Support NeoGAF

[Wazzim]

Way to go, OWS.

Way to go, troll.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Because while it should be common sense it doesn't stop some people from doing it to the tea party! which was solely my point. You're reading too much into what I said.

I guess my point is, you were preaching to the choir, so although I am definitely reading too much into that comment, you should understand how the comment could be seen differently. Mainly because you defended the video by pointing to "us" or opponents of the tea party as hypocrites. So overall this whole back and forth was a waste of time, mostly my fault, so lets move on now lol

 

[Enron]

Way to go, troll.

That's not even trolling.

 

[Wazzim]

That's not even trolling.

ok

 

[alstein]

But of course if that happened at a tea party rally "Clearly they're all racists!"

A common theme of the mainstream media (Fox isn't much worse then the rest on this) has been to call the protesters "thugs/rioters/communists".

It's going to be important to own the rhetoric and the conversation.

 

[Enron]

A common theme of the mainstream media (Fox isn't much worse then the rest on this) has been to call the protesters "thugs/rioters/communists".

It's going to be important to own the rhetoric and the conversation.

I haven't seen any of the mainstream networks cover them as "thugs" or "rioters", unless its some commentator with an agenda. Fox maybe, but I don't watch Fox though I wouldn't put it past them.

 

[Ripclawe]

A common theme of the mainstream media (Fox isn't much worse then the rest on this) has been to call the protesters "thugs/rioters/communists".

It's going to be important to own the rhetoric and the conversation.

what theme is that? Most of the MSM is embracing them including the NYTIMES coming out in support. The difference between this and the tea party is that one is in favor of bigger government and the other is not.

 

[sphagnum]

I went to Zuccotti Park yesterday, and while I'm heartened to see that my generation has had such a big role to play in this thing, I came out with a variety of thoughts:

1. I can't really understand how anyone wouldn't know what "the point" of the movement is. The fact that there are a billion things to protest isn't detracting from it, it just factors into the main argument - that the top 1% in this country have become so greedy and rapacious that it is affecting all areas of life. Nearly everything being talked about relates back to the rich, whether it be corporate control of government, needing to raise taxes on the rich, needing to hold those who tanked the stock market accountable, regulating corporations (including ones you wouldn't immediately think of, like Monsanto), etc. It was all pretty obvious to me at least.

2. While I personally don't have a problem with the amount of radicals, neo-hippies, and college students camped out there, I can see why it poses an image problem for the mainstream. I saw some blue collar workers, but they were absolutely dwarfed by the other groups. And almost everyone was white - i saw a few black people and one Asian (she was coordinating handing out the t-shirts). For a movement that proclaims to represent 99% of the people, it's far too racially homogeneous and needs to find a way to better incorporate the working class into it. I know blue collar workers tend to show up with the unions and it wasn't a big-marching-day, so I suppose I just missed them, but the hardcore element of the protest seems to really be more disaffected middle class than anything else.

3. Jesse LaGreca is a pretty cool dude.

 

[Kccitystar]

NY-gaffer here.

I honestly think that the Wall St. protesters need to push for an even bigger change. Not just financial change. There are people already there for financial reform but there needs to be reform for things much bigger than that. I think that there needs to be massive push in ideas/beliefs across the country that actually make sense and fit in the 21st century, and actually fucking work. I guess I'm a progressive kind of guy.

What I'm saying is that while there are thousands protesting the financial shenanigans in this country downtown we should feel way more empowered to protest against bigger overarching issues or ask even tougher questions. Asking why the people responsible for throwing the economy into disarray haven't been arrested or thrown in jail is a strong start.

 

[empty vessel]

You're going to love this article: http://www.corporatepolicy.org/issues/corppurpose.pdf

Thanks for this. Interesting read (not through yet).

