The 99 percent blog - aka lots of gems

[The Great Catpiss]

Originally Posted by willis

i agree, i just think it's disingenius for them to pretend like nobody knew these were bad loans they were making. they made bad loans knowing they were bad loans and yet somehow we're on the hook to fix their mistake? it's the same idea as me taking the bad loan then asking the bank to fix my mistake just on different scales obviously.

Quite a few people should be jailed for some of the offenses that went on.

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

Quite a few people should be jailed for some of the offenses that went on.

Which brings us to this....


Bill O'Reilly, Tavis Smiley And Cornel West Have Fiery Clash Over Wall Street, Poverty

[thatguyoverthere]

Interesting pair of articles analyzing this tumblr. It might be of limited use understanding the whole movement, because there are people who are taking part in the protests but not posting on this blog. Still, it's an interesting look at the data and helps to gain a little insight:

Parsing the Data and Ideology of the We Are 99% Tumblr | Rortybomb

One of the most fascinating things to come out of the current We Are 99%/Occupy Wall Street protests is the We Are 99% Tumblr. At the site, people hold up signs that explain their current circumstances, and it tells the story of a whole range of Americans struggling in the Lesser Depression. It is highly recommended.

DATA

The site features pictures of individuals holding their signs, and occasionally the tumblr reproduces the text of the signs themselves underneath the image as html text. Sometimes the text under the image is blank, sometimes it is a different message, but often it is the sign itself.

In order to get a slightly better empirical handle on this important tumblr, I created a script designed to read all of the pages and parse out the html text on the site. It doesn’t read the images (can anyone in the audience automate calls to an OCR?), just the html text. After collecting all the text on all the pages, the code then goes through it to try to find interesting points.

It’s a fun exercise, pointing out things I wouldn’t have seen otherwise. For instance, I found this adorable little rascal, pictured below, mucking up the algorithm, as the first version of the code assumed all the ages would have two digits. I found that he, and the sign his mom made for him as a confessional to her son, hit me a ton harder than any of the more direct signs of despair in this economy:

Going through the ~1,000 entries in the tumblr, here is the distribution of ages that I was able to generate:

Given that we assume tumblr and webcams are technologies of the young, the age distribution has a higher tail end than I had expected. There were two major clusters – people around 20 and people around 27, each with their own major concerns.

What were the most frequent words? We ate up all the words across all text and came up with the following list:


“Of Interest” is my call–I removed all the pronouns and other words that occur frequently but didn’t get at the chief concerns of the 99%. The major words are jobs and debt, as a quick glance of the site would show. The ability to make it month to month shows up here more than on the glance, with “pay”, “afford”, “rent”, “food” and “bills” right underneath the big items.

Student debt is a meta-concern, but what are the others? Scanning, I totaled four major categories. Here is the number of individual entry texts that flagged each, and the search terms to grab them:

“Children” has a few false positives in it (“It used to be my dream to help disabled children…”), but only a few. Student loans are an overwhelming presence, but it often has the same terms repeated and giant dollar figures next to them so it sticks with you. For all the people indentured with student loans there are almost as many worried about how they are going to take care of their kids.

Scanning the entire text, what is equally interesting is what is missing. There’s no signs of a luxury fever or cascading consumption heading downhill. These aren’t the signs of people envious of their peers going off to the high-end financial sector and then getting bailed out. The only time luxuries are mentioned are in a mode of denial (“We do not own HD TVs, expensive automobiles, use cable TV, or indulge in other..”). The only time unions are mentioned are in retreat and defeat (“No union”, “threatend [sic] by funding cuts and union busting”). So how to theorize this?

IDEOLOGY

So if the 99% Tumblr was a PAC, what would its demands look like, and what ideology would it presuppose? Freddie DeBoer is discouraged after reading the 99% tumblr. He’s concerned it reflects a desire for restoration of the glory days of the 90s-00s, which concerns him because “this country cannot be fixed by wishing to go back to the economics of 2005.” Concerned that the solidarity is one that, at most, is a I-got-mine-you-go-get-yours form of neoliberalism (as he imagines it, “I went to college and I don’t have the job and the car and the lifestyle I was promised”), DeBoer is worried that We Are the 99% isn’t “a rejection of our failing order. It is an embrace of it in the most cynical terms.”

With all due respect to DeBoer, the demands I found aren’t the ones of the go-go 90s-00s, but instead far more ancient cry, one of premodernity and antiquity.

Let’s bring up a favorite quote around here. Anthropologist David Graeber cites historian Moses Finley, who identified “the perennial revolutionary programme of antiquity, cancel debts and redistribute the land, the slogan of a peasantry, not of a working class.” And think through these cases. The overwhelming majority of these statements are actionable demands in the form of (i) free us from the bondage of these debts and (ii) give us a bare minimum to survive on in order to lead decent lives (or, in pre-Industrial terms, give us some land). In Finley’s terms, these are the demands of a peasantry, not a working class.

