Support NeoGAF

[teruterubozu]

no doubt. we need it, right!? a bill o'reilly talking points memo...

So a message = conservatism now?
WTF?

 

[coldvein]

the occupation is clearly in the "what now?" phase.

but it has already accomplished so much. that's what some of you fellows aren't understanding..

 

[Karma Kramer]

That's well and good. But I think at this point, and I don't think anyone disagrees on this point, the occupation is clearly in the "what now?" phase.

Follow your own advice, do what you can to help move towards any reform you support.

 

[coldvein]

So a message = conservatism now?
WTF?

(sarcasm) (my bad)

 

[teruterubozu]

but it has already accomplished so much. that's what some of you fellows aren't understanding..

It has accomplished AND regressed, depending on who you talk to.

 

[ghst]

I don't need them dressed in Armani but if you've got a bottle of white cider in one hand, a mongrel dog in the other and a facial tattoo, I ain't buying whatever it is you're selling.

that's not what cassandra told me.

(you might wanna ask your doctor about a rabies shot.)

 

[alstein]

Disagree. The financial institutions that got into trouble did so mostly by taking stupid greed-driven risks. They were just too free & careless with their loans, lending money to high-risk borrowers and then getting burned. It is harsh to say so, but those companies should have been allowed to perish. The industry would have corrected itself afterwards, driven by the incentive to survive and profit. When they know the government will bail them out if they lose, they are not incentivized to implement sound business practices.



Supposedly. But what makes you think that the government bureaucrats that "remove disincentives" via regulation are making the right choices for the long run? Why such trust in government? The free market is better. Companies will be naturally incentivized to come up with innovative new products (including energy products) if they think they can profit from it. Government meddling is not needed.



No, it was simply poor business. There was no market for their products at the prices they would have had to charge in order to be profitable. Their costs were just higher than their potential income. They gambled and lost. Or perhaps they counted on subsidies and bail-outs. Why? Let them thrive or die based on the products they offer.



Artificially restricted the loan market??? Is recent history so quickly forgotten? The financial crisis occurred because of (too) unrestricted lending. The market will find the proper level of lending without over-meddling by the government. That's what free markets do.



Agreed. So governments should not bail them out.



The OWS people mostly come across as childish individuals that want vague things like "social justice" and "tax the rich" and "forgiveness of all debt" and "guaranteed jobs". That's called communism, and it doesn't work.

Free market capitalism (with limited regulation & taxation) is not always fair or kind, but it's the best hope for society to develop and prosper. The OWSers want something for nothing, want to have someone (why do they trust unaccountable government bureaucrats so much?) always take care of them. That's not realistic; that's not real life.

a) Most of the occupiers wouldn't disagree with that statement, but they wish financial controls in place to minimize the tendencies of large corporations to be driven on short-term profits and nearsighted behavior- which is part of economic theory.

b) The reason for the trust in government is because corporations are only motivated to serve their shareholders, not society. Without government mechanisms in place, corporations will not care about 3rd parties to their transactions- this is the classic externality issue. This is why we have pollution laws in the first place. Even mainstream libertarians accept this.

c) That does not maximize marginal net social benefit. Ultimately, markets are meant to benefit society. If markets do not benefit society unregulated, then they need to be regulated. Often, research requires large investments, which large corporations are loathe to do, due to what I mentioned in a). This is why government investiture is needed, in order to maximize marginal net social benefit.

d) That's the cobweb theory of economics. That states that when a crisis or problem happens in the free market, people will react by going too far in the other direction. Ultimately the problem will correct itself, but sometimes that takes too much time, which is another reason for government intervention, as the cobweb theory is a short-term market failure.

BTW there are some people like you stated in the OWS movement, but they are a minority. There is debate going on about this right now. That said , "social justice" isn't a dirty word, except for objectivist types who have no care about society whatsoever (and those guys are the ones running the Republican party today, though I suspect they'll disappear once they get their agenda passed, leaving the burden onto someone else)

Free market capitalism requires conditions in order to work, and any undergrad-level economist understands them. The key conditions are

a) There needs to be market power equality. One party should not be able to dictate terms to another in a take it or leave it fashion.

b) There needs to be (perfect) competition. Perfect competition is impossible in reality, but you can get reasonably close.

c) There needs to be no externalities

d) It cannot be a public good- This doesn't apply for most of the things being talked about.

