OWS: "You may be passionate but it is not enough to resolve the crisis"

Some dude from the UK put it best, and I think every American should be embarrassed of this.  Education is the best start to figuring out a solution, not just protesting with a vague list of demands.  The wealthy know that the middle class and poor are dumb about money and the economy (and it's true).  Once we figure this out, we can have an intelligent conversation about this and find solutions.  In the meantime, I'm getting back to work. 

This is taken from the comments section of the article "Here's What the Wall Street Protesters Are So Angry About," in reference to a slew of charts depicting what the OWS are protesting (even though they don't really know it?) 

Jatin Luthia · Ealing, United Kingdom

Though the data is correct, the context of analysis is definitely incorrect. American labor has been winning compared to the rest of the world for a long time. The current disparity has largely risen from the fact that while capital has largely stayed in the US and labor has partially equalised over the rest of the world. Bear in mind though that wages in India and China are indeed less. With businesses getting more complex and global, CEOs are likely to get paid more (Though some amounts are obnoxious). It is businesses job to be competitive and make profits and it is labor's job to be competitive. If it is too costly to hire someone, economics will dictate that labor will move elsewhere. If wall street protests do make wall street dysfunctional, then capital will move away too and it will just be a double-whammy for labor as capital is a very competitive resource that US has especially as the Dollar holds out as a currency of choice. Such simplistic graphs and comments distort long-term economic realities and the result of years of trade and labour barriers followed by the developed world. Once the barriers started lifting, economic reality became different. I think more people need to understand economics than simply blame capital as capital has no direct social commitment. Its commitment to society is more indirect and derivative.

Reply ·  1 · Like · Follow Post · 15 hours ago

• Henry Harvey
  So what you're saying is that it's the job of business to be competitive and make profit, even if it means throwing out of work the people that live in the country where that business originated.
  
  
  The inherent unfairness in globalization is that a company can relocate whereas I can't realistically move my family to another country.
  
  
  I don't think one could be seen as opposed to capital per se if the wish is only to see a situation in which the people who manage corporations invest capital in the countries and the people who have helped them to get so rich and powerful.
  
  
  Much of the rage in the Occupy Wall Street movement comes from the realization that the multinational corporations and the financial institutions are selling us short, both literally and figuratively.
  Reply ·  1 · Like · 11 hours ago
  
  
  
• Jatin Luthia · Ealing, United Kingdom
  Henry Harvey Your comments are not economically driven. I am saying what incents each section of business. It is definitely the job of business to be competitive and make profits. Origination of business is very relative. Most American conglomerates earn more revenues overseas. How do you define "Origination"? Incorporation is not sufficient to define origination. You may be passionate but it is not enough to resolve the crisis. I think a matured response combining passion, economics and politics would be more useful. Otherwise, it may sound like irrational rabble-rousing and leave the US insular and lagging. The key to success of the US economy has been its adaptability.
  Reply · Like · 6 hours ago