The actual ideology of modernity, broadly speaking, is absent. There isn’t the affluenza of Freddie’s worries, no demands for cheap gas, cheaper credit, giant houses, bigger electronics all under the cynical ”Ownership Society” banner. The demands are broadly health care, education and not to feel exploited at the high-level, and the desire to not live month-to-month on bills, food and rent and under less of the burden of debt at the practical level.

The people in the tumblr aren’t demanding to bring democracy into the workplace via large-scale unionization, much less shorter work days and more pay. They aren’t talking the language of mid-twentieth century liberalism, where everyone puts on blindfolds and cuts slices of pie to share. The 99% looks too beaten down to demand anything as grand as “fairness” in their distribution of the economy. There’s no calls for some sort of post-industrial personal fulfillment in their labor – very few even invoke the idea that a job should “mean something.” It’s straight out of antiquity – free us from the bondage of our debts and give us a basic ability to survive.

It’s awful that it has come to this, but it also is an opportunity. As was discussed in the monetary debate from earlier, creditors aren’t bosses; their power is less coercive and much more obviously based on socially-constructed fictions, laws and ideas. As Peter Frase pointed out:

Indeed, widespread and large debt loads are one of the most important ways in which my generation differs from those that immediately preceded it…This has direct implications for the left: more than once, older comrades have noted to me that it has become much more difficult to live in the kind of bohemian poverty that sustained an earlier generation of young radicals and activists…

And there may be some advantages to a politics centered around debt rather than wage labor. The problem confronting the wage laborer is that they are, in fact, dependent on the boss for their sustenance, unless they can solve the collective action problem of getting everyone together to expropriate the expropriators. Debt, on the other hand, is just an agreed-upon social fiction denoting an obligation for some act of consumption that has already occurred. The only way to make people respect debt is through some combination of brute force and ideological legitimacy–a legitimacy that we can only hope is starting to slip away.

Upon reflection, it is very obvious where the problems are. There’s no universal health care to handle the randomness of poor health. There’s no free higher education to allow people to develop their skills outside the logic and relations of indentured servitude. Our bankruptcy code has been rewritten by the top 1% when instead, it needs to be a defense against their need to shove inequality-driven debt at populations. And finally, there’s no basic income guaranteed to each citizen to keep poverty and poor circumstances at bay.

We have piecemeal, leaky versions of each of these in our current liberal social safety net. Having collated all these responses, I think completing these projects should be the ultimate goal of the 99%.

(Update: 25 Most Frequently Appearing Words graphic has been updated and corrected; job(s) was originally reported as 201, not the correct 272. Merging job and jobs put unemployed at #25, with 31 mentions.)

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by thatguyoverthere

Interesting pair of articles analyzing this tumblr. It might be of limited use understanding the whole movement, because there are people who are taking part in the protests but not posting on this blog. Still, it's an interesting look at the data and helps to gain a little insight:

Parsing the Data and Ideology of the We Are 99% Tumblr | Rortybomb

I love journalism where they take data and actually crunch it and create information. They are telling us something useful based on real data. Not on anecdotal evidence or individual perceptions. Real, objective stuff.

[stolz25]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

I love journalism where they take data and actually crunch it and create information. They are telling us something useful based on real data. Not on anecdotal evidence or individual perceptions. Real, objective stuff.

Did you read his conclusions? It's as if he doesn't realize the US already has a 3 trillion budget deficit.

Upon reflection, it is very obvious where the problems are. There’s no universal health care to handle the randomness of poor health. There’s no free higher education to allow people to develop their skills outside the logic and relations of indentured servitude. Our bankruptcy code has been rewritten by the top 1% when instead, it needs to be a defense against their need to shove inequality-driven debt at populations. And finally, there’s no basic income guaranteed to each citizen to keep poverty and poor circumstances at bay.

Any single one of these things he mentions as obvious solutions are absolutely ridiculous to expect a government already so far in the whole it's comical to pay for.

[The Great Catpiss]

I'd like to see some level of universal health care.

[stolz25]

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

I'd like to see some level of universal health care.

I'd like to see how you plan to pay for it.

[The Great Catpiss]

Originally Posted by stolz25

I'd like to see how you plan to pay for it.

Taxes

[stolz25]

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

Taxes

Taxes fail to fund the current programs, by a wide margin. And I think you are underestimating what it would cost. This is medicare times five.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by stolz25

Taxes fail to fund the current programs, by a wide margin. And I think you are underestimating what it would cost. This is medicare times five.

we are already paying for it. Just through a haphazard network of insurance premiums, state and federal taxes and charitable giving.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by stolz25

Did you read his conclusions? It's as if he doesn't realize the US already has a 3 trillion budget deficit.



