Support NeoGAF

[ConfusingJazz]

Hmm, those complaining are the same losers who just want to sit home watching TV after work. They don't care as long as they have a job and the TV is working.

The things OWS protested against costs the US magnitudes more than a handful of cops.

Or I worked in politics for four years, and seen that it's a big pain in the ass to influence an election, and then seen hard work pay off. And I have seen what lazy and unorganized politics does, and that it won't accomplish shit other then keep the status quo.

 

[Karma Kramer]

The notion that because we don't see our bank/corporate financed political system/leaders/officials radically changing laws or prosecuting illegal wall street/financial activities shows that OWS accomplished nothing is pretty funny. They could have been a lot more organized but the amount of time and effort that went into it so that it did become globally aware pretty quickly is an accomplishment. People will bring up the Tea Party as a counter to how protests should function, but did OWS have financial backing from the elite? In fact the Tea Party initially was focused on the Wall Street/Bank bailouts but was co-opted and turned into a political tool to keep Americans divided (Birther, Anti-Government, etc). When these legitimate protests arise the elite make sure to change the narrative as quickly as possible by way of co-opting, propaganda news media, and unlawful police aggression. As long as the main headlines aren't focused on the elite's corruption then they are happy. Unfortunately real progress will take time because of the conditions, organization and dedication needed to by-pass the elite's power over mainstream America.

 

[OriginofHysteria]

Hmm....drawing a blank here.

Central jersey is where its at! It doesn't smell like poo like the east coast NJ, its not a barren wasteland like the north NJ and its not hickville like the southern NJ part.

 

[Dude Abides]

No, we're talking about Philadelphia, not New Jersey

Filthadelphia. The taint has spread to Southern NJ.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Central jersey is where its at! It doesn't smell like poo like the east coast, its not a barren wasteland like the north and its not hickville like the south!

Fair point, though I do think Ocean City is a really nice area...Wildwood is not. lol

Filthadelphia. The taint has spread to Southern NJ.

Says a guy living in New York. lol

 

[CharlieDigital]

Of course it does. Don't be ridiculous.

I disagree heartily. What measurable impact has it had on this election? Has income inequality been at the forefront of the discussion? Has it been the platform for any of the candidates with a shot at winning? Has there been a real discussion about raising taxes? All you need to do is consider that last question and see how futile it has been.

Voting is the least effective political act one can do. OWS was (and continues to be) 1000 times more effectively than all electoral votes you've ever made combined.

So you do not believe that former moderates like Mitt Romney (and most of the Republican platform) have moved their positions further to the right to appease to a voting base that -- despite being in the minority, population wise -- continues to out-vote the majority? If you do, then you can see that the Republican party has veered towards where the money and the votes are.

Actual votes determine very little about what public policy will look like, especially in an era of corruption where money is so influential.

Completely naive. See my previous point. The success of the Tea Party movement in co-opting the Republican party and driving out moderates like Crist, Huntsman, etc. is proof that bankable votes and money affect outcomes.

I had not intention in posting in this thread until I read this. I just wanted to point out that literally the same argument can be made, perhaps with the exception of sanitation costs, about the lunch counter sit-ins in the south during the civil rights movement that attempted to do away with segregation there.

Granted, it was a single part of a much larger movement that took place over a decade, but no one knows if Occupy Wall Street will begin a similar movement.

Already answered:

MLK didn't make his speech on the Lincoln Memorial and then sit there for a year. He organized voting drives, taught how to protest, studied up on local injustices, and made a solid network of Churches, sympathetic civilian leaders, and legal scholars to fight with him. Doing nothing but protesting accomplishes little.

 

[beastmode]

Well no, were there some normal legitimate ideas? I would think so. But that doesn't avoid the fact that the random nuts with perplexing unrealistic ideas like free college for everyone were outvoicing those with solid ideas. And unfortunately for our OWS protestors, that's what the general public viewed them as, freeloaders who did nothing and had stupid ideas

Yeah what a ridiculous idea, it's almost like there isn't a university with no tuition and open admissions in Mexico City.

 

[codhand]

Four pages of nothing! Some "effect"!

 

[OriginofHysteria]

Yeah what a ridiculous idea, it's almost like there isn't a university with no tuition and open admissions in Mexico City.

So you're open to poor people subsidizing rich people? Okay then.

 

[Wazzim]

Calling the person who has a job a loser is pretty telling.

You're good at spinning things to fit your view, I give you that.