Quite simply- the current system fails hard when it comes to market power equality, and is largely failing on the competition side of things. If we do not fix these problems, we'll go from a market failure to an actual unfree market, which will be bad given the size of these markets. Government has always been the best mechanism for making sure the free market stays properly regulated, but it needs to be able to do its job. When corporations are able to buy laws more cheaply then they can gain from being more competitive, there's a big problem.

BTW if you guys want to help out with the "what now?" phase of things, I'd recommend here:

http://the99delegation.forumotion.com/

These guys are at least trying to do something, though it's problematic right now- I think this is the direction it should go.

 

[coldvein]

It has accomplished AND regressed, depending on who you talk to.

where's the regression?

 

[Karma Kramer]

Also I am pretty sure living on the streets in fall/winter weather when you could be sleeping in a bed is a bit different then showing up for tea party rallies with the media parade.

 

[alstein]

Also I am pretty sure living on the streets in fall/winter weather when you could be sleeping in a bed is a bit different then showing up for a tea party rallies with the media parade.

Maybe OWS should move more towards 1-day Tea Party style rallies in the winter. That's one day to counter General Winter's advance.

 

[teruterubozu]

Maybe OWS should move more towards 1-day Tea Party style rallies in the winter. That's one day to counter General Winter's advance.

Well some people actually do one-day OWS-ing. You see it on this thread a lot - "I should go down and check with them, I haven't been there in a week."

 

[_Xenon_]

Uh-huh. So, the solution is - more "stimulus"? Tried that, didn't work. Ummm.... what then.... how about... uhhh... higher taxes? Nope, that won't help. Put all bankers in concentration camps? Abolish private banking and allow the government to take over all banking? Bad, bad, bad.

How about allowing US industries to become more globally competitive by reducing restrictions on them? Do you know that US government puts exporters at a huge disadvantage with all the restrictions we have to observe? (I am an exporter.) Meanwhile other countries subsidize exporters.

"stimulus" worked but not enough. Most of those "stimulus" goes into government job but seriously how long can they last and how much demand can they create? You need bigger plan to put more people at work, such as building nation wise high speed railroad.

As for restriction, I know you (I mean the US) have quite a lot of bullshits there, especially when it comes to exporting things to China, but seriously I think what the OWS is pretesting is against "banks" not "small to middle business". And the regulation most of people are talking about are regulations on invest banks, again, not small to middle business. Those banks make risky investment, build bubbles, rake tons of dough. When the bubble busted, federal reserve covers their ass. They literally vaporized tons of money and passed the bill to joe average. They are doing this not only in the US (house bubble), but also in Asia, in Europe, in everywhere. Heck even your military budget is one big ass bubble which benefits only a small group of people (soldiers on foreign land don't create service that fullfill most people's demand, which means that's not work, that's tons of money down the toilet).

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

lol what? the irony in accusing me of reading some blog by david duke (i seriously have no idea who this is) because I posted an image of ANN COULTER is too much.

Are your some kind of AI that randomizes the wording of talking points? If I posted a picture of Hitler and it was linked to a pro-Nazi website, would that outrage you? Do you use search engines? Assuming you indeed are some kind of AI this would actually be somewhat of a logical explanation.

C3PO, that's you.

Yes, you need to learn something about sourcing your material. I found it in google image is the response of some too lazy to dig deeper. With Gooogle Images, its not evenvery hard to do.

Your attempt to make it look like I did something wrong to cover up your own ignorance is typical of you. You want a higher standard for others, but you cannot even hold yourself to one for sourcing, that's pretty pathetic.

 

[Zenith]

they have money because they are successful. them being able to buy favors from washington is the fault of the people. we let politicians be bought and we have to take back all the power we have given them.

Wait, so it's our fault people with wealth are corrupting government?

 

[mugwhump]

Supposedly. But what makes you think that the government bureaucrats that "remove disincentives" via regulation are making the right choices for the long run? Why such trust in government? The free market is better. Companies will be naturally incentivized to come up with innovative new products (including energy products) if they think they can profit from it. Government meddling is not needed.

