Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
This is a signature worthy quote, not my signature but somebodies
Hmmm...might become mine! ;D Course I also have the Commie crap too so...have to find a nice blend.
And I agree that prosecuting the wall street execs (and politicos in bed with them) isn't necessarily the answer...FINING the CRAP out of them to the tunes of billions might make an impression....and make other people thing twice. When 10 Wall Street Executives file legitimate Chaper 13s PERSONALLY...I might think we have accomplished something!
The people down in New York and elsewhere are freedom fighters. The banksters, the corrupt politicians, and the police officers which side with them - they may get small victories. But we can not be stopped, and we will not be stopped.
The police officers which come with handcuffs to drag protesters away, they should serve the people and drag the 1% away. They need to stand WITH the Occupy movement, not against it.
Occupy Wall Street is squatting on a privately-owned park.
Last night, the owners wanted to clean the park (because, as someone who ventured down there recently, it is inhumanly disgusting) and the Occupy crowd wouldn't let cleaners into the park they're currently ruining. Then they saw this as a "victory", marched down Broadway towards Wall Street and a bunch of them got arrested. This may be personal, but when one of these clowns spits in my father's face, when he was just trying to get to work, simply because he wears a tie and suit jacket to work, I take issue with the group that is portraying itself as a peaceful movement. For the record, my father works in market compliance and its his job to finger brokers doing illegal trades. Way to fight the battle, scumbag.
Also, I played a little game while I was down there. Find the "down with corporations" signs and pick how many corporations they were currently sporting. Every single person with one of these signs was sporting mainstream corporate-produced apparel, accessories, etc. Hypocrisy, is the word that comes to mind.
But these protests are basically throwing pebbles at the walls of Troy. Even when one of their own (and richest) says the 1% should be taxed much more heavily (Warren Buffet), it isn't even reported as news. It's the 37th headline on CNN's finance page, or something. I believe these protests started with genuine and clear intentions, but now the Occupy Wall Street protest is an event, not a movement. People down there are trust-fund baby hipsters protesting the very machine that pays for their overpriced slum apartments in Bedford and Williamsburg. Obviously, this is not everyone that is down there, but this is a big portion of who is down there. "Tax the 1%" is at least a reasonable thing to protest. More than half the signs are still calling for people on Wall Street to be arrested, for Wall Street to be shut down (ludicrous) and unrealistic demands that would either dismantle the country's economy or be making a scapegoat out of someone. Their hearts may be in the right place, but they need to be protesting Washington DC, not Wall Street. The brokers they so vehemently despise played the game with the rules they were given. Don't like the way the game is played? Change the rules.
Protesting the players doesn't get the rules changed.
Occupy Wall Street is squatting on a privately-owned park.
Last night, the owners wanted to clean the park (because, as someone who ventured down there recently, it is inhumanly disgusting) and the Occupy crowd wouldn't let cleaners into the park they're currently ruining. Then they saw this as a "victory", marched down Broadway towards Wall Street and a bunch of them got arrested. This may be personal, but when one of these clowns spits in my father's face, when he was just trying to get to work, simply because he wears a tie and suit jacket to work, I take issue with the group that is portraying itself as a peaceful movement. For the record, my father works in market compliance and its his job to finger brokers doing illegal trades. Way to fight the battle, scumbag.
Also, I played a little game while I was down there. Find the "down with corporations" signs and pick how many corporations they were currently sporting. Every single person with one of these signs was sporting mainstream corporate-produced apparel, accessories, etc. Hypocrisy, is the word that comes to mind.
But these protests are basically throwing pebbles at the walls of Troy. Even when one of their own (and richest) says the 1% should be taxed much more heavily (Warren Buffet), it isn't even reported as news. It's the 37th headline on CNN's finance page, or something. I believe these protests started with genuine and clear intentions, but now the Occupy Wall Street protest is an event, not a movement. People down there are trust-fund baby hipsters protesting the very machine that pays for their overpriced slum apartments in Bedford and Williamsburg. Obviously, this is not everyone that is down there, but this is a big portion of who is down there. "Tax the 1%" is at least a reasonable thing to protest. More than half the signs are still calling for people on Wall Street to be arrested, for Wall Street to be shut down (ludicrous) and unrealistic demands that would either dismantle the country's economy or be making a scapegoat out of someone. Their hearts may be in the right place, but they need to be protesting Washington DC, not Wall Street. The brokers they so vehemently despise played the game with the rules they were given. Don't like the way the game is played? Change the rules.
Protesting the players doesn't get the rules changed.
Your logic and sense of values interest me. Are you a fundamental evangelical? Forgive me if you find this as an attempt of slander, just wondering.
From my personal experience from the SB1070 protests here in Arizona I discovered that at least 50% of the people had no idea what they were protesting, but it was all the cool kids were doing so they joined.
From my personal experience from the SB1070 protests here in Arizona I discovered that at least 50% of the people had no idea what they were protesting, but it was all the cool kids were doing so they joined.
Anything that makes news draws rubberneckers and fame ho's. I'd like to know the percentage of the "cool kids" who come out to see what it's all about actually get arrested...think it's not a lot.
All the poultry processing plants in North Alabama have been shut down for 2 days in protest of the new immigration law. Over 100 production farmers (as in they make their LIVING farming and not just a hobby or season thing) in Alabama are looking at losing up to 40% of their crop harvest because they have no field workers. Yes, there will be some people that step up and take SOME of these jobs, but realistically, these types of jobs are very manual, back-breaking and HARD work not to mention dangerous at times. Very few people with any other choices stay in them for any period of time. Especially in this day and age when it actually makes perfect economic sense to weigh the benefits of going on welfare/unemployment/food stamps against a low paying, low benefit dead end job. Especially if you have to consider child care in the equation. This country has made it an economic option to NOT work and be better off than working two or three minimum wage jobs with few benefits, awful hours, and the real possibility of injury...not to mention never seeing your family. THAT to me is the REAL issue. When I was growing up seeing someone use food stamps at the grocery was almost non-existent because the shame of it, especially in a small town, was so great only those that literally had NO OTHER CHOICE did it. Now, it doesn't even phase anyone anymore. Sad....
Occupy Wall Street is squatting on a privately-owned park.
Privately owned, with stipulations those private owners themselves agreed to when it was built that it would be considered a public plaza open twenty-four hours a day. You are either unknowingly making this statement with incomplete information or knowingly exaggerating it to intentionally discredit protesters.
Last night, the owners wanted to clean the park (because, as someone who ventured down there recently, it is inhumanly disgusting) and the Occupy crowd wouldn't let cleaners into the park they're currently ruining.
