Sunday, November 6, 2011

Occupy Wall Street

I find it humerous that the occupy wall street crowd doesn't really know what to protest.  I personally believe the real heart of the issue is the envy.  Just listen to the lady in this interview.

You can just hear the buzz words in the background... Corportism, Un-Regulated Greed, & We Need Government to Protect Us.  What these people need to do is go back and read what Thomas Jefferson wrote in the delaration of independence. 

These people are angry because they are drowning in debt.  They lived a lifestyle that was beyond their means and now they are slaves to those who lent them the money (banks).  People need to realize that to wealth doesn't come from consumptions but from underconsumption.  Capitalism works and it works well, it's just that the current generation that doesn't have a clue what capitalism is. 

I don't know about you, but the "we are the 99%" signs make me sick.  If you make the average wage in Canada, $25/hr or $50,000/yr, you are in the top 5% in the world for income.  These people claim they are the 99%?  What these hypocrites really want is more money because they are the greedy and envious of those who have even more. 

Perhaps these people should voluntarily give up three quarters of their annual income for the real 95%?.... hmmm, I'm quite sure the average greedy, self indulgent, selfish wall street occupier wouldn't give up a dime.



  1. I find it interesting that many of the "20 something" year old protesters are the very people who's parents (the 50 and 60 yr olds)have benefited greatly from capitalism in North America. The boomers and their kids have lived very well off of strong capital markets in the 80's and 90's and off of cheap debt in the 2000's. It's interesting that many of the "hard done by 20 somethings" still occupy their parents homes, as life is good/easy at home.As you point out, we live a standard of living well in excess of most of the rest of the world and should be thankful. I am. I think some North Americans need to adjust their ideas of what normal consumption is. A $120/mo dataplan for your iphone (to surf facebook) and a daily visit to Starbucks is not a need but a want (works out to $5000+ pre-tax per yr). But that's the new "norm".

    The following admission by a occupy wallstreet protester sums up part of the problem (I'm paraphrashing as don't have a source link):

    " I guess they are the 1%, when we show up at 9:00am to protest, the bankers have already been in their offices since 7:30am. When we leave at 5:00pm the bankers are still working "

    However,I do support some of the issues at hand:
    - executive pay is out of hand. especially with most CEO's have all upside and no downside (few own large blocks of stock in the company they manage).
    - excess bonuses not linked to per share added economic value.
    - excessive leverage through esoteric products.
    - weak boards of directors.

    That being said, capitalism works. We just need to adjust the balance a little better.

    Andre DesRoches

  2. "wealth doesn't come from consumptions but from underconsumption" I like that-very well said. . So, what do u think of BAC and the latest stock swap?

  3. Hi Settembrini,

    You mean the note in the 10q about swapping preferred shares for 400 million shares or $3 billion in debt?

    Doesn't mean anything to earnings power of BAC per share. The quantity of 400 million shares really isn't much, 3.5% of shares outstanding. BAC has bought back 500 million shares this year but most of that likely offset shares issued to mgmt.

    The news is blowing it out of proportion. When I emailed the guy from the globe and mail about what he wrote, he admitted to not even reading the 10q but got his info from Bloomberg.

    BAC has about two more quarters before they are in a much better position from a capital perspective. I will post something on the banks in the next little while.