SouthernDragon
Member
Zhengi said:
They cut spending?
-
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
They cut spending?
NullPointer
Member
C'mon now, we all know that its the unions and illegals.Marleyman said:
LegendofJoe
Member
Marleyman said:
I don't know the numbers concerning where the majority of campaign finance is being sourced from, but I sincerely doubt it's coming from average citizens and small businesses.
cooljeanius said:
If I still lived in DC I'd be there with them. I'm planning on stopping by for a bit when I visit some friends on Halloween weekend.
kame-sennin
Member
SouthernDragon said:
I was wondering the same thing.
SouthernDragon
Member
Zhengi said:
They didn't cut spending, though.
It's funny how being a self made anything, or picking yourself up by your own bootstraps are both physically impossible things that tons of system assisted American citizens are claiming as the secret to their success.
I wonder how well they would fare in 1840's America, if they're so self-actualized.
I wonder how well they would fare in 1840's America, if they're so self-actualized.
empty vessel
Member
akira28 said:
I like to invite these types to inhabit deserted islands and "self make" themselves there.
NullPointer
Member
Hrrrmph. Too mild and forgettable. It only appeals to the "I wish I had a pony" in all of us.Door2Dawn said:
empty vessel
Member
Enron said:
A guy made it because he wanted to. It's just a random thing that a random person who supports OWS decided to do. And it didn't cost him anything because he works in the industry. The producers of the video are listed right on the youtube video page, and here is a link to the guy's website:
http://davidsauvage.com/
You guys are terribly paranoid.
Dude Abides
Banned
Lol. If IBEW had paid for that ad he'd be decked out in gear with their logo, not have it handwritten in magic marker on his hat.
empty vessel
Member
Enron said:
I have no idea. Looks like somebody is trying to raise money to do so.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/13/occupy-wall-street-commercial_n_1009357.html
remnant said:
Which country are you talking about exactly?
The two countries I can think of, Iceland and America, that have pursued a deregulated financial industry both have banks going bankrupt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932011_Icelandic_financial_crisis
Naked Snake
Member
cooljeanius
Member
I was talking with a friend who interned on Wall Street, and apparently the bankers there are wearing bullet-proof vests now? (cross-post from http://www.reddit.com/r/occupywallstreet/comments/lia8f/bankers_wearing_bulletproof_vests_now/)
kame-sennin
Member
Naked Snake said:
Ok, he's been reading gaf.
JzeroT1437
Member
So, everyone who's been denouncing the movement,
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=449126&page=8
Still wanna defend the banks here?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=449126&page=8
Still wanna defend the banks here?
cooljeanius
Member
So I just found out about The Hot Chicks of Occupy Wall Street: http://hotchicksofoccupywallstreet.tumblr.com/
Yeah, got the idea. Not impressed. As noted it's like "And I want a pony."Door2Dawn said:
Also the guy in the white hard hat? Not doing your movement any favors there.
Really they should have been like
"We are Occupy Wall Street and here is what we stand for:
<cut to one person>
Take the corporations out of government
<cut to another>
Institute fairer taxes so the government's debt problems isn't idled solely on the backs of the poor.
<cut to another>
More funding for education to build a better tomorrow
<cut to another>
Ensure that no citizen is just one illness away from bankruptcy.
<cut to another>
To put in safeguards to ensure that the banks that got us here can't do it again.
<cut to another>
We are Occupy wall street
<cut to another>
We are Occupy wall street
<cut to another>
We are Occupy wall street
<cut to another>
And we are the 99%.
splash screen "Learn more at wwww.iwantaponytoo.com"
That's silly, but it'd be more effective than what they did. They're going up against corporations they need to step it up.
Amibguous Cad
Member
Chichikov said:
Wall Street is fine with government power when it protects them from competition or bails them out.
Here's an interesting story on Sweden...
http://www.thelocal.se/14496/20080922/
They deregulated and the exact same thing happened. A housing bubble appeared and created a crisis between 1990 and 1994.
The government's solution was to essentially buy the banks, screw the shareholders and save the creditors. The complete opposite to the US's solution.
On Wiki it says Canada just deregulated their Natural Gas Industry, hardly the banking sector.
Hong Kong is understandable, they are essentially built on banking.
as for Switzerland, do I really need to remind you why their banks are famous?
http://www.thelocal.se/14496/20080922/
They deregulated and the exact same thing happened. A housing bubble appeared and created a crisis between 1990 and 1994.