That's the thing: the free market ISN'T better at producing goods/services with effects external to the market, goods that affect parties other than the buyer and seller.

A classic example of a good with a positive externality is vaccination. Paying for a vaccination benefits not only you and whoever sold it to you, it also benefits third parties, because by vaccinating yourself, you help protect them from disease. Without subsidies, vaccine production would be below efficient levels.

Now, a classic negative externality: by driving your car, you're not simply rightfully utilizing the oil+car you purchased and rightfully own. You're also harming others via the pollution you produce.

It shouldn't be hard to see where subsidizing green energy comes into this...

 

[alstein]

Wait, so it's our fault people with wealth are corrupting government?

Given that we do have the power, if sufficiently organized to get these people out of office , ultimately it is our fault. That said, instead of shrugging off society's blunders, it's the responsibility of the 99% to get off their ass and do something about it, despite the oligarchs attempts to marginalize our efforts.

 

[_Xenon_]

Wait, so it's our fault people with wealth are corrupting government?

Of course it is. Regardless you are from the EU or from the US you are from a democracy country. In principle, a democracy government should always represent the majority of the people. Then why big corporation puppets keep getting elected? Well either democracy doesn't suit your population structure or your people are just not that political smart. If it's the first one then it's your fault to criticize other country not being democracy instead of doing enough to address yours, if it's the latter one then it's your fault to blindly believe(tm) those election campaign ads.

 

[Red Nightmare]

aBTW there are some people like you stated in the OWS movement, but they are a minority.

Don't think so. Can't prove it one way or the other, but I'm confident that a majority, or at least a substantial minority, of "occupiers" generally fit the slacker/hippy/malcontent/pinko mold. This seriously damages their credibility.

There is debate going on about this right now. That said , "social justice" isn't a dirty word, except for objectivist types who have no care about society whatsoever (and those guys are the ones running the Republican party today, though I suspect they'll disappear once they get their agenda passed, leaving the burden onto someone else).

"Social justice" is a meaningless term that is used to cover belief in bigger government and wealth redistribution with the facade of doing good for society. Left-wingers are expert at manipulating language as cover and deflection. (See: pro-abortion becomes "pro-choice"; doubting proposed higher-taxation solutions to global warming becomes the Naziesque-sounding "climate change denial", etc.)

There needs to be market power equality. One party should not be able to dictate terms to another in a take it or leave it fashion...There needs to be (perfect) competition. Perfect competition is impossible in reality, but you can get reasonably close.

That's why we have anti-monopoly laws and regulations. They seem to generally work. That's reasonable regulation. What else do you want?

If we do not fix these problems.....

In other words, give more power and money to unaccountable government bureacracies and apparatchiks so that they can "fix" our economic problems by inventing more and more rules & regulations and imposing more & more taxes based on... well, nothing, really. I do not share your religious faith in government. I trust the free market and the profit motive more. Governments are motivated only to maintain and increase their own power and are almost always corrupted.

 

[NullPointer]

"Social justice" is a meaningless term that is used to cover belief in bigger government and wealth redistribution with the facade of doing good for society. Left-wingers are expert at manipulating language as cover and deflection. (See: pro-abortion becomes "pro-choice"; doubting proposed higher-taxation solutions to global warming becomes the Naziesque-sounding "climate change denial", etc.)

The Kool-aid is strong with this one.

 

[Red Nightmare]

The Kool-aid is strong with this one.

Says the kettle to the pot.

 

[Jenga]

Says the kettle to the pot.

says the raptor to jesus

 

[Dash27]

More crackdowns coming per the NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/u....html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

San Fran, Providence RI, LA, Boston and others mentioned. I'm sure they will try and do it as peacefully as possible but, you get a few bad cops or idiotic protesters and.... bad optics, to say the least.

 

[Red Nightmare]

says the raptor to jesus

Says the raven to the crow.

 

[Evlar]

Don't think so. Can't prove it one way or the other, but I'm confident that a majority, or at least a substantial minority, of "occupiers" generally fit the slacker/hippy/malcontent/pinko mold. This seriously damages their credibility.