 

[akira28]

You guys saw that article about the Smithsonian run right? Turns out one of the leading runners, one of the ones who actually broke past the guards? A Conservative blogger who was at the head of the run, possibly with friends, for the sake of "journalism". Everyone wants to be like that guy who dressed up like a pimp and helped kill ACORN.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/...in-Provoking-Police-Action-in-DC-?via=siderec

Blogger's account
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/08/standoff-in-dc/print

 

[Dartastic]

Where is that article again about the demands of the protestors, and how it doesn't quite matter why there isn't a cognitive, singular idea?

 

[Jak140]

You guys saw that article about the Smithsonian run right? Turns out one of the leading runners, one of the ones who actually broke past the guards? A Conservative blogger who was at the head of the run, possibly with friends, for the sake of "journalism". Everyone wants to be like that guy who dressed up like a pimp and helped kill ACORN.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/...in-Provoking-Police-Action-in-DC-?via=siderec

Blogger's account
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/08/standoff-in-dc/print

What the fuck.

 

[teruterubozu]

2. While I personally don't have a problem with the amount of radicals, neo-hippies, and college students camped out there, I can see why it poses an image problem for the mainstream. I saw some blue collar workers, but they were absolutely dwarfed by the other groups. And almost everyone was white - i saw a few black people and one Asian (she was coordinating handing out the t-shirts). For a movement that proclaims to represent 99% of the people, it's far too racially homogeneous and needs to find a way to better incorporate the working class into it. I know blue collar workers tend to show up with the unions and it wasn't a big-marching-day, so I suppose I just missed them, but the hardcore element of the protest seems to really be more disaffected middle class than anything else.

Yeah well, ironically 75% of those college students will have corporate jobs in a decade, just like the hippies in the 60s. I think for most people, this is a " been there, done that, bough the T-shirt" scenario.

 

[richiek]

You guys saw that article about the Smithsonian run right? Turns out one of the leading runners, one of the ones who actually broke past the guards? A Conservative blogger who was at the head of the run, possibly with friends, for the sake of "journalism". Everyone wants to be like that guy who dressed up like a pimp and helped kill ACORN.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/...in-Provoking-Police-Action-in-DC-?via=siderec

Blogger's account
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/08/standoff-in-dc/print

Of course we won't hear a peep out of this from Enron.

 

[Timedog]

Yeah well, ironically 75% of those college students will have corporate jobs in a decade, just like the hippies in the 60s. I think for most people, this is a " been there, done that, bough the T-shirt" scenario.

Is it really ironic? Are 75% going to have jobs making more than 1.3 million dollars a year? Are 75% going to work at investment banks? Are 75% saying to dissolve all corporations, or that everyone working at a corporation is bad?

I'm not seeing the irony in saying that wall street banks should be regulated, investigated for fraudulent activity, and that the rich should pay higher taxes.

 

[empty vessel]

Is it really ironic? Are 75% going to have jobs making more than 1.3 million dollars a year? Are 75% going to work at investment banks? Are 75% saying to dissolve all corporations, or that everyone working at a corporation is bad?

I'm not seeing the irony in saying that wall street banks should be regulated, investigated for fraudulent activity, and that the rich should pay higher taxes.

Right. The people who are pretending as if one cannot seek reform if one has a job at a corporation or a product made by a corporation are way off base. In fact, such people probably ought to be most interested in reform.

* Note, I was mistaken earlier in this thread that 1.3 million is where the top 1% starts. That is the approximate average of the top 1%'s income, not where it starts. The reality is that not everybody in the top 1% of income earners are the real "top 1%" for purposes of economic dysfunction. We're probably really only talking about the top 0.1% or so of income earners (and the data bears out that this group is mostly responsible for the gains of the whole top 1%--this is a true ruling class of business executives we're talking about who make multiple millions of dollars in income every year). However, saying top 1% is obviously a lot easier for discussion purposes than breaking that figure down further. I think that, for actual policy purposes, one would want to go ahead and break it down further, with the focus directed to the top of the top 1%.

 

[Wazzim]

We aspire to be the leading trusted advisor and financier to our clients

What a joke.