The government's solution was to essentially buy the banks, screw the shareholders and save the creditors. The complete opposite to the US's solution.
On Wiki it says Canada just deregulated their Natural Gas Industry, hardly the banking sector.
Hong Kong is understandable, they are essentially built on banking.
as for Switzerland, do I really need to remind you why their banks are famous?
JzeroT1437
Member
And another for the Wall Street Defense Team:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=449142
Rollin' back the clock to 19th century labor standards. Classy.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=449142
Rollin' back the clock to 19th century labor standards. Classy.
Washington is accountable to us. Wall Street is not. They may be buying our laws but they're not passing them. I see the protesting of Wall Street as more symbolic than anything. It's time to take these protests to Washington.akira28 said:
empty vessel
Member
More on collective embezzlement and fraud:
Email Warned That Bank Up For Bailout Was Disastrous
by Marian Wang and Paul Kiel
ProPublica
http://www.propublica.org/article/email-warned-that-bank-up-for-bailout-was-disastrous
Email Warned That Bank Up For Bailout Was Disastrous
by Marian Wang and Paul Kiel
ProPublica
The U.S. Treasury Department had just announced preliminary approval of $299 million in taxpayer support for Californias United Commercial Bank when the email landed.
Wow you guys are either making a big statement with this one or your gatekeeper is incompetent, warned the anonymous missive, sent in October 2008 to the Treasury and obtained by ProPublica through a Freedom of Information Act request. This is one of the worst loan portfolios in the country run by one of the worst CEOs (and a lying CEO at that).
The warning went unheeded. Treasury pushed ahead and provided United Commercial Bank with funds under a part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program that was aimed at bolstering healthy banks.
But within months of getting bailout funds, things began to unravel. The bank disclosed publicly in May 2009 that it was restating its 2008 financial reports. It announced in July it would stop paying dividends on its stocks, including the shares bought by Treasury. In September, the banks audit committee wrapped up an internal investigation that found deliberate and improper actions and omissions by certain bank officials. And in November 2009, United Commercial Bank became the first bailout recipient to fail, wiping out Treasurys investment of almost $300 million.
Another bank, Florida-based U.S. Century, went into a similar slide right after receiving TARP funds, as we recently reported. That bank is now on the verge of collapse, weighed down by poor-performing loans, some of them to insiders. (No executives at U.S. Century have been accused of wrongdoing.) While no emails warning the government against the Florida bank have surfaced, it was also approved for bailout funds $50.2 million despite red flags.
In the case of Californias United Commercial Bank, former executives now face civil and criminal charges. Federal officials also are moving to bar former CEO Thomas Wu and nine other former executives from the banking industry altogether, citing their personal dishonesty and a pattern of misconduct. Two former executives though notably, not the CEO are the first senior executives at a bailed-out bank to face criminal charges. They are accused of hiding the banks loan losses from investors, auditors and regulators. ...
Wow you guys are either making a big statement with this one or your gatekeeper is incompetent, warned the anonymous missive, sent in October 2008 to the Treasury and obtained by ProPublica through a Freedom of Information Act request. This is one of the worst loan portfolios in the country run by one of the worst CEOs (and a lying CEO at that).
The warning went unheeded. Treasury pushed ahead and provided United Commercial Bank with funds under a part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program that was aimed at bolstering healthy banks.
But within months of getting bailout funds, things began to unravel. The bank disclosed publicly in May 2009 that it was restating its 2008 financial reports. It announced in July it would stop paying dividends on its stocks, including the shares bought by Treasury. In September, the banks audit committee wrapped up an internal investigation that found deliberate and improper actions and omissions by certain bank officials. And in November 2009, United Commercial Bank became the first bailout recipient to fail, wiping out Treasurys investment of almost $300 million.
Another bank, Florida-based U.S. Century, went into a similar slide right after receiving TARP funds, as we recently reported. That bank is now on the verge of collapse, weighed down by poor-performing loans, some of them to insiders. (No executives at U.S. Century have been accused of wrongdoing.) While no emails warning the government against the Florida bank have surfaced, it was also approved for bailout funds $50.2 million despite red flags.
