This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Occupy Wall Street Protests
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
heponton
Wowhead, I've considered you a dear friend through my many years in playing WoW. I have something that I wish to share, and I would like to seek the opinions and thoughts of the community.
For those not in the know, eleven days ago there was a mass protest in lower Manhattan to demonstrate against corporate/political corruption, abuse of the "99% percent" by the wealthy, as well as many other causes raised by individuals and groups who had similar interests.
International media has been closely watching the unfolding events and reporting on them since the beginning of the protests. However, US media has barely given any serious coverage, if any at at all, up until recently. As of now there are currently many branch groups organizing similar protests in large cities and political hot spots.
You can find information in many places but here are a few links to the most relevant info:
https://occupywallst.org/
http://www.reddit.com/r/occupywallstreet
http://twitter.com/#
!/search?q=%23OccupyWallStreet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street
I personally think that for us youth of the USA, this is a big cracker barrel for how we would like to see the future of our country, and in which direction it will go. I think regardless on our on individual views on the protests, we can all agree to that.
Post by
gnomerdon
Were they protesting on a private property?
edit: I feel a lot of things were taken out of context. It's not as bad as it sounds. Most of the 80 arrests were for blocking traffic, though some were also charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.
Post by
heponton
Were they protesting on a private property?
I believe you are referring to the New York Stock Exchange. Wall Street is just like any other street.
Post by
MyTie
I think "Wall Street" isn't an entity with the capability to measure ethics. "Wall Street" is just another word for the global exchange of goods. When people protest against "Wall Street" what it seems like they are doing is protesting against capitalism, with no better economic model in mind.
As for "the abuse of the 99% by the wealthy", that is just a vast generalization for a vague feeling of disparity. I don't feel that 1 out of 100 people I encounter in a day is somehow corrupt and looking to keep me in destitute financial situations.
This seems like just another argument against "the man", without a clear agenda or real list of wrongdoings.
The economic disparity in the United States is best fixed by insisting on a decrease in government spending and regulations. In essence, the global trade of goods, or Wall Street, is the true answer to fixing out problems. Arguing against capitalism is really just arguing for more government control on the economy, which will only make things worse.
Post by
MyTie
Were they protesting on a private property?
I believe you are referring to the New York Stock Exchange. Wall Street is just like any other street.
That's for clearing that up. We all thought the protest was against a slab of pavement until you came along.
Post by
xlanadenx
I think "Wall Street" isn't an entity with the capability to measure ethics. "Wall Street" is just another word for the global exchange of goods. When people protest against "Wall Street" what it seems like they are doing is protesting against capitalism, with no better economic model in mind.
As for "the abuse of the 99% by the wealthy", that is just a vast generalization for a vague feeling of disparity. I don't feel that 1 out of 100 people I encounter in a day is somehow corrupt and looking to keep me in destitute financial situations.
This seems like just another argument against "the man", without a clear agenda or real list of wrongdoings.
The economic disparity in the United States is best fixed by insisting on a decrease in government spending and regulations. In essence, the global trade of goods, or Wall Street, is the true answer to fixing out problems. Arguing against capitalism is really just arguing for more government control on the economy, which will only make things worse.
See, I was really starting to like how much sense you made.
That's for clearing that up. We all thought the protest was against a slab of pavement until you came along.
Then you did this.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
pezz
Noam Chomsky, you mean this guy?
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
I think "Wall Street" isn't an entity with the capability to measure ethics. "Wall Street" is just another word for the global exchange of goods. When people protest against "Wall Street" what it seems like they are doing is protesting against capitalism, with no better economic model in mind.
As for "the abuse of the 99% by the wealthy", that is just a vast generalization for a vague feeling of disparity. I don't feel that 1 out of 100 people I encounter in a day is somehow corrupt and looking to keep me in destitute financial situations.
This seems like just another argument against "the man", without a clear agenda or real list of wrongdoings.
The economic disparity in the United States is best fixed by insisting on a decrease in government spending and regulations. In essence, the global trade of goods, or Wall Street, is the true answer to fixing out problems. Arguing against capitalism is really just arguing for more government control on the economy, which will only make things worse.
See, I was really starting to like how much sense you made.
That's for clearing that up. We all thought the protest was against a slab of pavement until you came along.
Then you did this.My second post was sarcasm. I was pointing out that his know-it-all statement was blisteringly pointless.
Post by
MyTie
From what I've read on the links, it doesn't seem to be an "abolish capitalism" protest. It seems more about the widening gap between rich and poor, and the socially and economically dispossessed, compared to the relatively super rich elites. It's civil disobedience, not rioting. The "organizers" have stated that they are using the "tactic of mass occupation to restore democracy in America. We also encourage the use of nonviolence to achieve our ends and maximize the safety of all participants." People know that if they engage in civil disobedience they may get arrested or charged, that's the whole point.
I especially like Noam Chomsky's contribution. "Anyone with eyes open knows that the gangsterism of Wall Street -- financial institutions generally -- has caused severe damage to the people of the United States (and the world). And should also know that it has been doing so increasingly for over 30 years, as their power in the economy has radically increased, and with it their political power. That has set in motion a vicious cycle that has concentrated immense wealth, and with it political power, in a tiny sector of the population, a fraction of 1%, while the rest increasingly become what is sometimes called "a precariat" -- seeking to survive in a precarious existence. They also carry out these ugly activities with almost complete impunity -- not only too big to fail, but also "too big to jail."
I support them, and if I was in New York, I would join them (though I'd probably get deported!).