 

[Amibguous Cad]

Yeah well, ironically 75% of those college students will have corporate jobs in a decade, just like the hippies in the 60s. I think for most people, this is a " been there, done that, bough the T-shirt" scenario.

The ironic thing is that this tie, that's exactly what the protesters want this time. They don't want to tear down the system. They want the system to start working for them again and allow them the opportunity to provide for themselves and their family. Whether that's actually going to happen is anyone's guess.

 

[cooljeanius]

what theme is that? Most of the MSM is embracing them including the NYTIMES coming out in support. The difference between this and the tea party is that one is in favor of bigger government and the other is not.

I don't think anyone's posted the link to that yet, so I will: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/o...st-wall-street.html?_r=1&src=tp&smid=fb-share

 

[Deku]

The ironic thing is that this tie, that's exactly what the protesters want this time. They don't want to tear down the system. They want the system to start working for them again and allow them the opportunity to provide for themselves and their family. Whether that's actually going to happen is anyone's guess.

We're in the minority but I've commented the youth anger is much more about generational accounting and bringing balance in a political system increasingly catering the aging electorate than to young people than a purely left-right issue. There will always be a core of leftists who would find some inequality to protest, but that's their role in a democracy.

You can rail on corporate influence as much as you want but vast sums of money equivalent to 70~% of total expenditures on all levels of government are on its citizens, be it welfare, healthcare or transfer payments.

Discussions about politics have so far revolved around how much to spend and where to spend, rather than if we as a society and afford to spend increasing amounts of money on entitlements.

 

[bounchfx]

I don't think anyone's posted the link to that yet, so I will: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/o...st-wall-street.html?_r=1&src=tp&smid=fb-share

thanks for sharing

 

[Nekofrog]

Yeah well, ironically 75% of those college students will have corporate jobs in a decade, just like the hippies in the 60s. I think for most people, this is a " been there, done that, bough the T-shirt" scenario.

One of the big things that these people are protesting about is the fact that 75% of them WON'T have a corporate job in a decade -- if they have ANY job.

Spent two years out of college (along with my wife) with no job. Not one, zilch. And not for lack of trying. Eventually resorted to joining the military to make ends meet.

Things are worse than a lot of people realize in this country.

 

[theBishop]

The reason I believe in Occupy Wall St is because Wall St has become overly de-regulated and is essentially free from all judicial enquiry.

This isn't about left and right. It's about right and wrong. Wall St's crimes are as morally unambiguous as putting a gun to someones head and pulling the trigger.

So, you're right, the banks were deregulated and ran amok. But that didn't happen in a vacuum. To say "deregulated" implies that they were regulated in the past. The point being that if you simply demand to re-regulate the banks, we're just going to have the same problem in a few years. Something more fundamental has to be done about the nature of banking in the world.

And that's why this is about "left and right". The Right's most fundamental agenda is to expand the power of capital over labor. This movement is about empowering labor (aka the 99%) relative to capital, which makes it Left by definition.

 

[Karma Kramer]

You guys saw that article about the Smithsonian run right? Turns out one of the leading runners, one of the ones who actually broke past the guards? A Conservative blogger who was at the head of the run, possibly with friends, for the sake of "journalism". Everyone wants to be like that guy who dressed up like a pimp and helped kill ACORN.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/...in-Provoking-Police-Action-in-DC-?via=siderec

Blogger's account
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/08/standoff-in-dc/print

lol, doesn't really surprise me since this movement would lose all credibility if turned violent. where's enron and the gang lol?

 

[Chichikov]

I don't think anyone's posted the link to that yet, so I will: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/o...st-wall-street.html?_r=1&src=tp&smid=fb-share

I want to call out the last paragraph, which I think is important -

It is not the job of the protesters to draft legislation. That’s the job of the nation’s leaders, and if they had been doing it all along there might not be a need for these marches and rallies. Because they have not, the public airing of grievances is a legitimate and important end in itself. It is also the first line of defense against a return to the Wall Street ways that plunged the nation into an economic crisis from which it has yet to emerge.