Again, as I understand it you're skewing things. Brookfield Properties asked NYPD to evict the protesters, AND - and this is a pretty big AND - AND change the rules before Occupy Wall Street would be permitted to return. "They want to clean the park" is just a convenient excuse. It's more of a strategic tactic. Trust me, I've seen this. I occupied my state capitol this winter. The establishment exaggerates to make demonstrators look dirty, disrespectful, vandals, what have you. It is, quite simply, a public relations smear tactic that is resorted to when there is no violence for those in power to claim as justification for action. A quick look at a similar situation during the occupation of the Wisconsin capitol can demonstrate this. They tried getting us to completely vacate the capitol, citing the need to clean. Only the ground floor did not have its cleaning schedule disrupted during the first week of our occupation. In response, protesters talked with custodial staff and police, they negotiated. There were signs posted reminding protesters how to help keep the capitol clean, both through discouraged behaviors and volunteer cleanup crews. Various sections of the building were off-limits at varying times, precisely so we could allow the maintenance staff to do their job under those difficult circumstances. Scott Walker's Department of Administration made an initial estimate of clean-up/damages to the capitol building at $7.5 million. The actual cost was under $350K. The estimate the Walker administration claimed was between 21-22x the actual cost of cleanup. There is no way an honest attempt at an estimate by an impartial person presumably competent enough to lead a state agency would be that far off - there are definitely ulterior motives involved.
Also... "inhumanly disgusting?" Are you fucking serious? I suspect you're lowering your threshhold for "inhumanly disgusting" to sensationalize. We all attend Bonnaroo, for Christ's sake. We better than most can see through BSing on that - and I'm calling you out on it. The only things I've seen coming out of Occupy Wall Street that I, personally, would describe as "inhumanly disgusting" has been numerous actions by the NYPD. Are you glad to say your priorities side with the inanimate park and the inanimate corporation that owns it out of one side of your mouth while you call actual homo sapiens "inhuman" out of the other side?
Then they saw this as a "victory", marched down Broadway towards Wall Street and a bunch of them got arrested. This may be personal, but when one of these clowns spits in my father's face, when he was just trying to get to work, simply because he wears a tie and suit jacket to work, I take issue with the group that is portraying itself as a peaceful movement. For the record, my father works in market compliance and its his job to finger brokers doing illegal trades. Way to fight the battle, scumbag.
Daddy works on Wall Street, eh? Where the average salary is $392K and - after a quick Google search - I see that compliance officer positions pay $350K in the upper end and salaries are on the rise. While I don't condone spitting on someone myself... can you maybe see why your father might not fit in with a group of people identifying themselves as The 99%? Even on the low end of things, he wouldn't fit in with a group calling themselves The 98%. I bet that was a pretty nice suit he was wearing when he was spat upon, huh? I bet it cost more than I make in a month. Even if your father is trying to keep Wall Street in line, at least in his own jurisdiction, it sounds as if you and your family are beneficiaries of unfair tax policies that screw the rest of us. It seems that you're quite likely to have a vested financial interest in making these people look bad yourself. When you explain it like this, the prejudices you displayed earlier in your post make a lot more sense.
Random question: How's your trust fund doing these days? Go tell it to someone in The 1% who cares.
Also, I played a little game while I was down there. Find the "down with corporations" signs and pick how many corporations they were currently sporting. Every single person with one of these signs was sporting mainstream corporate-produced apparel, accessories, etc. Hypocrisy, is the word that comes to mind.
Did you play a game called "Actually talk to people with whom you disagree" while you were down there? You went there and wrote a fairly lengthy post here, and I don't see a single mention of you having a conversation with any of the protesters. You're right to see the hint of hypocrisy here, but you are wrong to focus on it. These corporations are so pervasive that they are impossible to avoid - this is precisely the reason we need to have them behave more responsibly than they currently do.
But these protests are basically throwing pebbles at the walls of Troy. Even when one of their own (and richest) says the 1% should be taxed much more heavily (Warren Buffet), it isn't even reported as news. It's the 37th headline on CNN's finance page, or something.
Um... I read about this in a small-town, Republican-leaning newspaper just yesterday. If even they're covering it, I'm pretty sure it counts as news.
I believe these protests started with genuine and clear intentions, but now the Occupy Wall Street protest is an event, not a movement.
Seeing as solidarity protests are taking place in 950+ cities in 80+ countries on a majority of the world's continents tomorrow... I'd say this is more than one single event.
Obviously, this is not everyone that is down there, but this is a big portion of who is down there. "Tax the 1%" is at least a reasonable thing to protest. More than half the signs are still calling for people on Wall Street to be arrested, for Wall Street to be shut down (ludicrous) and unrealistic demands that would either dismantle the country's economy or be making a scapegoat out of someone.
Your use of the word "scapegoat" implies that there are no real persons who should face accountability for our current crisis. I, and a lot of people, beg to differ. I do agree with you, though, that not all of those demands make sense. From the conversations I hear, two of the main ways of approaching this are as an anti-corporatist or as an anti-capitalist. Of the two, I consider myself an anti-corporatist.
Their hearts may be in the right place, but they need to be protesting Washington DC, not Wall Street. The brokers they so vehemently despise played the game with the rules they were given. Don't like the way the game is played? Change the rules.
Protesting the players doesn't get the rules changed.
You do realize a BIG part of the reason we got into this mess to begin with was because a bunch of wealthy elites decided to change the rules, right? Or that they prevented potential rules from applying to them? That there is no way to separate such rule-changing without going to our (supposed) leaders' funders? The millions they give to our politicians lead to our politicians owing them favors. I'm sorry, but there is too much "pay to play" in our political system for these people not to be considered players. Nice try deflecting the blame to DC, though... I think most of us see through the illusion that it is the true center of power in this country.
I know you occupied your state capital, I read those posts and applauded you for it. You were someone who was well-versed in the reasoning behind it and were there for real, genuine reasons. This is not the same. Not even close. There are certainly people down there that reflect your efforts and dedication in Wisconsin, but these are not a group of people with a singular goal/platform. Have you been to the protests? Until you do, please refrain from telling me what it is and is not.
Also, "the establishment"? Whatever. These people ARE dirty, making a filthy mess of a park that I actually used to hang out in, and they're causing hardship for people that are not wealthy, evil, etc. They're hurting the "little people", if you will, while the "big people" don't give a flying fuck about this protest.
The clean-up wasn't an attempt to remove everyone from the parks, it was an attempt to clean the park while letting the protesters remain there. This wasn't a sneaky ploy to remove everyone out of the park, it was geared to clean up after people who clearly don't give a fuck about cleaning up after themselves.
That agreement the owners have with the city, btw, allows for them to call on the city to remove people they deem dangerous, hazardous, etc. So, legally speaking, they 100% have the right to have every single protester removed, which they haven't done.
$700k? In a decade!? That is NOTHING. Are you kidding? $70k a year for upkeep is not a big budget, even by small NYC park standards.
And "inhumanly disgusting" is a phrase I would use to describe people leaving their food remnants on the ground, shiting in bushes, pissing everywhere, and showing little to no respect for their "home" for the past few weeks...and then refusing to let someone clean up after them.
You love citing facts, although they're pretty off-base.