In the case of Californias United Commercial Bank, former executives now face civil and criminal charges. Federal officials also are moving to bar former CEO Thomas Wu and nine other former executives from the banking industry altogether, citing their personal dishonesty and a pattern of misconduct. Two former executives though notably, not the CEO are the first senior executives at a bailed-out bank to face criminal charges. They are accused of hiding the banks loan losses from investors, auditors and regulators. ...
http://www.propublica.org/article/email-warned-that-bank-up-for-bailout-was-disastrous
Fusion Pizza
Member
Don't know if this has been posted yet, but this is HIGHLY RELEVANT
New Scientist has posted an article what many have believed, but we have never had empirical date before to prove; that a very small percentage essentially runs the world economy.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228354.500-revealed--the-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world.html
New Scientist has posted an article what many have believed, but we have never had empirical date before to prove; that a very small percentage essentially runs the world economy.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228354.500-revealed--the-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world.html
empty vessel
Member
Megalodactyl said:
Interesting article/work. But I think it only tells part of the story (as the article itself concedes). While ownership is important, so is control. A lot of large corporations are controlled by their executives, with ownership control being minimal. It is necessary to look at those individual managers when looking at systemic imbalance, because what has happened is that those managers have basically pilfered those corporations for their own gain. Collective embezzlement--theft and corruption from the inside of these immensely economically powerful entities--is probably the biggest contributor to the financial collapse. That's why regulation of executive management is so important. That said, the concentration of ownership--which is what provides the immense economic power to these entities--paves the way for this kind of behavior by those working inside the entities.
This may be out of date now (haven't really perused it for a long time) but for an overview of who sits on corporate boards, http://www.theyrule.net/ is a fascinating tool. For instance, go to "Popular Maps > 4 Big Banks" to see the reach of BoA, Citi, Wells Fargo, and JPMC in terms of executive influence.empty vessel said:
EDIT: Oooh, forgot the direct link feature: http://theyrule.net/map_170
remnant said:
This is not true at all. Canada has far stricter regulations than the united states. For one, Canada's investment bankers, unlike the US, are subject to the same rules as commercial banks.
Our government is also designed to keep track of the financial sector at multiple levels:
You are also forgetting that attempts to merge the big banks have been rejected by Canada's competition bureau and finance ministers. In 1998 they rejected both the merger between Royal Bank and BMO and the proposed merger between TD and CIBC.
empty vessel
Member
Evlar said:
I remember looking at that a long time ago. It looks like it is still being maintained (at least as much as possible) if the "about" section is anything to go by. It's a cool project.
Ghost_Protocol
Member
You guys have to read this opinion piece on the Occupy Wall Street movement. I found it on fox new.com of all places: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/10/14/understanding-occupy-wall-street/?intcmp=obinsite
Critics of the growing Occupy Wall Street movement complain that the protesters dont have a policy agenda and, therefore, dont stand for anything. They're wrong. The key isnt what protesters are for but rather what theyre against -- the gaping inequality that has poisoned our economy, our politics and our nation.
In America today, 400 people have more wealth than the bottom 150 million combined. Thats not because 150 million Americans are pathetically lazy or even unlucky. In fact, Americans have been working harder than ever -- productivity has risen in the last several decades. Big business profits and CEO bonuses have also gone up. Worker salaries, however, have declined.
Most of the Occupy Wall Street protesters arent opposed to free market capitalism. In fact, what they want is an end to the crony capitalist system now in place, that makes it easier for the rich and powerful to get even more rich and powerful while making it increasingly hard for the rest of us to get by. The protesters are not anti-American radicals. They are the defenders of the American Dream, the decision from the birth of our nation that success should be determined by hard work not royal bloodlines.
Sure, bank executives may work a lot harder than you and me or a mother of three doing checkout at a grocery store. Maybe the bankers work ten times harder. Maybe even a hundred times harder. But theyre compensated a thousand times more.
The question is not how Occupy Wall Street protesters can find that gross discrepancy immoral. The question is why every one of us isnt protesting with them.
According to polls, most Americans support the 99% movement, even if theyre not taking to the streets. In fact, support for the Occupy Wall Street protests is not only higher than for either political party in Washington but greater than support for the Tea Party. And unlike the Tea Party which was fueled by national conservative donors and institutions, the Occupy Wall Street Movement is spreading organically from Idaho to Indiana. Institutions on the left, including unions, have been relatively late to the game.
Ironically, the original Boston Tea Party activists would likely support Occupy Wall Street more as well. Note that the original Tea Party didnt protest taxes, merely the idea of taxation without representation -- and they were actually protesting the crown-backed monopoly of the East India Company, the main big business of the day.