This is an amazing paragraph. On the one hand you want to claim there's something weird about these people that "seriously damages their credibility", though you can't quite lay a finger on it. You might brush past the thing that makes them "weird" to you by dropping "malcontent" among the list of social infractions (what imaginable group of protesters wouldn't be malcontent?) On the other hand you admit you don't really have any idea who's in these crowds... every single one of them could be war veterans for all you know. So your rejection of them based on their identity- not their ideas, mind- boils away to nothing. It's like discussing who's going to be the next President based on which candidate is better looking... then admitting you don't know what either candidate looks like.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

More crackdowns coming per the NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/u....html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

San Fran, Providence RI, LA, Boston and others mentioned. I'm sure they will try and do it as peacefully as possible but, you get a few bad cops or idiotic protesters and.... bad optics, to say the least.

I suspect Boston and LA are probably the worst for potential violence.

 

[teruterubozu]

I suspect Boston and LA are probably the worst for potential violence.

It seems the warmer climate areas are cracking down while the colder regions are going to wait it out and see how long they last.

 

[Red Nightmare]

This is an amazing paragraph. On the one hand you want to claim there's something weird about these people that "seriously damages their credibility", though you can't quite lay a finger on it. You might brush past the thing that makes them "weird" to you by dropping "malcontent" among the list of social infractions (what imaginable group of protesters wouldn't be malcontent?) On the other hand you admit you don't really have any idea who's in these crowds... every single one of them could be war veterans for all you know. So your rejection of them based on their identity- not their ideas, mind- boils away to nothing. It's like discussing who's going to be the next President based on which candidate is better looking... then admitting you don't know what either candidate looks like.

I did lay a finger on it. I said they fit the hippy/slacker/pinko, etc. mold, which damages their credibility in the eyes of the general public. I'm part hippy and slacker myself (but not pinko), so I don't mind those types, really. (I buy my weed from one.) But most people look down on them.

I said I can't prove that the "occupiers" are all hippy/slackers/pinko types, but that's the impression I get from following the news online. (I don't watch TV.) I've heard or read several interviews with OWSers where they just sound incoherent or stupidly radical. Haven't heard much rational or logical from them. And I don't plan to go down and talk to them myself. (I'm an American ex-pat in Russia.)

 

[Evlar]

"Social justice" is a meaningless term that is used to cover belief in bigger government and wealth redistribution with the facade of doing good for society. Left-wingers are expert at manipulating language as cover and deflection. (See: pro-abortion becomes "pro-choice"; doubting proposed higher-taxation solutions to global warming becomes the Naziesque-sounding "climate change denial", etc.)

Here's some friendly advice: Language like this works fine when you're hanging out with your buddies, like-minded dudes who all vote the same way and all breathe the same political air, laughing at the damn liberals. It works because it doesn't have to conform with reality. You aren't actually discussing with an honest-to-god left-wing person; you don't have to fact-check whether anything you say resembles something they actually think. It's not like any of your buddies are going to defend them.

BUT if you stumble into a place where there are people with actual left-wing opinions and views this shit doesn't fly. You can't tell someone who is a lefty what "those lefties" think. It's not up to you to declare it. In the normal course of information-sharing the guys on the left will tell you what they think.

For starters, everything in that paragraph I quoted is bullshit. Incendiary bullshit. It's flaming.

 

[Red Nightmare]

Here's some friendly advice: Language like this works fine when you're hanging out with your buddies, like-minded dudes who all vote the same way and all breathe the same political air, laughing at the damn liberals. It works because it doesn't have to conform with reality. You aren't actually discussing with an honest-to-god left-wing person; you don't have to fact-check whether anything you say resembles something they actually think. It's not like any of your buddies are going to defend them.

BUT if you stumble into a place where there are people with actual left-wing opinions and views this shit doesn't fly. You can't tell someone who is a lefty what "those lefties" think. It's not up to you to declare it. In the normal course of information-sharing the guys on the left will tell you what they think.

For starters, everything in that paragraph I quoted is bullshit. Incendiary bullshit. It's flaming.

Not really. It's actually quite accurate. The problem here is that this site is pretty much a left-wing circle jerk where conflicting opinions are not welcome. All conservative posts and posters are attacked and mocked en masse. The type of condescending sarcasm you're using now is a typical intimidation tactic to shut up someone that says something contrary to your beliefs. Believe it or not, most people outside of NeoGaf OT do not accept most of what you take for granted as true.