The average salary for an employee on Wall Street is not $392K. There are a handful of people who make 10s of millions of dollars, and the VAST majority of people down there make under $100k (or right around it), including my father. Do some fucking research before calling out my father or any other hard-working middle-class Wall St. employee just because of the fucking area code their office is in. My dad wakes up at 4:30 every day to commute 2 1/2 hours each way to work and has been doing so since 1979. Your "Google search" is insultingly wrong. As someone who went to school for finance, began in finance, and then left the industry because I don't agree with how it's operated (yes, I LEFT being a broker to become a project manager for a construction company because I disagree with the lack or morality in the industry), I can tell you with extreme confidence that if you find someone who works in compliance who makes that much, they're an executive in one of the big firms. There are hundreds of financial firms and they all require, by law, a compliance officer. These firms do not pay their compliance officers anywhere close to that figure. Most don't make over $100k. But way to be a pompous dickhead and after making a multitude of assumptions about a person you'll likely never meet.
In other words...my dad IS the 98%. My family couldn't even be confused with wealthy, we were not "upper middle class". My dad worked 50+ hours a week for 30 years and is still doing it. He had the opportunity once, in his entire life, to cash out on a big trade, but someone literally robbed the trade from him and he was screwed by it. My dad hates the same fucks these people do. So, no, I don't see how someone could confuse my dad with a millionaire just because he has a tie on. That's so close-minded that your suggesting it borders on offensive.
Trust fund? HA! I am currently paying off $75K in student loans from Fordham (I had a scholarship cover the rest), that my parents do not help me with. You have a perception that Wall Street is made out of gold bricks and they give you a Porsche just for getting a job or something. Wall Street is overwhelmingly working class people with a handful of big shots. If you knew anything, you would know all the major banks are based in midtown Manhattan, not Wall Street. They're protesting a symbol, not the actual culprits.
Did I talk to people while I was down there? No. I just gawked and pointed like a fucking tourist. Of course I spoke with people. I was genuinely interested because I agree with the principle of taxing the rich to a greater extent. What I found was actually upsetting. Dozens of people protesting the wrong thing, or not sure what they were even protesting. I had intelligent, respectful conversations with a handful of people who knew what they were talking about, but the majority I spoke with were not of that variety. Like I said, it's "the cool thing".
And please. Spare me the "we can't avoid corporations!" diatribe. Go buy your clothes from a merchant vendor if you hate corporations that much. How many corporations are based in the downtown financial district of NYC, anyway? I wouldn't put my guess at double-digits. Again, protesting a symbol.
You read the Buffet thing in a newspaper yesterday? That's interesting. Because Buffet said it well over a month ago. Timely reporting!
My friend in Australia was telling me about "Occupy Melbourne". I don't see what 15 people in Melbourne Australia protesting "the establishment" has to do with changing American law, but okay.
Read above, where I looked into approximations of your father's salary, and go fuck yourself. I did my research, and this stinks of hypocrisy.
My response was above. Now, go fuck YOURself. I am not rich. My first car was a 1987 Chevy Celebrity. I don't even have a car right now. I live in an apartment in the Bronx, not exactly screaming "dolla dolla bills ya'll". I work 50-60 hours a week and barely make enough to go to Bonnaroo every year, on top of my regular expenses. But, you were able to take weeks off of work to protest in the capital of Wisonsin? Do you have a trust fund? Because I couldn't survive not working for two weeks, let alone a month. See how easy it is to take one innocent fact and turn it into a nonsensical pile of bullshit?
I find it interesting that you base a good portion of your post on trying to discredit me when you have never met me, know nothing about me, and think because a person works on Wall St. they're a millionaire.
Also, the financial institutions didn't "change the rules". The country was headed for a recession with or without the meltdown on Wall Street. Their actions sped up the process, sure, but this was coming with or without their actions. Did they use "grey areas" to make questionable trades? Yes. But the people who conducted blatantly illegal transactions were arrested and charged, or are being investigated still. The illegal actions were by a handful of people. I could get into more detail, financially speaking, but, basically, a few trading desks made these mortgage-backed "empty" securities, and they might as well have gotten Wall St. addicted to crack and thrown a 2-ton rock in the middle of the street. These guys are addicted to money and a few guys acting immorally and illegally gave them an avenue to rake in tons of it. But the vast majority of people who profited off of MBS's were not aware that they were essentially pedaling valueless securities.
But, again, this falls on the gov't. Do you know who works at the SEC? People who weren't qualified or smart enough to get jobs at an investment bank or brokerage. Even the top compliance people are lured away by big trading firms and investment banks (those $350k guys are these dudes, btw). This is true, but it won't show up on your Google search. So the people chasing the crooks are the people that weren't bright enough to get their jobs. I'm sure you see why this is not the best situation for financial regulation. And, no, I'm not deflecting anything to DC. That is where people should be protesting. Protesting a bunch of multi-millionaires (and billionaires) on their way to work isn't going to change a fucking thing. I don't see the point. They LAUGH at the protesters. Literally, they laugh. I saw it with my own eyes and it was infuriating, but they do. You want to make a difference?
You set camp in front of the fucking Capital Building and make it known you won't leave until changes are made. This is "out of sight out of mind" for politicians. They comment on it because they're asked. But in their heads, I would bet anything they're thinking "at least they aren't here".
Maybe you see now you have a lot more in common with me than you think, and making assumptions can be dangerous conversationally.
Post by awolfatthedoor on Oct 15, 2011 22:20:32 GMT -5
average salary is a misleading stat. median salary is prob what i would go with to be a bit more representative of what the average employee in any field makes.
The clean-up wasn't an attempt to remove everyone from the parks, it was an attempt to clean the park while letting the protesters remain there. This wasn't a sneaky ploy to remove everyone out of the park, it was geared to clean up after people who clearly don't give a fuck about cleaning up after themselves.
That agreement the owners have with the city, btw, allows for them to call on the city to remove people they deem dangerous, hazardous, etc. So, legally speaking, they 100% have the right to have every single protester removed, which they haven't done.
They have a cleanup crew similar to what we had in Wisconsin, and I know firsthand that it was livable. The professionals didn't get everything as often as they did, and that building got a lot of wear and tear, but the people living inside that capitol took care of it adequately. I know I've lived in far dirtier places than the occupied capitol. I'm not saying that building smelled like roses after a couple weeks, because we couldn't really air it out when it's below freezing while those extraordinary circumstances were underway. I still disagree with you in that it was/is a sneaky ploy. As I understand things, they wanted the entire park vacated for cleaning - not cleaning coexisting with occupation as you suggest. Post-cleaning, there were to be no tents or structures erected. That was a big sticking point. That's a game changer when it comes to something like this. When I see a demand like that being made of the protests, I see the equivalent of the moment our capitol went on lockdown with the "2 out, 1 in" rule." I know how important it is to resist that if you're going to make the moment last.
$700k? In a decade!? That is NOTHING. Are you kidding? $70k a year for upkeep is not a big budget, even by small NYC park standards.