Again, this is just a general feeling. Look at what Chomsky said: "gangsterism of Wall Street -- financial institutions generally". What is "gangsterism"? I don't believe it is anything but a word to try and demonize the world trade market, and financial institutions generally. The protests are aimed at putting more legal ramifications (read government regulation) onto the economy. ALL THIS MEANS is that they are against capitalism and for socialism, which is increased government control over the economy. I'm sure they think that will somehow stop corruption. I have news for them.
Post by
gnomerdon
^ Even the rich stockholders / corporations are taxed twice. They help the protesters more than the government helps them.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
It's not just a "general feeling". Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Exxon and BP. Lloyds and Swiss banks, and a lot of other companies. They lost 50 billion? they'll still get the bonus, for bringing the world to it's knees. They were all involved in outrageous profiteering, to the obvious detriment of a hell of a lot of people, and other species besides. Let's rein them in, give the proceeds of downright thievery to the people who need basics like medical care, housing, and education, and organizations, who need it, improve life for lots of people, and make sure it can't happen again. I'm not advocating closing them down completely (except perhaps BP, given their record.), but encouraging wealth distribution, and equality of opportunity (from birth) worldwide.
Yeah, some companies do irresponsible things. Those companies generally fail shortly thereafter. I also notice that the companies you list have significant governmental ties. But, that's not the point.
The point is that despite the flaws in a capitalist system, there are currently no viable alternatives. Straining the economy with additional burdensome governmental regulations will cause further disparity and recession.
Post by
xaratherus
I think "Wall Street" isn't an entity with the capability to measure ethics. "Wall Street" is just another word for the global exchange of goods. When people protest against "Wall Street" what it seems like they are doing is protesting against capitalism, with no better economic model in mind.
As for "the abuse of the 99% by the wealthy", that is just a vast generalization for a vague feeling of disparity. I don't feel that 1 out of 100 people I encounter in a day is somehow corrupt and looking to keep me in destitute financial situations.
This seems like just another argument against "the man", without a clear agenda or real list of wrongdoings.
The economic disparity in the United States is best fixed by insisting on a decrease in government spending and regulations. In essence, the global trade of goods, or Wall Street, is the true answer to fixing out problems. Arguing against capitalism is really just arguing for more government control on the economy, which will only make things worse.
See, I was really starting to like how much sense you made.
That's for clearing that up. We all thought the protest was against a slab of pavement until you came along.
Then you did this.My second post was sarcasm. I was pointing out that his know-it-all statement was blisteringly pointless.
Actually, it had a very clear point:
Facesmasher asked if the protests were taking place on private property.
Heponton was clarifying that the protestors were in the public location of Wall Street, not invading the private location of the New York Stock Exchange.
So your second statement
was
sarcasm, but was in fact the statement that, to me, seemed out-of-place and blisteringly pointless.
Post by
MyTie
Actually, it had a very clear point:
Facesmasher asked if the protests were taking place on private property.
Heponton was clarifying that the protestors were in the public location of Wall Street, not invading the private location of the New York Stock Exchange.
So your second statement
was
sarcasm, but was in fact the statement that, to me, seemed out-of-place and blisteringly pointless.
The protests are invading private property, not of the New York Stock Exchange, but some people were arrested for trespassing onto Bank of America property.
Further, explaining that New York Stock Exchange and Wall Street are not the same thing didn't answer the question at all. It was more of a "look what I know" moment.Were they protesting on a private property?
I believe you are referring to the New York Stock Exchange. Wall Street is just like any other street.See how inadequate this is at answering the question?
Let me give an exampleIs pasta healthy?Actually, pasta is sometimes made into different shapes.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Sigh. You'll never understand it MyTie, I think (though I hope you will) but if you ever turn up at my house, you will have a bed to sleep in, a good meal, and a lift to the bus stop, plus money for the bus, even though I have no job, and would have to forgo some luxuries, like fresh fish, or wine, to pay for the bus fare. You're welcome. Do likewise. Helping each other out makes the world go round. Start with the poorest. Caritas. Justice, Google a world without Mexicans. Over, and out.
I completely agree. What you are describing is kindness. What about this would I not understand? Is economic conservatism incompatible with social kindness? The difference is, I do NOT want government to rearrange the economic situation to anyone's advantage, because that would be to everyone's disadvantage.
Post by
gamerunknown
What is "gangsterism"?
Awarding oneself bonuses after failing as a company and using taxpayers dollars to rescue failing industries is one example. Completely contrary to the idea of Hazlitt that failing industries will necessarily die and some provisions and training should be made for unemployed workers that do not have transferable skills. His entire conception was based on the idea of low government interference to make industries more or less viable, along with throwing out stamp duties. The money used for bonuses alone probably could have prevented all the homes from foreclosing where the mortgage was granted because insurance companies decided to take risky investments for fun. Those suffering from a strict father morality for some reason don't tend to attribute individual responsibility to those lending irresponsibly, but people losing their houses can be held perfectly accountable. Hell, what if the money went for condoms in the South of Africa, or food for Somalia?
Another instance worth considering is that even with curved taxation the rich very rarely pay the majority of tax money due to accountants and subsidies and tax havens.
Then there's the other issue to keep in mind: the riots in London were said to have cost the country £100m... Less than 0.5% of the cost of white collar crime in 2009. Strange, isn't it?
Edit: Not that I agree with the protests, necessarily.
Post by
MyTie
Then there's the other issue to keep in mind: the riots in London were said to have cost the country £100m... Less than 0.5% of the cost of white collar crime in 2009. Strange, isn't it?
Not when you consider what a "white collar" crime can entail, and that "white collar" crime isn't necessarily done by rich people. How many people will be charged with insurance fraud? That one comes to mind as extremely costly.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.