I'm out for now. Please carry on solving all the world's economic problems with your brother "occupiers" and creating a perfectly just and egalitarian society. I'm sure you'll figure it out!

 

[Evlar]

Not really. It's actually quite accurate. The problem here is that this site is pretty much a left-wing circle jerk where conflicting opinions are not welcome. All conservative posts and posters are attacked and mocked en masse. The type of condescending sarcasm you're using now is a typical intimidation tactic to shut up someone that says something contrary to your beliefs. Believe it or not, most people outside of NeoGaf OT do not accept most of what you take for granted as true.

I'm out for now. Please carry on solving all the world's economic problems with your brother "occupiers" and creating a perfectly just and egalitarian society. I'm sure you'll figure it out!

None of this has anything to do with the factual inaccuracy of your statements. It's just staking a claim to being an oppressed minority on these boards. If you come in here taking pot-shots at people it ought to be no surprise when you take some fire in return.

 

[alstein]

It's impossible to debate/argue logically with anyone when you cannot even agree on the facts.

The big problem liberals have had since the 80s, is that they tried to hard to get conservatives to agree to their facts, when they never will. It's a better tactic to marginalize them and make their facts look wrong to others, which is exactly what conservatives did instead.

 

[Red Nightmare]

None of this has anything to do with the factual inaccuracy of your statements. It's just staking a claim to being an oppressed minority on these boards. If you come in here taking pot-shots at people it ought to be no surprise when you take some fire in return.

Okay, one more from me... I believe what I said about left-wingers manipulating language in deceptive ways for political gain is absolutely true. Hell, I even gave 2 very clear examples to support my assertion!

You really can't deny that the term "climate change denier" was deliberately created to stigmatize opponents of the global warming crowd. "Denier" is a term that is generally widely used only after the word "Holocaust". Using it after "climate change" is an obvious tactic to paint opponents as Naziesque creeps. Come on, son, this is self-evident.

Now I'm sure you can find examples of right-wingers also manipulating language for their own benefit. That's wrong, too.

No bullshit there. Have a nice evening!

 

[Zenith]

Not really. It's actually quite accurate. The problem here is that this site is pretty much a left-wing circle jerk where conflicting opinions are not welcome. All conservative posts and posters are attacked and mocked en masse. The type of condescending sarcasm you're using now is a typical intimidation tactic to shut up someone that says something contrary to your beliefs. Believe it or not, most people outside of NeoGaf OT do not accept most of what you take for granted as true.

I'm out for now. Please carry on solving all the world's economic problems with your brother "occupiers" and creating a perfectly just and egalitarian society. I'm sure you'll figure it out!

Another one plays the persecution card and bails. Shuffle the deck already. You expect anyone to take you seriously after something like "Can't prove it one way or the other, but I'm confident that a majority, or at least a substantial minority, of "occupiers" generally fit the slacker/hippy/malcontent/pinko mold. This seriously damages their credibility."?

You really can't deny that the term "climate change denier" was deliberately created to stigmatize opponents of the global warming crowd.

Sure I can. You're really reading too much into it. Besides, the right wing has "job creators" and "death panels".

 

[maharg]

You really can't deny that the term "climate change denier" was deliberately created to stigmatize opponents of the global warming crowd.

If I do, does that make me a "climate change denier denier"? And if I were, would that mean I was being stigmatized?

Not sure why you picked this example to expand on. It seems like your weakest. Pro-choice is easier to argue, although I think pro-life is more stigmatizing (being, by induction, anti-choice seems pale compared to being, also by induction, anti-life).

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

I love it, gets outwitted and the plays false victim. Face it, your arguments are completely empty and have been over and over again refuted, yet you then talk around the point in desperate rhetorical maneuvers and then try to delegitimate the fact that you've been had by reminding us that everyone 'out there in the real world' is just as pea brained as you.

i mean you literally are a talking point machine, and then "pinko commie utopia" remarks on the side aren't exactly the high points of finer articulate discourse.