You have no problem with that fraction of a large business being considered its own small business to collect more funding from a taxpayer source? I'm sorry, but that's the exact kind of corrupt political payola and inefficient government that needs to cease and desist. It's not just The 99% vs. the 1% in people terms; it's big guy vs. small guy in the business world too. This looks to me like a big guy wearing small guy's clothing to take some money only meant for small guys. That particular handout has a whiff of corruption to me.
And "inhumanly disgusting" is a phrase I would use to describe people leaving their food remnants on the ground, shiting in bushes, pissing everywhere, and showing little to no respect for their "home" for the past few weeks...and then refusing to let someone clean up after them.
New York City's reputation as being a pristine metropolis has been ruined! I brought up the Bonnaroo example. I think we've all seen how the media can portray us, even though we'll say it's an unfair stereotype. I think the same applies there. I sent a care package with some Madison friends who went out a week into OWS. I saw the pictures she sent back. I know there were portapotties there, I saw her photos myself. I've had to deal with Phantom Shitters at Bonnaroo too, but I know they're not representative of everyone there. I should think you do, too.
The average salary for an employee on Wall Street is not $392K. There are a handful of people who make 10s of millions of dollars, and the VAST majority of people down there make under $100k (or right around it), including my father. Do some fucking research before calling out my father or any other hard-working middle-class Wall St. employee just because of the fucking area code their office is in. My dad wakes up at 4:30 every day to commute 2 1/2 hours each way to work and has been doing so since 1979. Your "Google search" is insultingly wrong.
You think I just pulled those numbers out of my ass? I'm sorry, but I'm not that kind of guy. I looked into some things. You might dispute with what I found, and perhaps with good reason, but for you to say I did no looking into it whatsoever is clearly not the case. First of all, when I was looking into Wall Street average salaries, my number came from www.nytimes.com/2010/07/11/business/11rebound.html?dbk]this New York Times article. I stated what the average salary was, but didn't say your father made the average. I may have made a mistake in assuming that your father's job title is Compliance Officer. You said he worked in market compliance, and when I was looking into what compliance people made on Wall Street, it appeared that there were two primary titles I saw. Compliance Officer & Compliance Analyst. Since you said your father fingered illegal traders, I assumed Compliance Officer. What I saw for that position's salary ranged from $100-350K, and I didn't just look at one site and run with it. Am I wrong on your father's job title? If so, I'm curious to know how close I was to it.
I can tell you with extreme confidence that if you find someone who works in compliance who makes that much, they're an executive in one of the big firms.
Even the top compliance people are lured away by big trading firms and investment banks (those $350k guys are these dudes, btw).
You cannot tell me my numbers are invalid because I did not do any "fucking research" AND concede that people do indeed earn within the range that I claimed. You don't get to have it both ways here. So which is it?
So, no, I don't see how someone could confuse my dad with a millionaire just because he has a tie on. That's so close-minded that your suggesting it borders on offensive.
Yet it's okay to say that everyone protesting shits in the bushes? C'mon, man!
Trust fund? HA! I am currently paying off $75K in student loans from Fordham (I had a scholarship cover the rest), that my parents do not help me with.
You're telling me parental income has absolutely nothing to do with how much in loans/scholarships a student receives? I don't think we agree here. I went to one of the better public universities in the country, myself without much in the way of parental assistance, and you have two and a half times the college debt that I do. I somehow doubt I would have been extended the same amount in loans that you received with my father who earns half as much as yours does working two jobs. I don't know about you, but I wasn't given any of my loans without providing evidence of my parents' incomes. There's definitely a tie, even if the parents aren't paying it themselves. Just sayin...
And please. Spare me the "we can't avoid corporations!" diatribe. Go buy your clothes from a merchant vendor if you hate corporations that much.
This is not just a diatribe. (If that even was a "diatribe," - half the people reading this can assure you that if that's one of my diatribes, it's one of the weaker examples of one at best.) I'm observing this from a time zone away, and even from here I can discern that there appears to be friction between anti-corporatist and anti-capitalist factions out there. The necessity of corporations, being one of the points of contention in such friction, is fair game in this discussion. You won't find universal agreement on this issue in the movement. You're throwing down a black-and-white gauntlet on an issue where I favor grey. I'm sorry, but people taking such a dismissive attitude towards the notion of corporate responsibility is one of the reasons we got in this mess to begin with. If you haven't noticed, it's a conversation that's not going to be silenced at this point... so why are you trying?
You read the Buffet thing in a newspaper yesterday? That's interesting. Because Buffet said it well over a month ago. Timely reporting!
I didn't say a small-town newspaper was an example of cutting edge. You said the issue wasn't making news to begin with, and you're getting pissy because I provided a counterexample. You complained there was no quantity of it being reported, and when I point out that there's quantity you complain about quality. I think you just want to complain because you've got personal connections to Wall Street. I didn't say they covered Buffett's comments about his tax rates was the specific story I read. I knew he said that a month ago, too. What's showing up in the small-town newspaper, and I have worries that someone whose idea of knowing "anything" about this necessitates understanding the finer points of NYC geography gets the small-town mentality to begin with, what's showing up in this small-town newspaper this week in particular that I mentioned was Buffett's pledge to release his returns if Rupert Murdoch & other uber-wealthy would do the same. That happened more recently than the comment to which you refer; you're welcome to walk back your comment on timing. The fact that small-town rags are covering Buffett's comments at all in such journalistic backwaters demonstrates how the conversation is changing.
My friend in Australia was telling me about "Occupy Melbourne". I don't see what 15 people in Melbourne Australia protesting "the establishment" has to do with changing American law, but okay.
What I think you're missing is that this goes above and beyond Wall Street as a geographic location. In case you didn't notice, Occupy solidarity demonstrations took place in 950+ cities, 80+ countries, on six continents. This is a backlash against economic inequity as a whole, and since it exists everywhere it needs to be addressed everywhere.
But, you were able to take weeks off of work to protest in the capital of Wisonsin? Do you have a trust fund? Because I couldn't survive not working for two weeks, let alone a month. See how easy it is to take one innocent fact and turn it into a nonsensical pile of bullshit?
Just stating for the record that I had two part-time jobs, working 9-10 shifts seven days a week, when those protests broke out. I quit one of these jobs to enable my participation in those protests, and I still have the other one.
I find it interesting that you base a good portion of your post on trying to discredit me when you have never met me, know nothing about me, and think because a person works on Wall St. they're a millionaire.
I never said working on Wall Street guaranteed being a millionaire. I noted a very strong correlation between working on Wall Street and being a member of the top 1-2%. There's a notable difference between being in The 1% and earning $1M/yr, and you know it. I know somewhere along the line in your finance major, you learned enough math to know that what I said is less than 40% of what you're claiming I'm saying. You're exaggerating here to try to discredit me yourself.
Also, the financial institutions didn't "change the rules".
