Occupy Wall Street Continues Amid Violent Clashes With Police

The Occupy Wall Street movement has swept the nation recently. With occupations in countless cities, the news updates have been relentless. More likely than not you have read articles, op-eds, blogs, or watched videos online about the movement. Of course, some have been critical of those involved with Occupy Wall Street, while others have shown blind support. Yet, nobody can deny that there have been blatant displays of intimidation and violence unleashed against occupiers. It began with the now infamous video of the young women being pepper sprayed while they were barricaded in by police and posed no threat. Keep in mind that pepper spray registers higher on the Schoville Index than the hottest pepper on the planet. Then, police in Oakland raided the occupy camp there with tear gas and rubber bullets. An armed services veteran was shot in the head with a tear gas canister and was put in a coma as a result. Next, protesters engaging in civil disobedience at UC-Davis were beaten and repeatedly doused with pepper-spray. The escalation of violent tactics by police to remove what has been a non-violent protest is alarming. In almost all cases, there have been no apparent threats posed by the individuals being brutalized who have assembled simply to express their First Amendment rights.

The First Amendment to the Bill of Rights guarantees the right to peaceably assemble. It seems the protesters have done their part, so it is unnerving to see such hostility from police forces. In terms of the Constitution, the sides have been split on whether the First Amendment guarantee to assemble has limits. A Federal judge in New York has ruled that protesters in Zucotti Park, the home of the movement, had the right to assemble but did not have the right to camp out or even have certain structures or amenities. Since this ruling, there appears to be a concerted effort nationwide to eradicate occupiers and cripple the movement. Some have gone so far as to accuse municipal leaders of cross country collusion claiming that the leaders are sharing ideas on how to best remove the crowds.

If this is the case then the message being spread seems clear: Intimidate protesters with a display of power, erase all traces of the occupiers (using force when necessary), and black out the media coverage. These tactics seem popular as details pop up in citizen journalist reports and videos across the country. It is not difficult to understand why. Simply put, these tactics have produced results. Protesters have had to flee several encampments over the past few weeks. A lot of progress made by occupiers was also eliminated and morale took a hit momentarily. However, the Occupy movement has also noticed a sort-of positive consequence from the violence towards them as more and more supporters turn out to stand in solidarity. The question that remains is clear: Are these actions justified? And, if so, are they effective in the long-term.

In the argument for the justification of violent police tactics the lines are black and white. If there is a clear threat of danger to the lives of the police officers or occupiers then one could excuse harsh tactics. The problem with that is that the Occupy Wall Street movement has been mostly non-violent. The use of force to evict non-violent protesters is extreme and is often used under authoritarian regimes abroad. The scenes from the initial police raid in Oakland had the feel of a scene from the Arab Spring uprisings in the Middle East in early 2011. With no apparent end in sight for the Occupy movement and no signs of peaceful co-existence between police and occupiers on the horizon, these scenes will only grow in number. should municipalities decide to ratchet up their efforts, the displays of power by police forces will only become even more brutal and violent as their desperation grows.

With instances of violence becoming more and more pronounced, it is unclear how effective these tactics are in the long term. In the short term the results are immediate as panicked crowds disperse and re-group elsewhere. Despite the initial success by police to remove protesters, the movement has continued and even gained strength in some parts of the country. Each incidence of violence puts the story of the Occupy movement on the nightly news, as well as every newspaper each morning. As the story of the movement and the subsequent violence spreads comes the increasing support of Americans who are sympathetic to the cause. Eventually, without any other deterrence, the movement will grow to the point where it cannot be contained. Already, Occupy Wall Street has sparked a national debate about the current political environment. Occupy has even influenced Bank of America's decision to redact the $5 monthly fee it planned to charge for its debit cards.

As the movement becomes more and more relevant, it would appear that the long-term effects of police brutality do little to deter occupiers and, in some cases, it can bolster their numbers. With that said, the fact still remains that unarmed, non-violent citizens are being beaten and are enduring chemical warfare simply for expressing their First Amendment rights. It is time to return to true American values and stop the imitation of often maligned authoritarian figures. The Constitution was written to enable these kinds of protests. It is a slap in the face to our forefathers to do anything but keep these liberties protected. A step in the opposite direction is a step towards authoritarianism.

Did Hydraulic Fracturing Cause The Earthquakes in Oklahoma?

Oklahoma is accustomed to brutal weather. Anybody who has spent time in the south knows the ferocity of a tornado ripping across the arid terrain. Yet, it wasn't a twister that had the Sooner State on edge Saturday. A few minutes past 3 AM ET a 4.7 magnitude earthquake shook Oklahoma and the surrounding states. According to CNN.com, up to 30 smaller aftershocks followed thoughout the day. Then, just before 12 AM ET, another 5.6 magnitude quake shook residents once again. Most "Okies" woke up expecting an action-packed day on the gridiron, but ended the day on a most unusual note.

It's not that earthquakes are uncommon in Oklahoma, but rather the size of the two large initial quakes and the third that followed a day later. The easiest explanation for this seismic occurance is that it is natural geological activity along the New Madrid Fault Line. After all, the fault line is ancient and is famous for having produced a series of thousands of quakes over a period of 5 months in the early 1800s. Even with this simple, scientific explanation at hand others have pointed to a cause that is man-made. I am of course referring to hydraulic fracturing.