You've presented so many logical and rhetorical fallacies that it's like you took Schopenhauer's Art of the Dialectic to heart and try to play by every single play in the book despite the fact that he wrote it with intention of how to avoid such pitfalls. bah

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

This is a good sign of things to come, the hilarity of the "message", and squatting.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...-take-over-a-gallery/articleshow/10504687.cms

The boundaries of Occupy Wall Street expanded beyond Zuccotti Park over the weekend , as a splinter group briefly took over an art gallery in SoHo. On Saturday, during a talk about conceptual art at the gallery, Georgia Sagri, a Greek artist, suddenly rose and shouted out, "This is an occupation," witnesses said. About a dozen other people joined Sagri in declaring the gallery, Artists Space, an autonomous zone. They handed out fliers and taped pieces of pink paper to a wall headed 'Rules of the Space' .

Those rules included 'this space is occupied' , 'anyone can sleep here' , 'no police' and 'no press' . Then the group, calling itself Take Artists Space, issued a statement on its Website, "The newly-acquired occupied space in Lower Manhattan, which, unlike Zuccotti Park, provides luxurious bathroom and central heating, has just conducted its first official general assembly ," the group said, adding , "What this space needs now is bodies with voices."

Artists Space responded with its own online statement , "The group currently occupying Artists Space have done so without our consent. So far, it has not been clear to Artists Space staff or its board what purpose or cause this occupation serves." Stefan Kalmar, the executive director and curator of Artists Space, said that he chose not to call the police.


He said he did not consider the occupiers dangerous and thought there was a possibility that they might reach an agreement that would allow the occupation to continue without disrupting the gallery's work. During several meetings on Saturday, he said, the protesters complained that the art world had become less about aesthetics and more about profit, with paintings, sculptures and other art forms being treated primarily as capital.

Although the point was valid, Kalmar said, he thought it was misapplied to Artists Space, a non-profit gallery founded in 1972. The most recent show there, which closed on October 16, was Anarchism Without Adjectives : On the Work of Christopher D'Arcangelo (1975-1979 ). Kalmar said the next show, Comment, which is to open on Saturday, would address the ways major museums have come to resemble corporations.

Kalmar said the occupiers had told him that they selected Artists Space because they believed the institution to be sympathetic to their cause. Sagri could not immediately be reached for comment. At the height of the occupation on Saturday night, Kalmar said, about 60 people crowded into the gallery to join the discussions, eat pizza and drink beer. Several people slept inside Artists Space, he said, which he permitted with the proviso that the occupiers refrain from damaging gallery property, going on to the roof or hanging banners out the windows. At noon on Sunday , about 30 people sat in a circle on the wooden floor of the gallery for a general assembly .

The occupiers announced on their Website that they would screen two films that night inside the gallery, Squatting in Hamburg and Empire St Pauli, a film about gentrification in Germany. But the screenings were not to be. Kalmar said that after a laptop computer disappeared , he contacted the gallery's board members. A majority directed him to oust the occupiers , and that night he did so. Two security guards stood by, and the occupiers left with little incident, witnesses said.

The occupiers left several items behind, including sleeping bags, blankets and a sign that said, 'Push the Barricades Take the Street' . A piece of paper taped to the front door of the building gave protesters who wanted to retrieve their belongings a phone number to call. "It was not a bad idea as a project," Kalmar said of the occupation on Monday. But he added that he was disturbed by the behaviour of some protesters and the confrontational tone adopted by some. "This wasn't a community with love, friendship and solidarity," he said. "This was a dictatorship."

On Monday, the occupiers posted another message on the Web, suggesting that they would surface again in some form. "We battle with saboteurs , camouflaged socialists, intellectual scepticism; and we say: Let's occupy something else," the statement read. It added, "This was just a beginning. How can the rest of New York City remain unoccupied ? It can't . We will occupy everything."

 

[gkryhewy]

You really can't deny that the term "climate change denier" was deliberately created to stigmatize opponents of the global warming crowd. "Denier" is a term that is generally widely used only after the word "Holocaust". Using it after "climate change" is an obvious tactic to paint opponents as Naziesque creeps. Come on, son, this is self-evident.

Well, if the shoe fits...

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Some good, lots of bad for NY local businesses.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...nows-not-what-it-does-hurting-local-jobs.html

Oct. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Occupy Wall Street protests assailing income inequality, joblessness and big banks may have some unintended consequences. They’re hurting nearby merchants as police barricades deter shoppers.