People always like to ask "well, what's your solution?", to which I answer - what do I look like? a politician?

This is not a shadow government, this is a performance review.

 

[cooljeanius]

I want to call out the last paragraph, which I think is important -


People always like to ask "well, what's your solution?", to which I answer - what do I look like? a politician?

This is not a shadow government, this is a performance review.

Which is why it's important to call/write/fax/email your Senators and Congresspeople and ask them what they plan to do about all of this.

 

[Enron]

Of course we won't hear a peep out of this from Enron.

Oh, you mean how there's never a peep out of you guys whenever OWS does something dumb?

So, did this one conservative blogger recruit the other 100-200 people to go with him?

Was he the one that held the guard?

 

[kame-sennin]

On Meet the Press this morning, David Gregory shilled for Wall Street and Rahm Emanuel attempted co-option:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/vp/44834795#VpFlash

I don't think anyone's posted the link to that yet, so I will: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/o...st-wall-street.html?_r=1&src=tp&smid=fb-share

As the Occupy Wall Street protests spread from Lower Manhattan to Washington and other cities, the chattering classes keep complaining that the marchers lack a clear message and specific policy prescriptions. The message — and the solutions — should be obvious to anyone who has been paying attention since the economy went into a recession that continues to sock the middle class while the rich have recovered and prospered. The problem is that no one in Washington has been listening.

It is not the job of the protesters to draft legislation. That’s the job of the nation’s leaders, and if they had been doing it all along there might not be a need for these marches and rallies. Because they have not, the public airing of grievances is a legitimate and important end in itself. It is also the first line of defense against a return to the Wall Street ways that plunged the nation into an economic crisis from which it has yet to emerge.

Great stuff.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Oh, you mean how there's never a peep out of you guys whenever OWS does something dumb?

So, did this one conservative blogger recruit the other 100-200 people to go with him?

Was he the one that held the guard?

Who knows, point is conservative bloggers are trying to sabotage this movement. Is that not outrageous?

 

[Chichikov]

On Meet the Press this morning, David Gregory shilled for Wall Street and Rahm Emanuel attempted co-option:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/vp/44834795#VpFlash

Eric Cantor is like something that was developed in a lab to piss me off.

 

[Enron]

Who knows, point is conservative bloggers are trying to sabotage this movement. Is that not outrageous?

That guy is a dick, but so are the other 200 people that wanted to storm into the Smithsonian.

 

[Karma Kramer]

"The growing mobs..."

wtf

Does the GOP have no subtly anymore? Could it not be more obvious that they would not favor regulating and prosecuting wall street to try and prevent another 2008?

 

[Slavik81]

I want to call out the last paragraph, which I think is important -

People always like to ask "well, what's your solution?", to which I answer - what do I look like? a politician?

This is not a shadow government, this is a performance review.

I think it's legitimate to rebuke those who decry a lack of financial reform while knowing nothing of the various reform acts that have been passed.

You can't run a performance review of what reform's been accomplished in the years since the financial crisis if you don't know what's been done since then. Nor can you judge the regulations that have passed unless you know what you'd prefer. Are bank capital reforms stringent enough? The question implicitly demands that you know what you want.

The actual measurable results of reform to reduce risks and minimize damage when things go wrong will only come when there is another crisis. Until then, all we have is opinions and no empirical evidence.

 

[Chichikov]

I think it's legitimate to rebuke those who decry a lack of financial reform while knowing nothing of the various reform acts that have been passed.

You can't run a performance review of what reform's been accomplished in the years since the financial crisis if you don't know what's been done since then. Nor can you judge the regulations that have passed unless you know what you'd prefer. Are bank capital reforms stringent enough? The question implicitly demands that you know what you want.

The actual measurable results of reform to reduce risks and minimize damage when things go wrong will only come when there is another crisis. Until then, all we have is opinions and no empirical evidence.

I disagree.
You're allowed to demand results from your elected officials.
Actually, it's your duty.