Are you suggesting that all their money spent on lobbyists and campaign donations is for naught, and has no effect on our laws? Sorry, but if you are, you're wrong.
These guys are addicted to money and a few guys acting immorally and illegally gave them an avenue to rake in tons of it.
Again, I think you're missing a crucial point here. You kind of catch on to it in drawing a distinction between "immorally" and "illegally." What I think you need to consider more is that there are plenty of "immoral" financial practices which should be illegal, but aren't due to the too-comfortable relationship between politicians and their campaign donors. Money that is made on Wall Street flows to K Street.
And, no, I'm not deflecting anything to DC. That is where people should be protesting. Protesting a bunch of multi-millionaires (and billionaires) on their way to work isn't going to change a fucking thing. I don't see the point.
I think you're falling for one of the most common misconceptions about change, the pace at which it occurs. It undeniably doesn't come at the pace most people would like it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't come. I think Occupy is helping facilitate that. We're talking about it, aren't we? Others are talking about it, aren't they? Others are following their lead, aren't they? This is going to affect the 2012 election, is it not? I think it's false to suggest that this situation today is the same as it was on September 16th before OWS began.
You set camp in front of the fucking Capital Building and make it known you won't leave until changes are made. This is "out of sight out of mind" for politicians. They comment on it because they're asked. But in their heads, I would bet anything they're thinking "at least they aren't here".
As I said above, change doesn't come as fast as some would like it - though it is happening. It seems here like you're accusing Occupy of not making a difference because this has not yet happened. I'm telling you that Occupy is building to this moment. There is an Occupy presence in D.C. It was originally intended to be a similar effort to OWS, beginning on October 6th in response to the 10th anniversary of invading Afghanistan. The fact that you're bringing it up as a hypothetical "should" rather than an actual "is" just underscores one of the selling points for occupying Wall Street instead: media prominence. OWS began September 17th and was so wildly successful that the unexpected circumstance of both protests coexisting took place. Occupy DC has managed to shut down Senate office buildings and branches of the Smithsonian. It is indeed happening. In fact, the National Parks Service extended their permit for an additional four months this week. There is a stage being set. The infrastructure for massive demonstrations and movement resistance are being built. Just because this movement is not going directly to D.C. does not mean this movement is never going to D.C. It just isn't going to happen with the snap of a finger.
I'll point to Fight Club as an example. Tyler Durden doesn't go from fighting in a back parking lot straight to blowing up all those buildings. It takes time. The movement slowly builds people and grows. New locations come on board. Smaller steps are taken at first to practice for larger steps. All the while, there's a bigger aim on the horizon, but it takes patience and dedication.
So it is with this movement.
I think it's worth noting that this thread is not called "Occupy Wall Street." It is called "Occupy Together." At this point in the movement, we're working on Occupy Everywhere. We don't want the politicians to merely say "I'm glad they're not here." We want the politicians to say "I can't get away from these people anywhere." When that happens, we truly begin winning. For now... we're just getting started.
So...flat-out ignore the portions of my post that agree with the overall theme of you comments. K. I applauded your stance in your state's capital. I do not give the idiots at "Wall Street' (they are a good 4 blocks from WS, at least) the same respect.
Regarding the clean-up: Call me out, say I'm lying, say whatever you want, but I was raised in NYC, I know a lot of people who would have been on that detail, and the protestors literally blocked people who were trying to make an hourly wage from getting into the park.
"As I understand things" does not constitute fact or truth in your statement. I have been down there, my father walks those blocks daily, I have friends living in that neighborhood, and I have life-long friends in the NYPD who are literally wasting hours upon hours babysitting these people. Do you know the OT rate for NYPD, FDNY, and NYC EMS? All three are being forced to work around-the-clock and rack up tax-payer $$$'s to work 24/7.
And call me an a-hole, but I agree with the law that states that no random structure should be erected in a park in lower Manhattan. without being approved by the NYC DOB. For the record, NYC is the most highly regulated construction region in the world. The WORLD. This is not even close to an exaggeration. So when there is a clause in a contract stating some kind of restriction on NYC construction, pardon me if I don't even bat an eye. Trying to build a random, un-certified structure isn't a noble or righteous act, it's flat-our dangerous and puts anyone in that space in danger. Unless you are referring to regular tents, in which there is NYC law stating clearly that this is illegal. This is not "the man" keeping people down. This is a law for a city with over 8 million people in it stating that people can't throw up a fucking tent of Fifth Ave because they want to.
"You have no problem with that fraction of a large business being considered its own small business to collect more funding from a taxpayer source? I'm sorry, but that's the exact kind of corrupt political payola and inefficient government that needs to cease and desist."
Way to word things so they help your stance! Do I think taxpayer money should be used to keep the parks of NYC flourishing? Yes. Do you understand what a single park in NYC provides? I lived by a gov't-funded park in NYC for two years. There are soccer leagues, flag-football leagues, softball leagues, tai-chi workouts, and literally dozens of other uses for a NYC park (playground, dog park, bocci court, speed-chess tables, etc.), that these people flat out reject as a consequence of their behavior. They "took over" a public park and made it uninhabitable for the neighborhood families that used to use it on a regular basis. "FUCK THE MAN!!!"
This isn't occupying the capitol building in Wisconsin. This is occupying a neighborhood's park and refusing to make it inhabitable or enjoyable by anyone.
"It's not just The 99% vs. the 1% in people terms; it's big guy vs. small guy in the business world too"
This almost made me hard. Please, BY ALL MEANS, watch the video below, and tell me these jerk-offs give a flying fuvk about "the little man". Meet a street vendor, who has not been able to work FOR TWO WEEKS, and literally lives off of his food cart. Tell me these pretentious dickheads give a poop about "the little man".
Ah-hem.
Also, the port-o-potties you speak of are union-obligated port-o-potties that the OWS crowd are not supposed to use (they are there by law, for the union-supported workers). The city is not sponsoring or supporting the protestors. The person above is the true victim of the actions of the OWS crowd. I get the feeling you think I'm a stuck-up asshole who is just picking a fight out of boredom, but this is my home, that guy above is closer to me than some fucking jerkstore from Williamsberg who is there to impress his underage girlfriend.
"what I found, and perhaps with good reason, but for you to say I did no looking into it whatsoever is clearly not the case. First of all, when I was looking into Wall Street average salaries, my number came from this New York Times article. I stated what the average salary was, but didn't say your father made the average. I may have made a mistake in assuming that your father's job title is Compliance Officer. You said he worked in market compliance, and when I was looking into what compliance people made on Wall Street, it appeared that there were two primary titles I saw. Compliance Officer & Compliance Analyst. Since you said your father fingered illegal traders, I assumed Compliance Officer. What I saw for that position's salary ranged from $100-350K, and I didn't just look at one site and run with it. Am I wrong on your father's job title? If so, I'm curious to know how close I was to it. "
Seriously dude, suck my balls.
That may be the most arrogant, baiting comment I have ever read on this board.