“If this doesn’t stop soon I will be out of business,” said Marc Epstein, 53, president of Milk Street Cafe on Wall Street, less than a block from the New York Stock Exchange.

Sales have dropped about 20 percent since the protests began last month and the 103 jobs created by the cafe’s opening in June are now at risk, said Epstein, who is not alone. Caroline Anderson, general manager of Boutique Tourbillon, a Wall Street jewelry store, said customer traffic is down about 20 percent, and Vincent Alessi, a managing partner at Bobby Van’s Steakhouse on Broad Street, said his lunch business has been cut in half.
....

“These protesters don’t understand the consequences of their actions,” Epstein said. “Who’s going to create the jobs they’re banging their drums for?”

.....

As Wall Street banks reported earnings this month, financial executives made little or no mention of the protests’ impact on their business. Firms including Bank of America Corp., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Citigroup Inc. have their main New York offices in Midtown, about three miles from the protest epicenter in Lower Manhattan’s Zuccotti Park.

At Kenjo, a watch retailer adjacent to Milk Street Cafe, the barricades have killed the lunch-hour rush, Artice Jones, the manager, said yesterday as he looked around a store devoid of customers.

“If it stays this way for the rest of the month, it’s not going to look good going into November,” Jones said.

Sales Plunge

Sales have plunged 40 percent at Paternoster Chop House near the London Stock Exchange, said manager Gerhard Jacobs, whose waiters greet customers at the metal barricades and escort them through the square that police have cordoned off.

“Not only is it affecting my general trade, it’s also affecting my future business,” Jacobs said. “We’ve got inquiries for weddings and exclusive hirings who are now considering taking their business to other restaurants because of the uncertainty of how long this may carry on.”

Alessi, the steakhouse manager, said customers are “fed up” and are seeking out more convenient places to eat.

“We’re tired of being herded through barricades like cattle,” he said.

Paul Browne, a spokesman for the New York City Police Department, didn’t respond to e-mails inviting comment on how the barricades have hurt businesses in the area.

Too Early

It’s too early to tell whether the protests are damaging the real estate market in New York’s Financial District, where pending apartment sales have slumped 26 percent in the past month, compared with an 8.8 percent decline for all of Manhattan, said Noah Rosenblatt, founder of UrbanDigs.com, a real estate data and consulting firm.

Beth Bogart, 55, a documentary filmmaker from New York’s West Village who has volunteered at the Zuccotti Park press table for the past three weeks, said she has encouraged occupiers, visitors and journalists to help local businesses.

“It’s a fairness issue; this cart was here before we were here,” she said, pointing to the food and apparel vendors that line the park’s south border. “We have to make sure that since we are here he doesn’t go out of business. That would be an incredible injustice.”
.....

“If anything, we are getting more business from the demonstrators,” said Isabelle Baelly, 54, who runs a newsstand across from the ECB. “They are very peaceful and we have been letting them use our bathroom facilities and Internet.”

Sales are up as much as $1,000 a day at the Pret A Manger sandwich shop a block and a half north of Zuccotti Park, said Shamirah Dillard, a store manager.[/B]

“It’s been good, definitely,” she said in an interview. Weekends and days with scheduled marches bring the greatest peaks in extra sales, especially for hot drinks, which more than cover the increased costs of toilet paper and maintenance to keep the two bathrooms clean, she said.
....
--With assistance from Namitha Jagadeesh in London, Alex Webb in Frankfurt and Katie Spencer in New York. Editors: Peter Eichenbaum, Dan Reichl, Mark Schoifet

 

[teruterubozu]

Some good, lots of bad for NY local businesses.

Yeah, I've been listening to all these shop owners call conservative radio shows to vent. Mostly about occupiers raiding their bathrooms.

 

[Evlar]

This is honestly the first time I've ever heard the theory that "denial" is a loaded term meant to imply Nazism. From my experience it's a commonplace English word used to refer to all kinds of willful rejection. We haven't censored visa application denial or denial of parole or denial of criminal wrongdoing as being code-words for Nazi sympathy.