Now you can say that the results that they demand are unrealistic, but I would strongly disagree.

You don't need a degree in macro-economics to be pissed at the banking sector.

 

[Slavik81]

I disagree.
You're allowed to demand results from your elected officials.
Actually, it's your duty.

Now you can say that the results that they demand are unrealistic, but I would strongly disagree.

You don't need a degree in macro-economics to be pissed at the banking sector.

What results? My point is that reforms that would prevent a crisis like this one from doing damage in the future have NO RESULTS until the next catastrophy.

 

[Chichikov]

What results? My point is that reforms that would prevent a crisis like this one from doing damage in the future have NO RESULTS until the next catastrophy.

In a word - inequality.
People feel that the government has been serving the ultra rich, to the benefit of the ultra rich at the expense of everyone else.

You can say you don't think it's a problem, you can say it's un-fixable.
But I don't accept your proposition that those people lack economic understanding to make that demand.

 

[Slavik81]

In a word - inequality.
People feel that the government has been serving the ultra rich, to the benefit of the ultra rich at the expense of everyone else.

You can say you don't think it's a problem, you can say it's un-fixable.
But I don't accept your proposition that those people lack economic understanding to make that demand.

No, I agree. But inequality and banking reform are completely different issues. One is broad and general, while the other is detailed and highly technical. At best, banking reform is an indirect and minuscule component of reforms to reduce the widening inequality gap.

For the larger problem of inequality, I agree with you. There are clear and obvious results of wider policies on inequality, though they may take decades to manifest. In that case, it is not required to discuss anything in specific. Identifying a problem is legitimately the first step to solving it.

 

[A Human Becoming]

A date is set for Occupy New Hampshire - October 15 @ noon in Manchester, NH. I'll be there.

 

[UltimaPooh]

Live stream of Occupy KC....

http://www.justin.tv/OccupyKC

 

[Archer]

great song that seems to go with the occupy movement....

 

[Monroeski]

Who knows, point is conservative bloggers are trying to sabotage this movement. Is that not outrageous?

Outrageous? Yes.

But it's not like this isn't par for the course during demonstrations like this, no matter the ideology of the protesters or their opposition. When you have people getting political in visible groups, you'll also have people doing whatever they can to make them look bad.

 

[Clevinger]

You guys saw that article about the Smithsonian run right? Turns out one of the leading runners, one of the ones who actually broke past the guards? A Conservative blogger who was at the head of the run, possibly with friends, for the sake of "journalism". Everyone wants to be like that guy who dressed up like a pimp and helped kill ACORN.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/...in-Provoking-Police-Action-in-DC-?via=siderec

Blogger's account
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/08/standoff-in-dc/print

This reminds me that that little shitheel, whose name I can't recall, is recruiting others for this type of moronic conservative activist journalists.

 

[polyh3dron]

"The growing mobs..."

wtf

Does the GOP have no subtly anymore? Could it not be more obvious that they would not favor regulating and prosecuting wall street to try and prevent another 2008?

When it's the obviously astroturf'd tea party protests organized by Fox News and Freedomworks, "they're every day ordinary Americans!" But when a grassroots protest like this occupy Wall St thing happens it's a "growing mob". Gotta love them Republicans.

 

[Myansie]

And that's why this is about "left and right". The Right's most fundamental agenda is to expand the power of capital over labor. This movement is about empowering labor (aka the 99%) relative to capital, which makes it Left by definition.

How about companies that actually produce real products and services? I've got nothing against the Apple's, Ferrari's or Dolce & Gabbana's of this world. The problem I'm seeing is a financial market run amok. In the long term that effects everybody negatively including your legitimately productive companies. Companies need to be legislated, there needs to be laws to stop things like slave labour and fraud in the financial sector for example. Are stronger unions the answer to keeping the private sector in check?