Or I worked in politics for four years, and seen that it's a big pain in the ass to influence an election, and then seen hard work pay off. And I have seen what lazy and unorganized politics does, and that it won't accomplish shit other then keep the status quo.

I'm in a political party myself so I certainly do not see unorganized politics as superior towards organised politics

 

[elongation]

The kings are still there, they just don't wear crowns anymore. The slaves are still there, just not in chains anymore.

And sure, if you want to count the time when the Clovis people walked the earth then yeah I guess you can say there was a time when there were no rich and poor people.

Before the Neolithic Revolution human beings lived in semi-to-fully collectivised groups where the ideas of wealth and property were non-existent and meaningless.

Yes we still have rulers (the capitalists nowadays) and wage slaves, but what is your point? You don't believe it is possible to overcome class hierarchy? Do you think we should all just sit back and continue to be ruled? This is liberalism at best.

 

[x-Lundz-x]

Again completely wrong. You're giving us a 3000 year timespan to play with but even with 50 year's data you'd be shown categorically wrong. Look at only a few hundred years ago with income inequality just before the French Revolution. With 3 millennia you can go back to times where people earned literally nothing and they were owned by a single monarch.

edit:



Don't be so disingenuous. It's about if the wealth gap is improving, not if it still exists. Look at your own posts:

Wrong. Absolutely wrong. You think Kings of the middle ages have the same power as rulers of today? You think our president has the same power as the tyrants in China? You think the tyrants of China have the same power over their people as the rulers of the same country fifty years ago? Do you hae the slightest bit of a clue?
Not everyone is going to be president of the united states, and classes will always exist (duh), but that doesn't mean all rulers have been given the same treatment or that being poor is the same as being poor throughout time and location or the same for the middle class and upper class.

In other words, You Are Talking To Yourself.

I'm not going to continue to try and say the same thing over and over again but I'll try again. The Occupy group has some grand idea that they are going to change the world and we are going to live in some Utopia where a wealth gap doesn't exist and everyone is going to be happy because we all live on the same plane of existence when it comes to wealth.

Prove to me a time in history when the people with the money did not have the power, and the people without the money changed anything? Never.

Sure we have had revolutions and and wars and tyrants get removed and replaced but guess what, who are they replaced with? People with the money. Money is power, and the people with the money are never going to give any of that power to the people without.

I ultimately was replying saying that OWS accomplished nothing, because that is exactly what it did. Nothing. Well I guess it got some hot chick with great eyes on the cover of time magazine and coined the term 99% but that is about it. But hey, you let me know when your paycheck magically goes up because the people on wall street feel sorry for you because they have all the money and you don't.

Those lines weren't always flat:

No one's expecting a perfect solution, however everyone but you prefers bad to worse.

I just accept the world for what it is, nothing more or less. I do my best with what I have and don't worry about anything else.

 

[Buddha Beam]

Exactly. For a movement to succeed in its goals, the participants must take actions that have an impact on the outcome and not just pout like a little kid.

The Tea Party movement, for example, has been extremely successful because its constituents vote at a higher rate than the average citizen and it seems that they are better at enticing donations for their political candidates and causes.

You're taking a very short sighted view of all this. If in another year or few months the national narrative has shifted back to talking about deficits and the need for austerity, as opposed to the wealth gap and income inequality that we're talking about now, you can say the Occupy movement failed... because it will have.

Until that time comes though, you can't possibly say that with a straight face. It's all still a work in progress. You don't reverse 40 years of income inequality in a year. We're talking about at LEAST a decade long effort here. Occupy, or a successor movement, DOES however need to pick that ball back up and keep running it down the field, I'd agree.

 

[Dude Abides]

Says a guy living in New York. lol

Of course. That's why I roll my eyes at New York's underachieving little brother, Philadelphia.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Four pages of nothing! Some "effect"!

Getting a high page count on GAF isn't really a good gauge for what's important or has an effect as the Kanye thread has shown.

 

[ReBurn]

Those lines weren't always flat:

No one's expecting a perfect solution, however everyone but you prefers bad to worse.

This one stings a bit. I'm constantly told to do more with less and get productivity up with the same staff, then I have to tell that staff that they aren't getting merit increases due to budget restrictions. I even had to tell my people once that they weren't getting cost of living adjustments because deflation caused by lower housing costs meant they were able to buy more on their current salary.

Sometimes I hate being the guy between upper management and the employees that I need to get stuff done.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Of course. That's why I roll my eyes at New York's underachieving little brother, Philadelphia.