My father has worked in the financial industry for over 30 years. He has forgotten more about trading than any CNN, MSNBC or Fox News analyst will ever know. I am going to go out on a huge limb here and guess you have never, in your life, spoken to a trader that worked on the AMEX or NYSE floors, ever. Those guys do not rack up 9-figures. They work countless hours to make a solid wage to support their families. The analyst/officer argument is nonsensical. You can be given an "executive" label in a small company that won't even be middle-management in a bigger company.
"You cannot tell me my numbers are invalid because I did not do any "fucking research" AND concede that people do indeed earn within the range that I claimed. You don't get to have it both ways here. So which is it?"
Oh, you. To clarify, when I say the top percentile of an industry (in this case, compliance) makes the "average" that you stated ($350k), you see that as me being hypocritical. Again, you say the range is, at its maximum, $350k, so when I say executives make that much, that somehow proves that the average compliance analyst/officer makes that much? I don't follow.
"Yet it's okay to say that everyone protesting shits in the bushes? C'mon, man!"
Good attempt at deflecting a comment.
"You're telling me parental income has absolutely nothing to do with how much in loans/scholarships a student receives? I don't think we agree here."
You're starting to piss me off. No, my parents' income had nothing to do with the 1/2 scholarship I earned. Actually, it did. My parents, combined, made $2500 over the "limit" for financial aid, even though they had another son in college, so I actually got LESS than I would have at other schools. Actually, I got over 1500 on my SATs and graduated with a 4.2 GPA, so my parents had a lot to do with that, they encouraged me to read, question and grow as a person. Good working class folk encouraging their sons to grow. Screw them!
The rest of the comment that follows the quote above is too stupid to respond too. Your parents income has literally nothing to do with the tuition of the school you attend, unless you an uber-rich alum at an Ivy League school. Since it is clear that neither of us are of that ilk, I assume that neither of our parents are rich enough to influence the admission standards of an accredited university (I'm going to guess and say you went to Wisconsin, which is a good school that I would have loved to attend). My parents didn't get me loan co-signed with a treasure chest. They signed over the deed to their house. So, again, try to tell me we're richer than you are.
I'm not trying to get into a pissing match about our fathers, how much they make, their worth, or what they mean to us. It seems to me that we both come from families who emphasize family above selfishness. But, I don't appreciate the tone, to be honest.
Where do these corporations sell their stock? ONLINE. I don't know how many ways I can explain this, but Wall Street is a FUCKING SYMBOL.
The NYSE is closed. The AMEX is a ghost town. There are NO F-ING BANKS ON WALL STREET AT THIS POINT.
I'm not going to spend time debating facts. They are facts. But argue about the little things. The truth is, these people are protesting the symbol of wealth. "Wall Street" is no more relevant than the movie that sports the same name. Again, I don't know how many different ways to say this, if you want to make a difference, protest the people with the ability to change the rules, not the people who work within them.
By all means, rip through this post if you like. The fact remains that the people protesting on "Wall Street" (again, they're blocks away) do not have a common cause, do not have a singular voice, and are giving a convoluted message.
Wax poetic about change all you want. But whether it's quick or slow, it does not come from protesting the wrong F-ing people. I seriously don't even understand why you're fighting with me. The people at OWS are 30% legitimate and the rest are a fucking joke. If you disagree, go there. But you won't, or can't, and will keep going off of hearsay instead of fact. I have been there. You have not.
I'm done on this subject. I will just post a bunch of videos to the OWS crowd and you can tell me how these people are doing any good whatsoever. It's a god damn joke, and you're celebrating a bunch of assholes who don't need to work for a living getting involved with a real "movement".
Good job dude, here are the dickbags you're supporting (can't wait to see you defend these asshats):
My favorite:
GWS!!!!!!
Get a fucking clue.
Last Edit: Oct 16, 2011 19:03:13 GMT -5 by flanzonyc - Back to Top
^^^love those videos!!! So true. If you saw any of the European riots...same ranting bs. Most have no clue what they are saying. Keep bringing these vids up!!!
Now sit in the lotus position, close your eyes, and think calm thoughts.
Great idea Druid! This is getting way out of hand. And one of the things that I have been trying to get across is that this ISN'T just about Wall Street and the Big Banks...it's the economy and the economic politics that are ruining the country. Our economic policies are no good for ANYONE except the already wealthy and other countries who need money. I work in DoD and think that things are way askew...NOT that I would ever want any soldier to pay the ultimate price because they didn't have the support they needed, but we all know government waste is prevalent EVERYWHERE. And passing tough immigration laws are hurting the exact small businesses that we NEED to support to get the economy back online. Unless we want to hire a bunch of Taliban to do work for us, we need to step back and take inventory of what we REALLY need to make the economy better HERE, NOW! I work in an area where the "Median" income is 70K....well above the national average and yet most people here are feeling the hit primarily because federal workers are being singled out. I don't believe in taking away things from certain people just to "encourage" small business to create more low paying jobs and take advantage of the tax cuts so they can say they are doing their jobs. There will never be an even playing field so lets start focusing on how to make it less tilted toward the mythical 1% that no one can agree on....
So tonight in Worcester, some people decided to start an occupation on their own. It helped when at least 30 people in one wave decided to come from Boston to help out, and more waves were behind them. Worcester Police within an hour supposedly brought paddy wagons nearby - but according to last update since left.
I'm respecting everyone's opinions and posts in this thread, I really am. I love all of you guys. I mean no ill will, but flanzonyc, ALL of those videos you posted about the Wall Street protesters came from one source and ONLY one source, the NRO. Thats the National Review Online.
This is what the interwebs has to say about the NYC-based biweekly magazine:
The National Review is "America's most widely read and influential magazine and web site for conservative news, commentary, and opinion."
Of COURSE the NRO is going to try and invalidate what these protesters are trying to accomplish. In essence this is what, say Fox News, would/is doing. There are reportedly tens of thousands of protesters in NYC at the time. I'm feeling like the NRO went around and video taped ALOT of people and decided to post the MOST asinine reply's of them all and say THIS is a summary of what ALL of the protesters are like at the forefront of this movement.
Here are some other examples of "at the scene" protesters and also what I feel is a GREAT summarization of why this country needs change. Its not about Wall Street..........its really not, its just a starting point.
Last Edit: Oct 16, 2011 23:49:36 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
Of COURSE the NRO is going to try and invalidate what these protesters are trying to accomplish. In essence this is what, say Fox News, would/is doing. There are reportedly tens of thousands of protesters in NYC at the time. I'm feeling like the NRO went around and video taped ALOT of people and decided to post the MOST asinine reply's of them all and say THIS is a summary of what ALL of the protesters are like at the forefront of this movement.
You know what's amazing? Fox News had a very good segment about the protest tonight. I was shocked!!!