Personally I believe that's the role of the government. We vote for the government, it's supposed to represent the majority of people. This isn't happening. It's being run by the large banks, those in charge of the raw capital. Even Bill Gates doesn't have the kind influence the major players in the banks do. That is wrong on so many levels. A major flaw in the American system of government has appeared.

I'm going to contradict myself a little here and talk about the unions in Australia. Our political system is awesome. The right is constituted by economic rationalists and the left is by politicians who generally think the same way, but they have to negotiate through the Labor Parties caucous. It's like a government within the party made up of unions. If you've been paying attention to Australian politics our leadership has been doing some crazy sea sawing in recent years, but the system is so good everything is still running smoothly. I'm not entirely comfortable with having the unions so tightly integrated into our system of government, but when I compare it to the American predicament where the banks have essentially integrated to a far larger extreme, they are in the justice system, then I have to agree with you. The union alternative is a far better option. Realistically I can't see how America can move that far left though.

 

[bill gonorrhea]

Didn't the parents of the protesters let them know lifes not fair? That just because Jimmy has a Twinkie doesn't mean you get one too. I blame the parets for ows. #occupyparentshouse.... Oh wait I bet 60% do.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Outrageous? Yes.

But it's not like this isn't par for the course during demonstrations like this, no matter the ideology of the protesters or their opposition. When you have people getting political in visible groups, you'll also have people doing whatever they can to make them look bad.

Definitely, which should signal skepticism. The coverage of the arrests of the 700 people on the Brooklyn Bridge may have been accurate, but I saw little mention in MSM coverage that it was a possibility the police had contributed to leading the protestors and shutting the bridge down. It becomes very difficult to be confident in coverage when it doesn't accurately portray both sides or it doesn't humbly admit to not having enough evidence to be confident of any conclusion ("It is unclear why the protestors split off from the pedestrian pathway and began walking onto the roadway"). Investigations that take place later can be conclusive, while news should provide the information/testimony that would be used in an investigation. This allows us to approach the event more fairly and not conclude anything either.

If the incident at the Museum was mainly initiated by a few individuals, those individuals should have been questioned and interviewed/researched. So the story more accurately represents the truth. This is basic journalism and when dealing with growing movements it is essential that journalist be consistent and objective, otherwise either side (movement vs opposition) can bend journalism and effectively spin the story in their favor.

 

[bounchfx]

Didn't the parents of the protesters let them know lifes not fair? That just because Jimmy has a Twinkie doesn't mean you get one too. I blame the parets for ows. #occupyparentshouse.... Oh wait I bet 60% do.

yeah, so everyone should just shut up, and take it in the ass! yeah! right !?

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Didn't the parents of the protesters let them know lifes not fair? That just because Jimmy has a Twinkie doesn't mean you get one too. I blame the parets for ows. #occupyparentshouse.... Oh wait I bet 60% do.

You're way late and others have done it better.

 

[Karma Kramer]

That guy is a dick, but so are the other 200 people that wanted to storm into the Smithsonian.

As an example of how poor journalism effectively spins the story away from the objective truth... Enron is assuming all 200 people were pushing and storming the Smithsonian or wanted to. Categorizing them as "dicks."

He assumes this even after such news has been released such as:

A conservative journalist has admitted to infiltrating the group of protesters who clashed with security at the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum on Saturday — and he openly claims to have instigated the events that prompted the museum to close.

This is why I question people like Enron in this thread, because I see them actively participating in the thread, but I don't see that same level of active participating in objectively determining the truth.

"I strained to glance behind me at the dozens of protesters I was sure were backing me up, and then I got hit again, this time with a cold realization: I was the only one who had made it through the doors....So I was surprised to find myself a fugitive Saturday afternoon, stumbling around aircraft displays with just enough vision to keep tabs on my uniformed pursuers. ‘The museum is now closed!’"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...useum-protest/2011/10/09/gIQAIKxCYL_blog.html

The problem I see with the way news is managed today is that because it is 24/7 and because the goal now is to be the first organization that has the story, little attention is given to investigating beyond the surface. Which allows for easy manipulation of the news