Yes, the one with lower taxes, better civil liberties (and not just related to guns), and that doesn't have Mayor Bloomberg.

 

[Wazzim]

So you're open to poor people subsidizing rich people? Okay then.

Is there anything wrong with that?

You subsidize the future rich because you then can tax them on their income later on

 

[maniac-kun]

The bankers hired people that took care of this minor annoyance.

 

[Karma Kramer]

You're taking a very short sighted view of all this. If in another year or few months the national narrative has shifted back to talking about deficits and the need for austerity, as opposed to the wealth gap and income inequality that we're talking about now, you can say the Occupy movement failed... because it will have.

Until that time comes though, you can't possibly say that with a straight face. It's all still a work in progress. You don't reverse 40 years or income inequality in a year. We're talking about a decade long effort here. Occupy, or a successor movement, DOES however need to pick that ball back up and keep running it down the field, I'd agree.

Exactly... It's almost like people who agree that the wealth gap is a problem, but didn't participate in OWS would rather consider it a complete failure than recognize that with more effort from themselves and others it could have been even more effective. Getting the national narrative focused on 1% vs 99% in these economic conditions is definitely now in the American psyche and when something else pops up, organization and commitment will only be stronger. Everything has to start somewhere.

 

[Dude Abides]

Yes, the one with lower taxes, better civil liberties (and not just related to guns), and that doesn't have Mayor Bloomberg.

High crime, joke public transport, and broken municipal services.

 

[dave is ok]

I disagree heartily. What measurable impact has it had on this election? Has income inequality been at the forefront of the discussion? Has it been the platform for any of the candidates with a shot at winning

Have you seen an anti-Romney ad lately?

 

[CharlieDigital]

Have you seen an anti-Romney ad lately?

Ads mean nothing; only outcomes matter.

This type of thinking that "getting the message out" is "good enough" is precisely why OWS and its supporters will continue to fail.

 

[GungHo]

Those lines weren't always flat:

No one's expecting a perfect solution, however everyone but you prefers bad to worse.

I would like their definition of productivity to be explained for this one. Because, if it's factoring in gross product, that's ignoring automation and other things we've put into place with computer machines, and it's misleading. If it's not gross product and is instead meant to represent actual man hours, then that's more damning.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

High crime, joke public transport, and broken municipal services.

Crime is in a few concentrated areas (like New York), public transit is fine and not subject to constant price hikes, and municipal services are fine too.

 

[beastmode]

So you're open to poor people subsidizing rich people? Okay then.

I'm up for everybody subsidizing (to scale with what they can give) everyone who needs it.

 

[Tawpgun]

Occupy brought the issue forward. I agree that they didn't accomplish anything concrete, but they raised awareness of the issue of the growing disparity between the rich and the poor, and how money plays too big a role in politics.

Occupy is coming back though. There's a big event in NYC on the one year anniversary of Occupy. I'll probably be going to check it out. Hopefully they'll be more focused and organized this year.

 

[Dude Abides]

Crime is in a few concentrated areas (like New York), public transit is fine and not subject to constant price hikes, and municipal services are fine too.

Keep telling yourself that, little brother.

 

[CharlieDigital]

Occupy brought the issue forward. I agree that they didn't accomplish anything concrete, but they raised awareness of the issue of the growing disparity between the rich and the poor, and how money plays too big a role in politics.

You could say the same thing about the whole stupid KONY 2012 movement.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Keep telling yourself that, little brother.

Oh yeah we don't have the bike rider problems you do. It's easy to walk and not worry about a bike rider knocking you over.

 

[Zaptruder]

This one stings a bit. I'm constantly told to do more with less and get productivity up with the same staff, then I have to tell that staff that they aren't getting merit increases due to budget restrictions. I even had to tell my people once that they weren't getting cost of living adjustments because deflation caused by lower housing costs meant they were able to buy more on their current salary.

Sometimes I hate being the guy between upper management and the employees that I need to get stuff done.

Is your upper management a clueless set of douchebags because they don't care, or because you kow-tow to their demands?

If the former, oh well, life sucks. If the latter - you're not helping the issue.

 

[dave is ok]

Ads mean nothing; only outcomes matter.

This type of thinking that "getting the message out" is "good enough" is precisely why OWS and its supporters will continue to fail.

Putting more words into my mouth, and also calling me part of OWS.

Romney has taken a lot of shit over his 15% capital gains tax rate from the Obama campaign and the media. One of the main gripes coming from OWS was that very rate. Who are you to say there is no relation?