But Duddits is right. The NRO is going to find the idiots and focus on them. Just like left leaning outlets did to the Tea Party. A movement that starts through social media is going to have a lot of fringe elements. That's just the way it is. Freaking Anonymous was involved with this, so you know there will be trolls and nutjobs afoot. That doesn't mean the concept is worthless or can't grow into something truly meaningful.
Way to word things so they help your stance! Do I think taxpayer money should be used to keep the parks of NYC flourishing? Yes. Do you understand what a single park in NYC provides? I lived by a gov't-funded park in NYC for two years. There are soccer leagues, flag-football leagues, softball leagues, tai-chi workouts, and literally dozens of other uses for a NYC park (playground, dog park, bocci court, speed-chess tables, etc.), that these people flat out reject as a consequence of their behavior. They "took over" a public park and made it uninhabitable for the neighborhood families that used to use it on a regular basis. "FUCK THE MAN!!!"
Zuccotti Park has none of the amenities you speak of, so you are wording things to help your stance as well. Did they do another remodel after the one in 2006? Zuccotti Park is a nice area to take a lunch break. It's not a family park. I could understand people being upset because of it's tie to 9/11 but families really aren't suffering from it's occupation
But, again, this falls on the gov't. Do you know who works at the SEC? People who weren't qualified or smart enough to get jobs at an investment bank or brokerage. Even the top compliance people are lured away by big trading firms and investment banks (those $350k guys are these dudes, btw). This is true, but it won't show up on your Google search. So the people chasing the crooks are the people that weren't bright enough to get their jobs. I'm sure you see why this is not the best situation for financial regulation. And, no, I'm not deflecting anything to DC. That is where people should be protesting. Protesting a bunch of multi-millionaires (and billionaires) on their way to work isn't going to change a fucking thing. I don't see the point. They LAUGH at the protesters. Literally, they laugh. I saw it with my own eyes and it was infuriating, but they do. You want to make a difference
Flanzonyc, did you read this article in Rolling Stone? This was the first thing that popped into my head after this quote. I'd honestly value your opinion on this but it better make up for your opnion of Wilco. Haha.
So...flat-out ignore the portions of my post that agree with the overall theme of you comments. K. I applauded your stance in your state's capital. I do not give the idiots at "Wall Street' (they are a good 4 blocks from WS, at least) the same respect.
You said a lot I agree with. I admitted as much at a few points in that post, but as it was there wasn't much I could add about certain points any better than what you had already said. I don't deny the omissions, but they were more editorial discretion for the sake of (relative) brevity than flat-out ignoring them. One thing you said there, you had an especially lengthy paragraph in there I liked, the one where you called out particular behaviors and that there are indeed people engaging in them.
Regarding the clean-up: Call me out, say I'm lying, say whatever you want, but I was raised in NYC, I know a lot of people who would have been on that detail, and the protestors literally blocked people who were trying to make an hourly wage from getting into the park.
I didn't say you were lying. The way I see it, you were trying to say the situation was one thing and not the other... and I was trying to say that it was both things. The park needs to be clean. We agree. This protest should be allowed to continue. I'm not so sure we agree. I'm not aware of paid employees being denied entry to Zuccotti Park. Your mentioning it is the first I've heard of it. As I mentioned, it was my understanding that the park's owners contacted NYPD about clearing out the park in advance of a complete clean-up effort. This is new information to me, and I'm going to let you know it's illustrated to me a distinction between Zuccotti Park and the Wisconsin capitol. We allowed custodial employees to do their job. Areas of the capitol were prohibited for sleeping. I know I had to relocate my sleeping bag one night because that particular wing & floor was designated for cleaning that night. I think it might be possible that the Wisconsin capitol afforded the luxury of more breathing room for protesters and maintenance crews to coexist. I have read that Zuccotti Park has an area of 33,000 sq ft. I poked around trying to find square footage of the Wisconsin capitol building, but didn't find a precise estimate. So I went to Google Maps and looked at the the Wisconsin capitol and Zuccotti Park at the same scale. It looks as if the outline of my state capitol could just about swallow Zuccotti Park whole, and that's not even counting 3-4 stories of vertical space which were also available for our protests. I can understand why such close quarters might lead to more friction and difficulty in getting this job done.
"As I understand things" does not constitute fact or truth in your statement.
I know I don't know everything. I don't say that I do. I admit that there are points of contention where I feel I may have incomplete information. In such cases, my mind may be changed with the introduction and processing of new information - I can be pragmatic like that. When I'm not dead certain because I feel I may not have complete information, I add a comment like what you're bringing up. It's in the interest of transparency. It is intended as a disclaimer to say that what I am about to say is my understanding of a situation based on what I know at the time I am saying it. As such, it's telling you that it's subject to change if you come correct with your response. I don't say that to make myself appear an authority on things; I say it to admit potential imperfections in my argument/reasoning and invite further discussion. Think of my saying that as tantamount to saying "Correct me if I'm wrong, but..."
I have been down there, my father walks those blocks daily, I have friends living in that neighborhood, and I have life-long friends in the NYPD who are literally wasting hours upon hours babysitting these people. Do you know the OT rate for NYPD, FDNY, and NYC EMS? All three are being forced to work around-the-clock and rack up tax-payer $$$'s to work 24/7.
No, I don't. Would you care to enlighten me? While you're at it, you've praised my Wisconsin protests... I present to you your opportunity to condemn us for driving up similar expenses in Madison. Are you going to take it?
And call me an a-hole, but I agree with the law that states that no random structure should be erected in a park in lower Manhattan. without being approved by the NYC DOB. For the record, NYC is the most highly regulated construction region in the world. The WORLD. This is not even close to an exaggeration. So when there is a clause in a contract stating some kind of restriction on NYC construction, pardon me if I don't even bat an eye. Trying to build a random, un-certified structure isn't a noble or righteous act, it's flat-our dangerous and puts anyone in that space in danger. Unless you are referring to regular tents, in which there is NYC law stating clearly that this is illegal. This is not "the man" keeping people down. This is a law for a city with over 8 million people in it stating that people can't throw up a fucking tent of Fifth Ave because they want to.
I was primarily referring to regular tents. Removing those is a quick and easy way to end these protests. I think it's of particular interest to note that Mayor Bloomberg is a billionaire here, and if he's not extremely careful with how he treads he could wind up a poster boy for The 1%. I don't think he wants that. The fact that nobody is willing to attach their name, face and voice to the protestees should tell you something. The only person I've seen holding an "I Am The 1%" sign since this started? C. Montgomery Burns.
I'm going to stick up for peaceful civil disobedience, though. What the tea dumpers of the Boston Tea Party did was not legal. What the conductors of the Underground Railroad did was not legal. What the participants of lunch counter sit-ins did was not legal. Democracy and justice are not always neat and tidy. If you want to make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs.
"You have no problem with that fraction of a large business being considered its own small business to collect more funding from a taxpayer source? I'm sorry, but that's the exact kind of corrupt political payola and inefficient government that needs to cease and desist."
