Let's say 'the 99%' prevail over Corporations and Govt...

[TTkickedin]

Ok, lets say one day post 2012, the 99% take over and end all corporations and end government causing the 1%

No more Government aid
No loans
No industries
No money circulation
No more products being made
No manufacture of cars
No police
No court system
Everything that was previously illegal is now legal
Everything the government has control over is now under no control
No credit
All corporations are shut down completely
Small businesses too, they rely on products made by corporations for the most part, (raw materials)

What would happen, Really? Curious to see some legitimate responses to this question.

[zacmil]

Ok, lets say one day post 2012, the 99% take over and end all corporations and end government causing the 1%

Umm... I don't think that's really what anyone involved with the whole Occupy Wall Street thing was really advocating.

What would happen, Really? Curious to see some legitimate responses to this question.

But since you asked...

It was more about addressing a perceived "incumbency of wealth" (thank you for the phrase, John Stewart). The whole point was to try and bring about change so that those who have tons of money don't have an unfair advantage; it was really all about creating an environment where everyone has the opportunity to live the American Dream. No one really advocated the ending of all corporations and no one advocated the end of government--if anything this would really require what is generally referred to as "more government" due to an increase in regulation and social welfare efforts.

Essentially, the real goal was all about separating money/business from politics. The complaint is that politicians are often wealthy people who rely on donations from wealthy corporations, individuals, or other entities in order to run an election campaign. This creates a situation where the politician is sort of indebted to the donor(s). Because of this, the argument is that our system is full of regulations, loopholes, and procedures that favor the wealthy. Furthermore, one could make the argument that our government is neither accessible nor responsible to the average citizen.

This is, of course, simply my perception. This is what I felt was at the heart of the whole occupy movement once you threw out all the crazies.

Also...

No more Government aid
No loans
No industries
No money circulation
No more products being made
No manufacture of cars
No police
No court system
Everything that was previously illegal is now legal
Everything the government has control over is now under no control
No credit
All corporations are shut down completely
Small businesses too, they rely on products made by corporations for the most part, (raw materials)

you've just described a Libertarian
(just kidding)

[frapjap]

[TTkickedin]

Well i never really did understand what they wanted, until after i read their 'list of greivances.' And saw what kind of a mess they made in dewey sq. (Occupy Boston.) I had some respect for them after reading it (after i posted.)

Then i read the part that wanted to give the EPA more control, and i was like O.o you serious? and lost all respect.

They're the ones that helped block the importation of cars and make it so much harder on car owners. Them, and the DOT, can go die.

Anyway, so now that you actually illustrated for the most part of what I read (except the EPA part, f*** EPA,) with the actual proposed agenda for the OWS crew, what if it did go through in its entireity? I'm just looking for a little speculation here, nothing more or less.

[frapjap]

or this. I'm undecided.

[themadscientist]

They can't so the question is merely entertaining. You are owned wholly by your corporate masters and their paid muscle, politicians. Nothing short of a BTMFD event will shake us loose from the shackles that have been slowly slipped over our wrists and ratcheted shut.

This post has been brought to you by Monsanto, destroying natural farming and pushing genetically-altered super seeds on you for decades. Enjoy!

[zacmil]

Well i never really did understand what they wanted, until after i read their 'list of greivances.' And saw what kind of a mess they made in dewey sq. (Occupy Boston.) I had some respect for them after reading it (after i posted.)

Yeah, I think that sort of thing happens a lot. I know that I've been guilty on more than one occasion of forming an opinion and not really having all the facts. That's why I'm kind of picky when it comes to news sources, it really is hard (in my opinion) to find good, solid reporting these days.

Then i read the part that wanted to give the EPA more control, and i was like O.o you serious? and lost all respect.

They're the ones that helped block the importation of cars and make it so much harder on car owners. Them, and the DOT, can go die.

I do think that we need an agency with the power to develop some effective and realistic ways to address some of the environmental issues we're facing. I believe, however, that the EPA, as with many facets of our government, sort of misses the point. Who cares how a problem is addressed (assuming, of course, that there are no violations of human rights, civil liberties, etc.) as long as the desired result is achieved? I get what you're saying about the EPA though, and I sort of agree.

Anyway, so now that you actually illustrated for the most part of what I read (except the EPA part, f*** EPA,) with the actual proposed agenda for the OWS crew, what if it did go through in its entireity? I'm just looking for a little speculation here, nothing more or less.

If most (or even some) of the OWS philosophy did have some impact on policy, I would be thrilled. As I'm sure you realized from my earlier post, I support most of what was at the core of the OWS agenda. If we were to separate the money from politics, I believe that government would become more accessible to the average citizen. It may become more realistic for a person from an average blue-collar background to become involved in politics, which would introduce a new perspective to our government. I believe it's always good to have a new perspective, and we could see a new wave of ideas that would enable our society to continue to grow and experience the good fortune to which we've all become accustomed.

[TTkickedin]

[zacmil]

They can't so the question is merely entertaining.

I'm afraid I have to disagree. I believe that this mentality (and I do realize you were just being facetious) is what holds us back from any change. The idea that things operate a certain way simply because of human nature or the way a system is designed keeps us from ever trying to make something better. If people were to realize that society is what we make it, we could begin to address the social inequalities that were the central issues of the OWS movement.

[carloslebaron]

About the first question in this topic, I guess that I will be used my gun very often trying to protect myself from others who will try to rule the area because won't be an authority to control it.

I guess the cities will become desert areas very fast, because people will escape to rural places looking for food.

The total chaos will carry epidemic situations that will kill millions.

Of course, This an apocaliptic scenario is because you have mentioned "no police, no court system, etc". but having the 99% organized in cooperatives, working together to exchange goods, contracting security, hiring lawyers and appointing judges, etc, etc...I guess that the 1% can go to hell and no one will care...

[C-Kwik]

About the first question in this topic, I guess that I will be used my gun very often trying to protect myself from others who will try to rule the area because won't be an authority to control it.

I guess the cities will become desert areas very fast, because people will escape to rural places looking for food.

The total chaos will carry epidemic situations that will kill millions.

Of course, This an apocaliptic scenario is because you have mentioned "no police, no court system, etc". but having the 99% organized in cooperatives, working together to exchange goods, contracting security, hiring lawyers and appointing judges, etc, etc...I guess that the 1% can go to hell and no one will care...

Where the hell do you get this stuff? This one is really out there...even for you.

[carloslebaron]

Where the hell do you get this stuff? This one is really out there...even for you.

Said what? I have read clearly the title of this topic and it says: "Let's say 'the 99%...." I think that the topic is about a hypothetical situation.

[C-Kwik]

Where the hell do you get this stuff? This one is really out there...even for you.

Said what? I have read clearly the title of this topic and it says: "Let's say 'the 99%...." I think that the topic is about a hypothetical situation.

I apologize. I read your post as what would happen if the "99%" had their way.