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Putting more words into my mouth, and also calling me part of OWS.

Romney has taken a lot of shit over his 15% capital gains tax rate from the Obama campaign and the media. One of the main gripes coming from OWS was that very rate. Who are you to say there is no relation?

No, those things would have been targeted anyway.

 

[Earthstrike]

I voiced my opinion on this a few threads ago and I say this as a liberal: OWS accomplished nothing. Not a single fuck was given except that these dirty, useless people decided to sit around and protest instead of doing something useful and constructive with their time.

The root of that failure is that there was no goal, no organization, no mission, and -- let's face it -- no money.

But more importantly, it's hard to sympathize with a bunch of able-bodied, able-minded folk who decide that they are going to protest by sitting around and occupying some space.

Let that sink in for a moment: they protested by sitting around and occupying some space. Yeah? Their message was income inequality? Well has anything changed since then? Has income inequality improved? Is there a plan or long-lived movement now to fix this?

Complete and utter failure.

While I agree with a lot of this, isn't this fundamentally what a protest is in the modern era?

 

[winter]

You were saying?

You have one case of an ex-con who was arrested for a string of robberies who made his way from Michigan committing a sexual assault and a case of some poop and graffiti on a wall (par for the course in Philly). The way you talk about the occupy movement you insinuate that the they are rife with criminal behavior and the people partaking in the protests are creeps and rapists. And you do this on purpose in order to discredit the movement and its message. Everyone knows you do this.

There is always going to be bad people unconnected to the movement that will take advantage of the situation to find victims. This happens with everything. Sexual assaults should not discredit the message of occupy any more than pedophile priests should discredit the teachings of the Catholic church.

And I was specifically referring to Philadelphia not New York.

 

[CharlieDigital]

Putting more words into my mouth, and also calling me part of OWS.

Romney has taken a lot of shit over his 15% capital gains tax rate from the Obama campaign and the media. One of the main gripes coming from OWS was that very rate. Who are you to say there is no relation?

And yet polling has not shown any significant swing in favor of Obama...

Facts!? Data?!?! HOW DO THEY WORK!?!

 

[Dude Abides]

Oh yeah we don't have the bike rider problems you do. It's easy to walk and not worry about a bike rider knocking you over.

Of course you don't. Riding a bike is exercise. I believe there's a Philly ordinance against physical exertion of any kind.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Of course you don't. Riding a bike is exercise. I believe there's a Philly ordinance against physical exertion of any kind.

Ah good to see your rural PA upbringing manifesting.

 

[onadesertedisland]

I like the ads coming up about Obama giving amnesty and how this affects jobs. Seriously...

Do people really believe immigration has anything to do with the levels of unemployment we have? I'm sure all of the unemployed are just hustling to get their work wear pressed so they can loiter around Home Depot for for poverty level wages.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

And yet polling has not shown any significant swing in favor of Obama...

Facts!? Data?!?! HOW DO THEY WORK!?!

Romney's unfavorables are sky high, which is the body shot of politics. As a result, his speeches and policy proposals will be seen with a more skeptical eye, and therefore don't return as much benefit.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

You have one case of an ex-con who was arrested for a string of robberies who made his way from Michigan committing a sexual assault and a case of some poop and graffiti on a wall (par for the course in Philly). The way you talk about the occupy movement you insinuate that the they are rife with criminal behavior and the people partaking in the protests are creeps and rapists.

Considering that it's obvious that Occupy members didn't want crimes to be reported, but handled internally, is it truly unfair to claim that?

And you do this on purpose in order to discredit the movement and its message.

What movement?

There is always going to be bad people unconnected to the movement that will take advantage of the situation to find victims. This happens with everything. Sexual assaults should not discredit the message of occupy any more than pedophile priests should discredit the teachings of the Catholic church.

Actually I think that did a lot, rightfully, to discredit the Catholic Church.

And I was specifically referring to Philadelphia not New York.

So? Why exclude New York?

 

[dave is ok]

And yet polling has not shown any significant swing in favor of Obama...

Facts!? Data?!?! HOW DO THEY WORK!?!

"What measurable impact has it had on this election? Has income inequality been at the forefront of the discussion? Has it been the platform for any of the candidates with a shot at winning?"

That is what you asked. Stop moving the goalposts.