Any single one of these things he mentions as obvious solutions are absolutely ridiculous to expect a government already so far in the whole it's comical to pay for.

He is not proposing solutions, he is pointing out the problems. You have to understand root cause first and then start to think about the right solutions.

[The Great Catpiss]

Originally Posted by stolz25

Taxes fail to fund the current programs, by a wide margin. And I think you are underestimating what it would cost. This is medicare times five.

First of all, I mentioned "a certain level of health care". It implies a certain minimum level. Of course people will bitch that that level isn't enough. People can still get insurance for other things. Most of us already pay for insurance.

Lou is partially right. It's shouldn't go up much more than what we currently pay. Unfortunately our government has it's flaws. Since the government would become involved, it would likely become inefficient causing what we pay to maybe double.

Bump everyone's taxes up at least 10%

Use my proposed tax structure
Flat tax rate: Everyone pays with no deductions
+
Temporary Tax rate: Everyone pays with no deductions (may be progressive). This rate goes up and down based on government spending.
+
Progressive Tax to keep people happy. Deductions may come out of this

I'm sure you hate my idea, but I think it would eventually lead to lower taxes as people feel the repercussions for their spending.

[Donkey®]

[The Great Catpiss]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

I wouldn't bring my kid around those hippy freak anarchist mob punk nutjobs. What a terrible mother.

[The Esteemed Gentleman]

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

I wouldn't bring my kid around those hippy freak anarchist mob punk nutjobs. What a terrible mother.

[stolz25]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

we are already paying for it. Just through a haphazard network of insurance premiums, state and federal taxes and charitable giving.

No, you aren't, that's the thing. The vast majority of people get their health insurance through their work, and the employer pays most of the premiums. The average person probably doesn't have the slightest clue what their total premium costs. And you don't pay taxes on your medical payments, or even your prescriptions if you do it right. Neither does your employer.

Average family health insurance policy: $13,375, up 5% - USATODAY.com

This is old, but it gets to my point. Now, some of that is going to profit of course, but you can be sure if the government was running it that money would get spent in the form of higher wages and benefits for employees, and general waste.

At that point the government has two options, charge the people getting the policy the portion that employers were formerly paying, but of course people are going to wonder why their medical insurance just jumped by 10 times a month, or tax.

[stolz25]

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

First of all, I mentioned "a certain level of health care". It implies a certain minimum level. Of course people will bitch that that level isn't enough. People can still get insurance for other things. Most of us already pay for insurance.

Lou is partially right. It's shouldn't go up much more than what we currently pay. Unfortunately our government has it's flaws. Since the government would become involved, it would likely become inefficient causing what we pay to maybe double.

The people who do not have health insurance likely cannot afford to pay what it currently costs.

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

Bump everyone's taxes up at least 10%

Use my proposed tax structure
Flat tax rate: Everyone pays with no deductions
+
Temporary Tax rate: Everyone pays with no deductions (may be progressive). This rate goes up and down based on government spending.
+
Progressive Tax to keep people happy. Deductions may come out of this

I'm sure you hate my idea, but I think it would eventually lead to lower taxes as people feel the repercussions for their spending.

I don't know what you think this tax system would do. When it came time to raise taxes, which of those brackets do you think will be getting the raises? The point is to make everyone feel the pain when taxes are raised to increase spending, but you are creating a system where they can raise only one section of it, as they do now.

[The Great Catpiss]

Originally Posted by stolz25

The people who do not have health insurance likely cannot afford to pay what it currently costs.

And those costs get averaged into our costs and taxes.

[The Great Catpiss]

Originally Posted by stolz25

I don't know what you think this tax system would do.

The goal is to make people feel the reprecussions of government spending. I could probably go into more detail.

Originally Posted by stolz25

When it came time to raise taxes, which of those brackets do you think will be getting the raises?

If it's a long term fixed increase, then it should probably be split into the flat tax and the progressive tax which should affect everyone. If it is a temporary measure, then it should fall in the temporary increase which affects everyone.

Originally Posted by stolz25

The point is to make everyone feel the pain when taxes are raised to increase spending, but you are creating a system where they can raise only one section of it, as they do now.

You are assuming that. Perhaps there would be a rule that the flat tax must revenues match at least 40% of the progressive tax revenues. Some economist could probably figure out a good ratio.

The tax system today is terrible, and most solutions I've seen are improbable or worse.

[stolz25]

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

And those costs get averaged into our costs and taxes.

I think you misunderstood me. I mean that many people who are currently have health insurance through their employer couldn't afford if it they had to pay the bill.

However, again, I think you are greatly underestimating the cost.