-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Occupy Wall St - Occupy Everywhere, Occupy Together!
- Thread starter magicstop
- Start date
- Status
travisbickle
Member
Who's they?remnant said:
The last time Bank of America was worried about runs on the bank, or masses of people removing their money, they closed their doors at will. They would shit a duck if OWS suddenly decided that moving from specific banks to Credit Unions would be a good first gesture for 100K supporters to try.
Might be a nice set of baby steps to try, actually.
Might be a nice set of baby steps to try, actually.
The bank and the police. If your on private property they have the "right of way" if you will. Not much different than a citizen arrest on someone who is trespassing.travisbickle said:
Now if the protestors can prove they were being abused maybe they would have something, but I can't see a judge ignoring the obvious theatrics of this thing and interpreting it as willful abuse.
To be honest, I think its going to take a Martyr before this movement finds a leader.
Someone is going down, hard, and then the movement is going to be incited. Right now it is about a belief, but when someone goes down HARD this will become real. The 60s movements didn't hit high gear until a few people went down hard, it is going to happen hear.
Right now people are happy, working towards a belief they have. But once their belief hits "cause" and they are fighting, when people get truly angry, THAT is when it will happen.
A grim way to look at it, but until shit hits the fan this movement is no more than a group of people sharing a belief.
Edit:
This would probably cause some incite, since this is the exact type of thing that people are mad about. The banks controlling their money is going to just get people even more furious about it.
Someone is going down, hard, and then the movement is going to be incited. Right now it is about a belief, but when someone goes down HARD this will become real. The 60s movements didn't hit high gear until a few people went down hard, it is going to happen hear.
Right now people are happy, working towards a belief they have. But once their belief hits "cause" and they are fighting, when people get truly angry, THAT is when it will happen.
A grim way to look at it, but until shit hits the fan this movement is no more than a group of people sharing a belief.
Edit:
remnant said:
This would probably cause some incite, since this is the exact type of thing that people are mad about. The banks controlling their money is going to just get people even more furious about it.
travisbickle
Member
Remnant do you view the actions of the protesters, in this case, a threat"? We would all agree that the police are allowed to subdue a threat, but I would not call what I saw as a threat. Specifically, The video that shows a group of officers pushing an unarmed woman back into the bank.
The only legal offence I see as being committed was the bank worker wasting police time.
The only legal offence I see as being committed was the bank worker wasting police time.
Yes, no and its irrelevant. As soon as the bank manager says leave and you don't leave, expect trouble. To act like a victim when they lock the door is a little disingenous. It's not entrapment if they open the door for you to leave and you refuse.travisbickle said:
It comes down to whether or not BoA has to right to control trespassers on their property.
And as far as the run on the bank goes, well yeah I can see why BoA isn't happy about that either. Not that they seem to care. If they were worried they would have acted more strongly. I mean it not as if this was a big secret
I mean anyone can empty their BoA account online this second. You don't need a drumline into the bank.
remnant said:
That is the point of a protest though, sitting in the shadows? Being passive isn't what people are trying to do in this case.
People should know WHY the accounts are being closed.
And as far as I am concerned the second they refused to let people close their accounts they broke the real rules. We are supposed to have a mutual agreement with a bank, they hold my money and get to loan it out but when I want it then it is my money.
They don't give me my money back and they broke their end of the deal.
lsslave said:
I really think that Bloomberg is trying hard to keep a martyr from happening, for his own sake. I suspect the martyrs will come from somewhere else.
akira28 said:
I don't think the OWS types have enough money in BOA to really pull an effective run. Isn't most monster megabank money in corporate accounts anyways? The big revenue source from the 99% sorts is bank fees, not deposits.
Also I suspect most of the protestors who do have savings, will have it in a credit union/ smaller bank anyways, because that's just good common sense.
BoA has no responsibilty to promote your protest. Protestors don't have the right to invalidate property rights. they own the bank. Not you.lsslave said:
Ignoring the immature idea that banks should do nothing to prevent a run as I understand it you could still move your money. Do it online or at another branch.
remnant said:
No, they do not have any responsibility to promote it, but they also should not have any right to refuse you to take your money from them.
You miss one payment on your mortgage because all this bullshit cost you to lose your job and they'll be at your door like a hungry wolf but if you want your money from them they will be bitches about it. That is what is wrong.
Then again, I am really comfortable with CIBC, they have been phenomenal to me thus far for a bank and I wouldn't close my account unless I had to (when I was out of work they kept a missed payment from meeting my credit rating on my credit card, with my flawless credit that was a dodged bullet that earned a LOT of respect from me)
alstein said:
They can keep trying but eventually it will happen, unless this movement just ends up collapsing.
People could get bored of it like with everything else (what is happening with the protest Scientology movement lately?) but if something big happens soon it could matter. Wait and see I suppose.
travisbickle
Member
I asked one question and get three answers; I swear all the posters who are against the protesters can't answer a simple question.remnant said:
Also your opinion is relevant, don't let anyone tell you it isn't.
Again BoA did not stop you from moving your money. You want to close your account? Walk down the street to find another branch, locate a computer or stop the theatrics and walk in calmly like every other customer.lsslave said:
Really, you miss one payment and you're out the door? Granted this anecdotal but I've seen people in homes for years sporadically paying mortages or flat out not paying and still living there. This was in the 90's and 2000's mind youlsslave said:
SO wait you don't use BoA. You just assume they will be on like hungry wolves?lsslave said:
Yes. Bank runs are serious shit. You are not going to sneak up behind BoA and complete one.akira28 said:
Actually you got two answers. Akira28 got the irrelevant.travisbickle said:
Banks won't change - at least they provide some food when they visit my university each week.
