CEO be compensated over 1.5 million dollars?

Also let's not forget that the upper tax bracket under America's greatest prosperity, post WW2 until Kennedy cut them, was above $400,000 was 91%...

91%

Kennedy cut it to 70% in 64, let's take a guess who gutted it from the 70s to the 30s...

Then when you look at corporate and capital gains it looks even worse.

All of this (which admittedly, I just kind of glanced over before my eyes started glazing over) assumes that there is a finite amount of money on Earth.

The problem is that real wealth in this country for the last 40 years can only really be made on the stock market. Why are the rich getting richer? Investments. It’s not salary, and only people making enough to not need all their paychecks for consumption can even think about it. Then you need to somehow avoid all the scam artists, thieves and hucksters who try to sell you bad investments, and no one teaches you how.

Sharpel007:

5,000 or half of Disney's entire workforce

This number is so far off that...

...I don't know. Insert your own jokes.

Sorry, I was thinking of how many people they just axed, and how much he could give them as send off, but did not revise my numbers. Obviously, they employ about 200k+, 75k of which are in FL.

Also

The problem is that real wealth in this country for the last 40 years can only really be made on the stock market

See capital gains tax cut, compensating CEO's in stock, and stock buybacks used to be illegal before the 80s, but now they are spun as great.

Yeah but the stock market isn’t just benefiting CEOs, I’m not one and it is benefiting me. The stock market isn’t lifting the 1% it’s lifting the 20% and the thrifty below that.

Sharpel007:

how exactly do you explain the wealth gap at its worst since the depression

This lacks context. The gap has increased, but more people from the middle went up than down. By a lot. I'd look it up, but I'm on vacation.

Jeff:

It's no secret that I'm fairly liberal, and pro-labor, but Occupy did nothing positive. It had no cohesive voice, no specific demands.

I don't think that's an accurate portrayal. The cohesive voice was basically a modern "pro-labor" movement.

From The Atlantic: Occupy Wall Street Did More Than You Think

Occupy reintroduced organized protest to a generation that wasn't directly familiar with it, and decentralized and modernized it, without which perhaps BLM, #MeToo, Sunrise, etc., don't happen. It influenced legislation and helped elect progressives to the House, helping usher in the Green New Deal.

So while perhaps the initial Occupy protests didn't have a cohesive set of demands, their pro-labor voice was clear, and it has since turned into a pretty substantial pro-labor movement that has achieved further tangible pro-labor results, including higher wages for many workers, etc.

djDaemon:

pretty substantial pro-labor movement
That has spawned strong progressive politicians who are running for and winning important elections.

Here's another funny DeSantism.

At the end of March, Florida’s pension fund held more than 682,000 shares of AB InBev valued at the time at nearly $46 million. The company’s stock price has fallen since then from $66 a share to $58, though it’s still higher than its 52-week low of $44 from September 2022, which was well before the company’s recent controversies.

They held the stock when it was valued much lower but because "woke" he wants to sue. This is a bike fall meme if there ever was one.

Strong "we're all trying to find the guy who did this" vibes.

Vater:

All of this (which admittedly, I just kind of glanced over before my eyes started glazing over) assumes that there is a finite amount of money on Earth.

The is a finite amount of everything, that is one of the basic principles of economics. We are just shifting things around. Yes, I am aware you can just "print more" but it doesn't exactly work like that. 50-60 years ago I could happily work one job and have a house, vehicle, kid, and the wife could stay home. Now unless I am extremely lucky, or well off that isn't happening.

The depression ended and we transitioned into a strong period of growth and prosperity, income/corporate taxes were at their highest, along with being skewed heavily toward the very well off, and capital gains were almost at their highest. Now I get it paying taxes sucks, but what it did achieve was keeping the mega rich in check a bit (the goverment took less of it if you invested in your company and your workers than hoarding it for yourself), along with giving plenty of funding to public works and infrastructure projects, which allowed this country to be regarded as one of the best.

Now, we have a crumbling infrastructure, low taxes, low wages for the common workers, inflated housing and COL, and some of that is caused by corporations keeping prices high and created shortages as needed. Is this worth it so little bald Jeffy can fund his space ventures and take over more of the internet, or so Elon can mess around with buying random companies to play with? Up to you I suppose.

It appears that the generation who lived through this period of great prosperity is now in charge and changing the rules as needed to ensure they continue to prosper, and that they can suck up as much of the wealth as possible from future generations to enrich themselves now as much as possible and then when they are gone the rest of the world is left to figure it out.

TheMillenniumRider:

low taxes

wut

TheMillenniumRider:

50-60 years ago I could happily work one job and have a house, vehicle, kid, and the wife could stay home. Now unless I am extremely lucky, or well off that isn't happening.

Interesting. I'm neither extremely lucky nor well off, and I have a house, 3 vehicles, two kids, and my wife did stay home until a few years ago when she decided the kids were old enough that she could go back to work because she wanted to. Yeah, we're struggling a bit more right now because of the insane increase in cost of EVERYTHING...but we manage.

Also consider that 50-60 years ago families didn't buy subscriptions to everything on the planet either, like internet, streaming, cell phones, etc. They had one car and a single dumb TV with an antenna and 3 channels.

But do you wear flannel shirts?

I wish I could link that throwback, but I’ve been searching for 10 minutes and that’s enough.

Whoa, I don't even remember that...was that something that should be added to the meme thread?

Vater:

Interesting. I'm neither extremely lucky nor well off, and I have a house, 3 vehicles, two kids, and my wife did stay home until a few years ago

Must be nice, I looked at homes, mortgage costs more than rent, hoping for the market to fall apart so prices come back down to reality. I would love to pick apart the how and whys behind how you ended up where you did, but it would be too much detail to dole out for the interwebs.

Wish it was as simple as canceling subscriptions, but seeing as that would save me about $70/mo for internet/mobile/streaming. Probably not making much gain there.

I mean, I have a house, 3 vehicles, a daughter that’s going to college in the fall, and excessive amounts of musical equipment and Milwaukee power tools.

I’m not extremely lucky or well off, either.

Yesterday, I ate chili out of a can.

I didn't have to. I chose to.

I'm not extremely lucky or well off, either.