Hydraulic Fracturing, "fracking" in short, is the process of drilling for natural gas. The process consists of physically drilling deep into the earth and the bedrock. A solution of salt-water and chemicals is pumped into the bedrock to break it apart. The natural gas stored in pockets in the bedrock is then released and collected. It is the belief of many that fracking is the cause of many ills, because of the way the process is done. Fracking companies are not forced to dislose the chemicals that they inject into the earth. In some case, residents that have lived near fracking sites have fooded the web with videos of flammable tap water.

Now, a recent press release by Caudrilla Resources, a fracking firm based in the UK, stated that independent auditors found a connection between the use of fracking methods and an uptick in seismic activity. A report, released by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) shortly after, also drew links between fracking and increased seismic activity. In the case examined by the USGS, the evidence suggests that fracking began and immediately so did small earthquakes. In all, the USGS recorded almost 50 earthquakes within a 2-mile radius within 24 hours of the fracking operations start.

In both the Caudrilla case and the USGS report, seismic activity was relatively minor in terms of scale, with most quakes falling below 2.0 and none reaching above the 3.0 threshold. This fact may very well quell some arguments about the cause of the earthquakes that occured Saturday and Sunday. Yet, it does not seem so far-fetched to believe that fracking could also be leading to quakes of greater size and scale. Whether it is the process of fracking itself, or it is the increase in smaller seismic occurences that are the potential cause, it is clear that more scientific review is needed.

Repatriation A Disaster In The Past, Will Be In The Future

So John McCain was on "Squawk Box", and he began spouting the ever popular line about repatriation of offshore dollars. The "esteemed" Senator rambled on and hit the predictable talking points:

1. There is money just sitting there offshore doing nothing.
2. This money would be better spent at home.
3. This money will create jobs.
4. This money will somehow spur a new fury of economic activity.

Now, anyone listening to McCain would think he had a very precise, logical point. Well, at least they would think that if they had done no investigation into past attempts at repatriation. I must admit, bringing home $1.2 trillion sounds great. Why wouldnt it? Idle money begins to be circulated, which could lead to jobs, etc. It makes sense on paper, but in practice it is clear that the true culture of business rears its ugly little head.
Last week, The Senate Subcommittee on Investigations released its report detailing the effects of the 2004 repatriation holiday. The report, titled "Repatriating Offshore Funds: 2004 Tax Windfall for Select Multinationals, explained what actually happened with repatriated funds versus what was expected. In a memo to Sen. Chuck Schumer, the title read: 2004 Repatriation A Failed Policy. In my opinion, the title of that memo hit the nail on the head.

Here is a link to the report

For those of you looking for a quick rundown, here goes:

-2004 America Jobs Creation Act dropped tax rate from 35% to 5.25% on cash assets stored offshore.

-$312 billion was repatriated. $3.3 billion in estimated taxes were avoided.

-"The American Jobs Creation Act essentially provided guidelines on four uses of repatriated funds: two – using funds for jobs and research and development -- were encouraged, while two others – using funds for executive compensation and stock buybacks -- were prohibited."

-"The evidence presented in this Majority Staff Report, however,
shows that, rather than producing new jobs or increasing research and development expenditures, the 2004 repatriation tax provision was followed by an increase in dollars spent on stock repurchases and executive compensation. In addition, the repatriation tax break created a competitive disadvantage for domestic businesses that chose not to engage in offshore operations or investments, and provided a windfall for multinationals in a few industries without benefitting the U.S. economy as a whole."

-The top 15 repatriating corporations brought home $150 billion (roughly 48%), but had a reduction of their combined workforce by nearly 21,000.

-A broader study of 840 repatriating corporations also showed no net gain in employment.

-Research and Development expenditures did not increase as exepected.

-Stock repurchases increased after repatriation. Remember, this was a prohibited activity. Buybacks increased by 16% in 2004-05, and 38% in 2005-06. Each dollar of repatriated cash generally meant somewhere between a 60 cent and 92 cent payout to stockholders.

-Executive compensation increased after repatriation. This was also a banned activity. Compensation at the top 15 repatriating corporations increased 27% in 2004-05, and 30% in 2005-06.

-Only a small amount of companies with strong overseas prescence benefitted.

-Most funds came from offshore tax havens.

-Since the 2004 repatriation, offshore tax shelters have seen a great increase in cash inflows.

My brief summary does not do the report justice, so if you do not have time to read it now, I would bookmark it or download it and read it when you have a chance.

I think little more has to be said. Repatriation has failed before. History repeats itself if we dont learn from our mistakes, and I think we can all agree that the 8 years of Bush economics were a mistake. Repatriation will kill jobs, not create them. Corporations already have $2 trillion in cash reserves. Apple has more cash on hand than the Government. They have the money to create jobs.

The time has come to close offshore tax havens and stop giving unfair advantages to corporations that spend a great deal of time trying to not play by the rules. Capitalism is great when it is executed properly. Creating these unfair advantages kills small business. It destroys "Main Street". And, In my opinion, its as un-American as it can get.