Americans today also support taxes. In fact, two-thirds of voters -- including a majority of Republicans -- support increasing taxes on the rich, something the Occupy Wall Street protests implicitly support. Thats not just anarchist lefty kids. Soccer moms and construction workers and, yes, even some bankers want to see our economy work for the 99%, not just the 1%, and are flocking to Occupy protests in droves.
Ive even met a number of Libertarians and Tea Party conservatives at these protests. So the critics are right, the Occupy Wall Street movement isnt the Tea Party. Occupy Wall Street is much, much broader.
Maybe its hard to see your best interests reflected in a sometimes rag-tag, inarticulate, imperfect group of protesters. But make no mistake about it: While horrendous inequality is not an American tradition, protest is.And if youre part of the 99% of underpaid or unemployed Americans crushed in the current economy, the Occupy Wall Street protests are your best chance at fixing the broken economy that is breaking your back.
Sally Kohn is the founder and Chief Education Officer of the Movement Vision Lab, a grassroots think tank. Follow her on Twitter@sallykohn.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011...py-wall-street/?intcmp=obinsite#ixzz1bLq8T37J
Excellent
Critics of the growing Occupy Wall Street movement complain that the protesters dont have a policy agenda and, therefore, dont stand for anything. They're wrong. The key isnt what protesters are for but rather what theyre against -- the gaping inequality that has poisoned our economy, our politics and our nation.
In America today, 400 people have more wealth than the bottom 150 million combined. Thats not because 150 million Americans are pathetically lazy or even unlucky. In fact, Americans have been working harder than ever -- productivity has risen in the last several decades. Big business profits and CEO bonuses have also gone up. Worker salaries, however, have declined.
Most of the Occupy Wall Street protesters arent opposed to free market capitalism. In fact, what they want is an end to the crony capitalist system now in place, that makes it easier for the rich and powerful to get even more rich and powerful while making it increasingly hard for the rest of us to get by. The protesters are not anti-American radicals. They are the defenders of the American Dream, the decision from the birth of our nation that success should be determined by hard work not royal bloodlines.
Sure, bank executives may work a lot harder than you and me or a mother of three doing checkout at a grocery store. Maybe the bankers work ten times harder. Maybe even a hundred times harder. But theyre compensated a thousand times more.
The question is not how Occupy Wall Street protesters can find that gross discrepancy immoral. The question is why every one of us isnt protesting with them.
According to polls, most Americans support the 99% movement, even if theyre not taking to the streets. In fact, support for the Occupy Wall Street protests is not only higher than for either political party in Washington but greater than support for the Tea Party. And unlike the Tea Party which was fueled by national conservative donors and institutions, the Occupy Wall Street Movement is spreading organically from Idaho to Indiana. Institutions on the left, including unions, have been relatively late to the game.
Ironically, the original Boston Tea Party activists would likely support Occupy Wall Street more as well. Note that the original Tea Party didnt protest taxes, merely the idea of taxation without representation -- and they were actually protesting the crown-backed monopoly of the East India Company, the main big business of the day.
Americans today also support taxes. In fact, two-thirds of voters -- including a majority of Republicans -- support increasing taxes on the rich, something the Occupy Wall Street protests implicitly support. Thats not just anarchist lefty kids. Soccer moms and construction workers and, yes, even some bankers want to see our economy work for the 99%, not just the 1%, and are flocking to Occupy protests in droves.
Ive even met a number of Libertarians and Tea Party conservatives at these protests. So the critics are right, the Occupy Wall Street movement isnt the Tea Party. Occupy Wall Street is much, much broader.
Maybe its hard to see your best interests reflected in a sometimes rag-tag, inarticulate, imperfect group of protesters. But make no mistake about it: While horrendous inequality is not an American tradition, protest is.And if youre part of the 99% of underpaid or unemployed Americans crushed in the current economy, the Occupy Wall Street protests are your best chance at fixing the broken economy that is breaking your back.
Sally Kohn is the founder and Chief Education Officer of the Movement Vision Lab, a grassroots think tank. Follow her on Twitter@sallykohn.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011...py-wall-street/?intcmp=obinsite#ixzz1bLq8T37J
Excellent
SouthernDragon
Member
Ghost_Protocol said:
How did this get past their censors? Someone is getting fired~
kame-sennin
Member
cooljeanius said:
It sucks that no matter what their beliefs are, what they express, or what they represent, it is impossible for women to escape judgment about their physical bodies. Women just don't have the privilege of being judged solely by their ideas, some asshole is always going to try an shift the conversation to whether they're hot or not.
- Status