 

[Conciliator]

I think it greatly increased public awareness of growing income inequality. Some people say 'awareness doesn't do jack shit' but that's not really true. If any kind of legislation/regulation is enacted, or if there's just a cultural shift that changes the trajectory of wealth disparity in the coming decades - which, I know, is a big if - that could only happen because people are aware of it enough to make it a part of the public discourse. And a lot more people are aware of it now because of the occupy wall street shit.

 

[codhand]

Manos, you are judgmental; NYC, Philly and NJ are all pretty cool in my book, maybe you should stop occupying this thread, and do some work.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Manos, you are judgmental; NYC, Philly and NJ are all pretty cool in my book, maybe you should stop occupying this thread, and do some work.

Waiting for my computer to finish it's transition to Windows 7.

 

[RDreamer]

I think it accomplished a few things, or at least moved the narrative a bit. I think their overarching goals are nearly impossible in the short span that the word "Occupy" has even been known. Getting money out of politics and fixing inequality was never going to be fixed in a year or two years or even probably a decade. Part of the point of Occupy was just pointing out how ridiculous the whole democratic process, that which we use to fix these things, has become.

As for what they did: They cemented the imagery of the 1%, which I think has helped quite a bit. There isn't a ton you can solidly point to, but I think it's an image that resonates with quite a lot of people regardless of where you stand on the political spectrum. It's a criticism that would still have been probably used against people like Romney, but perhaps not to the extent or effectiveness of what's going on now.

I think it provided a decent counter narrative and grabbed enough news that the tea party's stupid debt and deficit hysteria and the push towards austerity didn't grasp us as a country fully. Obama has been a largely conciliatory president toward the opposition, and I think that the protests and actions exhibited by Occupy had to at least make him think twice about going further right on some issues and perhaps gave him a bit of courage to point out some other issues (things like the Buffett rule). I think it also provides a sort of warning to other democrats about going further right. Yes it's not as concrete as the message and beating the Tea Party has sent to the Republican party, but the democrats would be stupid not to have listened a little. These are the youth that helped put Obama into office, and these are the youth that are politically active and will be growing up and putting more into the system via votes. You could argue that they won't always be so crazy left wing, sure, but they sure aren't going to be tea party-esque people when they get a few years older. It behooves the party to at least take note.

In Wisconsin I think that energy went toward the recall elections. We never got the pure Occupy movement here because of that. I think a lot of the youth were focused on that, but were also empowered in a way by seeing other Occupy movements around the country (and maybe vise versa was also true). Unfortunately, yes, Scott Walker was not recalled, and that does put a damper on things and perhaps discouraged some youth, but it did accomplish some things. I think it put a spotlight on a lot of local issues here, and it did flip a few other seats, so Walker isn't quite as free to put forth more agenda (not that he had much more to put forth anyway).

 

[Stinkles]

So yeah, the whole Occupy Wall Street protests have kind of fizzled out. What exactly did they accomplish? Anything?

It helped solidify the problematic notion of another gilded age.

 

[Tawpgun]

You could say the same thing about the whole stupid KONY 2012 movement.

I guess. Kony 2012 did raise awareness on the issue. People just weren't clear on how invisible children handles their money and invisible children didn't do good job at conveying the current situation.

And then their boss man went crazy.

I definitely support Occupies intentions and message, im going to go to their protest in September but more as an observer.

 

[CharlieDigital]

"What measurable impact has it had on this election? Has income inequality been at the forefront of the discussion? Has it been the platform for any of the candidates with a shot at winning?"

That is what you asked. Stop moving the goalposts.

Who is moving the goalposts? My #1 "goalpost" has been about votes and money. On the former, Romney is by all accounts very close to Obama nationally. On the latter, Romney and the Republican Super PACs have out-raised and out-spent the Democrats by a wide margin. The only goal that matters is getting more left-leaning politicians in office so that we can repeal the Bush era tax cuts, actually implement Frank-Dodd, preserve and otherwise improve the ACA, and ensure that the SCOTUS is balanced. To that end, OWS has had no impact on the voting as far as polling data has shown.

Romney's unfavorables are sky high, which is the body shot of politics. As a result, his speeches and policy proposals will be seen with a more skeptical eye, and therefore don't return as much benefit.

Which doesn't seem to matter given that national polling data shows these two at a statistical dead heat. He may be unfavorable, but that doesn't mean many folks won't pinch their nose and punch the ticket for Romney and Ryan in November.

 

[dave is ok]

Who is moving the goalposts? My #1 "goalpost" has been about votes and money. On the former, Romney is by all accounts very close to Obama nationally.

You really believe this is close?

SPOILER:

Spoiler

It isn't