Who could make a change? Politicians - but I doubt that either the US or the UK or even the Chinese government will want to do that. And without those three, nobody will try anything. So banks will keep on playing games.
Who could make a change? Politicians - but I doubt that either the US or the UK or even the Chinese government will want to do that. And without those three, nobody will try anything. So banks will keep on playing games.
The girl recording it obviously got there late since she wasn't allowed inside. What I'm thinking is that there was a large group of people inside the bank trying to move their money and the bank couldn't handle the crowd so they called the cops. Hopefully someone else can find some more info about it.ReBurn said:
Alpha-Bromega
Member
Shiggy said:
that's unnacceptable
Alpha-Bromega
Member
Myansie said:
they could literally spit in your face, fuck your wife and laugh while they take everything youve ever had yet there will still be defenders of the bank cartel thanks to the media and cultural control they've had for so long.
HarryHengst
Member
This is really cute. Keep defending the people who bite you in the ass please.remnant said:
Alpha-Bromega
Member
markot said:
i'm not against a degree of culpability on their parts, but ultimately they were simply enacting what was being encouraged and is a deep part of our culture. Why WOULDNT you take the loan? these loans are good as gravy, baby, look at everyone else!
When you create a culture of excess and you push and manipulate that culture for your own good, it's really hard to keep blaming the victim like that.
HarryHengst
Member
The government will do that, because thats whats in the interest of banks and other corporations. And corporations own the government.Wazzim said:
Alpha-Bromega
Member
i've come to the thought that it's not a manner of ownership, they are a singular entity in my mind.
travisbickle
Member
remnant said:
You're in the top 10 of posters for this topic, so I think the question goes beyond this incident.
ReBurn
Gold Member
Walking into a bank branch with a group of people carrying protest signs is confusing and frightening for employees and other customers. The videos I've seen show assertive or even agressive people protesting. Creating a tense climate may help get the point across to the person behind the counter, but the teller most likely isn't the person who screwed you over.
I think people who make a scene at bank branches bring it upon themselves when they get arrested. If they are on private property and are asked to leave they should leave. When they refuse to leave they are trespassing. Getting arrested is a consequence they should be willing to accept if they are willing to break the law as part of the protest.
I sympathize with the sentiment behind the protest, but the method of protest can be damaging to the cause. They should be smarter about what they're doing. People close accounts every day without incident, so I'm sure they can get the money out without making a scene. But if making a scene was the intention they accomplished the mission.
I think people who make a scene at bank branches bring it upon themselves when they get arrested. If they are on private property and are asked to leave they should leave. When they refuse to leave they are trespassing. Getting arrested is a consequence they should be willing to accept if they are willing to break the law as part of the protest.
I sympathize with the sentiment behind the protest, but the method of protest can be damaging to the cause. They should be smarter about what they're doing. People close accounts every day without incident, so I'm sure they can get the money out without making a scene. But if making a scene was the intention they accomplished the mission.
Maybe they're protesting this.Sentry said:A friend was just telling me about 'occupy hollywood' which was news to me, said it's on pirate bays front page, imd this;
Wonder what they're protesting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/15/b...reet-is-more-critical-of-protesters.html?_r=1
One group that doesn't get it.
One group that doesn't get it.
travisbickle
Member
ReBurn said:
The occupy movement just went global, protest occurred around the world inspired by what is happening in America, I don't think a few over-zealous protestors closing their accounts is going to damage the cause.
Frank Lemon
Member
alstein said:
Holy cow, you're not kidding alstein.
from the article:
Its not a middle-class uprising, adds another veteran bank executive. Its fringe groups. Its people who have the time to do this.
We'll see about that buddy.
Also, this quote right here kind of sums up the 99% point pretty well:
He added that he was disappointed that members of Congress from New York, especially Senator Charles E. Schumer and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, had not come out swinging for an industry that donates heavily to their campaigns. They need to understand who their constituency is, he said.
Fuck those assholes. That is some serious bull propaneganda. Sideshow? Insulting these people seems like something they would say. We should be responsible with our money which was taken from us and handed to you on a silver platter?? America really needs to wake up and stop watching tv and come back to the real world.alstein said:
Alpha-Bromega
Member
travisbickle said:
there should be an organized withdrawal and cancellation, at least as symbolic
Very cool article about the power of OWS
Not sure if it's been posted, but that article gives a brief overview as to why this movement has been an overwhelming success. And just think, some people on this forum said this would never take off....
Not sure if it's been posted, but that article gives a brief overview as to why this movement has been an overwhelming success. And just think, some people on this forum said this would never take off....
ReBurn
Gold Member
It's things like this that the media picks up on, not the peaceful marches and sit-ins. If the movement really represented 99% of people it wouldn't matter. But 99% of people aren't behind this. Some people are really turned off by the antics of confrontational protestors and it's damaging when they become the face of the movement. That's all I'm saying.travisbickle said:
empty vessel
Member
ReBurn said:
The idea of OWS is not that 99% of people support it. It is that it represents the interests of the 99% as against the top 1%. Some people who are part of the 99% do not understand where there interests lie due to ignorance or conditioning, and they may well oppose the movement and inadvertently hurt their own interests. Those people are mostly irrelevant now, with any luck. Their interests will nevertheless be advanced without their effort or understanding.
- Status