When I said your statements were bullshit, on this point particularly I meant this

doubting proposed higher-taxation solutions to global warming becomes the Naziesque-sounding "climate change denial"

isn't true. Climate change denial specifically refers to denying that either 1) climate change is occurring at all, or 2) it's caused by human activity (and, for clarity, that ought to be stated as "human-caused climate change denial"). This isn't specifically about how we ought to respond to climate change, certainly not about taxation or regulation; it's about whether it occurs at all. There are some people who believe we can address climate change by further tampering with the environment... geo-engineering by pumping sulfur aerosols into the air or other methods. This is certainly not "climate change denial" because it accepts the science of climate change. It also is not a taxation or regulation regime.

And, while we're at it... People don't call themselves "pro-abortion" because, generally speaking, they actually don't favor abortions for their own sake; they favor allowing the option under particular circumstances. Saying someone is "pro-abortion" is like saying they're "pro-limb-amputation" or "pro-angioplasty". In an ideal world none of these things would be necessary. "Pro-choice" is a simplification used because it makes a nice-sounding slogan that fits on a bumper sticker, but so is "pro-life". Nevertheless, pro-choice at least gets in the vicinity of the actual position of those who oppose banning or criminalization of abortion procedures. That's right, "pro-choice" is a code word for reducing regulation. Imagine that.

 

[CrocMother]

Don't think so. Can't prove it one way or the other, but I'm confident that a majority, or at least a substantial minority, of "occupiers" generally fit the slacker/hippy/malcontent/pinko mold. This seriously damages their credibility.

Do you realize how ridiculously ignorant you sound?

 

[Sky Chief]

Yeah, I've been listening to all these shop owners call conservative radio shows to vent. Mostly about occupiers raiding their bathrooms.

There is going to be a huge backlash against these occupiers. Any good will or agreement that people may have felt towards them or their cause will quickly fade away as they become more and more of a nuisance.

 

[Enron]

It's already reached that point in Atlanta. Residents and business owners had been complaining for a solid two weeks about Occupy before Kasim Reed finally stood up and did something (using the hip-hop show last weekend as cover)

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

It's already reached that point in Atlanta. Residents and business owners had been complaining for a solid two weeks about Occupy before Kasim Reed finally stood up and did something (using the hip-hop show last weekend as cover)

I suspect it's going to be occurring more and more like that all over the country.

 

[alstein]

It's already reached that point in Atlanta. Residents and business owners had been complaining for a solid two weeks about Occupy before Kasim Reed finally stood up and did something (using the hip-hop show last weekend as cover)

The Atlanta protests have always seemed to be below the standards of other areas. I'm actually ok with those being squashed. That said, if the legitimate protests are squashed- those guys aren't going away, they'll be back and angrier next time.

 

[Enron]

I suspect it's going to be occurring more and more like that all over the country.

Polls conducted by Atlanta news outlets showed over 55% support for OWS three weeks ago, and immediately after the hiphop fiasco that supported plummeted to like 35%. I also get the feeling that this is happening or will soon be happening elsewhere.

The Atlanta protests have always seemed to be below the standards of other areas. I'm actually ok with those being squashed. That said, if the legitimate protests are squashed- those guys aren't going away, they'll be back and angrier next time.

Oh, there's no doubt that they were. It was a complete joke - nothing but college students united in various causes fueled by a perhaps selfish desire to matter. You could see it in the videos they posted, in the interviews they gave. And the awkward union with civil rights leaders - no one really had a clue of what to do next except keep singing songs, painting signs.

However, being a nuisance to locals is something many of the better Occupy protests share with the subpar Occupy Atlanta. That many people in one place over time is not going to have positive effects on the communities they are occupying.

 

[Sky Chief]

The Atlanta protests have always seemed to be below the standards of other areas. I'm actually ok with those being squashed. That said, if the legitimate protests are squashed- those guys aren't going away, they'll be back and angrier next time.

And that will only further alienate the general public from their cause.

 

[ReBurn]

I hope that the moral of the story isn't that if you just wait long enough the protesters will just give up and go home.

 

[Jenga]

I hope that the moral of the story isn't that if you just wait long enough the protesters will just give up and go home.

I think the moral of the story is that the protesters need to be careful about giving the government reasons and excuses to kick them off and to respect private property of local businesses that aren't necessarily a part of the system they are trying to fight.


or in other words, quit being a dirty annoying hippy

 

[dave is ok]

Enron and Manos predicting widespread backlash against OWS

I'm literally laughing out loud