94-95% of college educated workers have jobs, which spells contentment. As does 3+ years of UE insurance to help maintain one’s iphone data plan.

Also, an agent would have to be employed to enact whatever changes were demanded. At the extreme, the most hopeless countries rely on a military backed coup. Without a doubt, impossible in this country.

There’s the government, which from the latest numbers is trusted by about 30% to improve economic conditions (core Tea Party sentiment is pretty universal, despite the marginalization).

So, that leaves an articulate, charismatic, messiah-like character to take the country by storm, motivate the young and give the voters a reason to “hope”.

Don’t go to sleep – there are some very new things happening here …and that pendulum always swings way too far right or left.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Hugo branded socialism is a hot fantasy for many, but there is no chance in this country for the foreseeable future (though, 50 more years of open borders should provide adequatee conditions).

We are in down times, but remember, this is the first depression where the American unemployed had iPhones. Venezuelans could barely feed themselves.

Clarification: the Baggers did go more right-centric but their impact will be felt for years.

“The movement will become more left centric, and therefore more partisan and lose support precipitously”
– disagree: it didn’t happen with the TeaBags and there are a hellava lot more people who buy into the above manuscript. Take a case study: Venezuela. Don’t be quick to roll your eyes – they had a strong middle; an educated populace but they allowed to rich to eat the middle.
Two classes: the lower didn’t have power or money.
But they had one thing:
VOTES.
Enter Chavez; a couple quick changes in the constitution and the country spiraled into socialism.

..and Marty, it didn’t happen with “Violent revolution” – there were a couple of deaths and many protests but not as many as one would think…
Regarding your statement “top 1% are sheltered both financially and literally” – the top 1% are sheltered there too – they are just all new faces: those who have kissed Hugo’s behind (granted there are always one or two smart old-schoolers left behind but they can’t leave their houses either).

We have never had a class war here because we in the middle always felt that somehow, someway they/we were going to live on the hill.
I am not hearing that as much anymore. Are you?

They better throw some “cake” to those folks in the loin cloths…
Again, I hope I am wrong…..

The movement will become more left centric, and therefore more partisan and lose support precipitously. If they are to organize into another pseudo-third party a la the Tea Party and install representatives into government, they will come at the expense of Democrats, sliding legislative majority to the right.

Violent revolution, or the innuendo of, would serve little to overturn economic injustice, as the top 1% are sheltered both financially and literally. It would be the store fronts of the middle class that would be broken, so to speak.

The only movement I see successful is all the leftbags making up with the teabaggers and taking on two party government. Will never happen, because now everybody hates each other – a reality Obama is readily embracing. He’s a divisive, and that’s why I want him out.

I believe that the benefits that we in this former great state have all enjoyed came from my father’s “Greatest Generation” paying their fair share. What I would like help from you and all on this BLOG is to understand the tax rates at that time. Without knowing, I will bet you that that top 1% had a lot fewer loopholes to wiggle through in 1946 that those same folks do now. We need to stop with the math-play and truly understand if/why the middle class is paying a higher percentage of taxes that the uppers.

The uppers need to do this for their own self-preservation

If they don’t and this isn’t addressed, that “wave” that was the Tea Party is going look like a ripple as the tens of millions that are un or under-employed wake up and jump on this one….

Hope I’m wrong.

(I want less corruption or more participation in it)

You misunderstood, Dan. The question is how is collecting 5% more from the top 1% of earners’ income is going to improve the lives for the other 99%. I’m not against raising taxes, but I think this question should be addressed in real terms.

Extending unemployment and paying down debt will do very little for workers in the short term. I don’t need to hear this from the street – my guess is that 9 of 10 of the protesters don’t even know why they’re there. But I would like some articulation from the president, since this is becoming his sole focus for the campaign.