Way to word things so they help your stance! Do I think taxpayer money should be used to keep the parks of NYC flourishing? Yes. Do you understand what a single park in NYC provides? I lived by a gov't-funded park in NYC for two years. There are soccer leagues, flag-football leagues, softball leagues, tai-chi workouts, and literally dozens of other uses for a NYC park (playground, dog park, bocci court, speed-chess tables, etc.), that these people flat out reject as a consequence of their behavior. They "took over" a public park and made it uninhabitable for the neighborhood families that used to use it on a regular basis. "FUCK THE MAN!!!"
I don't disagree with taxpayer money being used to support parks, and you know I said nothing of the sort. That response is a bit of a stretch, as far as I'm concerned. Again, I'm going to say you've expressed support for what we did at the Wisconsin capitol. I'm sorry, but that's a public building in a public square. If that had happened in more seasonal times, it would/could have interfered with farmers' markets, Madison Symphony Orchestra concerts, public ceremonies, and other functions. As a year-round building, there are also things like field trips and weddings in the rotunda which could be disrupted. Are you telling me that means that should negate my right to directly petition my government for redress of grievances? Writing letters sure as hell didn't work. My February letter to the governor's office regarding Walker's bill went wholly unanswered; my April letter regarding craft brewery issues got me an automated response but never a reply from the office. My state senator, one of the Fitzes in FitzWalkerstan, won't even let my name on his constituent email list - and I live in his district. Sorry, but they're not going to listen to you/me/we through conventional means. That's why these new tactics are springing up.
Present them.Please, BY ALL MEANS, watch the video below, and tell me these jerk-offs give a flying fuvk about "the little man". Meet a street vendor, who has not been able to work FOR TWO WEEKS, and literally lives off of his food cart. Tell me these pretentious dickheads give a poop about "the little man".
Let me make sure I have it right: this guy runs a food cart, has all these people in one place, and he's losing business? Sounds like the exact opposite of everything I heard from everyone I know working in bars & restaurants in downtown Madison during our protests. We even had Ian's Pizza do so much business they closed their doors and exclusively cranked out pizzas for the capitol occupation - and even that one business doing so wasn't enough to meet demand. I'm sorry, but there were more food carts camped closer to Madison's capitol square than there usually were during our protests. Those capitol protests will probably go down in history as the best thing Scott Walker has done for the Wisconsin economy. This guy in your video seems to be an outlier in terms of my firsthand observation of mass sustained demonstrations' effect on area businesses. What is he not doing to take advantage of this situation? I see a few hundred or thousand potential customers behind him in that video. Why doesn't he have his food cart down there? The interviewer has to ask what he does, so it doesn't seem apparent he has a food cart. Has he tried contracting with the NYC General Assembly, who has a fund for the occupation? Has he tried to market himself online as being in a position to feed Occupy Wall Street, knowing it has far-flung supporters willing to contribute? Has he focused on the union demonstrators, knowing they're more likely to be employed than your stereotypical OWS participant? Phrase the question however you like... it seems this guy isn't answering when opportunity is knocking.
The person above is the true victim of the actions of the OWS crowd. I get the feeling you think I'm a stuck-up asshole who is just picking a fight out of boredom, but this is my home, that guy above is closer to me than some fucking jerkstore from Williamsberg who is there to impress his underage girlfriend.
A personality, a hometown, a girlfriend and her age? Is this someone specific you met? If not, what is it?
Also, the port-o-potties you speak of are union-obligated port-o-potties that the OWS crowd are not supposed to use (they are there by law, for the union-supported workers). The city is not sponsoring or supporting the protestors.
Thank you for the update. I emailed my friend who went inquiring about her porta-potty picture (See? That's the pragmatism I'm talking about when I say "As I understand it...") and what the specifics were on the bathroom situation, but hadn't heard a response from her since my last post here.
My father has worked in the financial industry for over 30 years. He has forgotten more about trading than any CNN, MSNBC or Fox News analyst will ever know. I am going to go out on a huge limb here and guess you have never, in your life, spoken to a trader that worked on the AMEX or NYSE floors, ever. Those guys do not rack up 9-figures.
Where I'm from, we are of the impression that people such as these refer to our native areas as "flyover country." So no, I haven't met many coastal financiers now that you mention it...
They work countless hours to make a solid wage to support their families. The analyst/officer argument is nonsensical. You can be given an "executive" label in a small company that won't even be middle-management in a bigger company.
"You cannot tell me my numbers are invalid because I did not do any "fucking research" AND concede that people do indeed earn within the range that I claimed. You don't get to have it both ways here. So which is it?"
Oh, you. To clarify, when I say the top percentile of an industry (in this case, compliance) makes the "average" that you stated ($350k), you see that as me being hypocritical. Again, you say the range is, at its maximum, $350k, so when I say executives make that much, that somehow proves that the average compliance analyst/officer makes that much? I don't follow.
I looked up some numbers. I mentioned a range I had found after looking at a handful of sites. The numbers on different sites seemed to agree at both ends of that scale. So I mention these numbers. You tell me I did no research. Then you admit that the top salaries at the position I had mentioned earned... wait for it... about as much as the upper level of the range I stated. You questioned my methods, but then you agreed with me on the upper end of the range I cited. You do see how your own response lent some validity to my claims, do you not?
"You're telling me parental income has absolutely nothing to do with how much in loans/scholarships a student receives? I don't think we agree here."
You're starting to piss me off. No, my parents' income had nothing to do with the 1/2 scholarship I earned. Actually, it did.
You didn't have to go on past "Actually, it did." In saying that, you agreed with my point: There is a correlation between parental income and loans/scholarships.
Good working class folk encouraging their sons to grow. Screw them!
I will concede that your father may be, as you said, something like Wall Street's middle class. But for you to call someone working in Wall Street market compliance "working class?" I don't think that collar is as blue as you think it is...
My parents didn't get me loan co-signed with a treasure chest. They signed over the deed to their house. So, again, try to tell me we're richer than you are.
You said you grew up in New York City. I grew up in small-town Wisconsin, population ~20K. Even if our families had the exact same house; does a 3 bed, 1 bath, single-story ranch with one-car garage describe your childhood home too? I'm sure I don't have to tell a finance major how the property values would differ even if we lived in the exact same type/style/size home in those varying locations...
Where do these corporations sell their stock? ONLINE. I don't know how many ways I can explain this, but Wall Street is a FUCKING SYMBOL.
The NYSE is closed. The AMEX is a ghost town. There are NO F-ING BANKS ON WALL STREET AT THIS POINT.
I'm not going to spend time debating facts. They are facts. But argue about the little things. The truth is, these people are protesting the symbol of wealth. "Wall Street" is no more relevant than the movie that sports the same name.
You want to help me understand this? I'm willing to learn. These corporations that sell their stock online... do they operate through any centralized entity that is not a stock exchange? I was under the impression that online transactions are submitted and processed at places like the New York Stock Exchange. Is my understanding of the process wrong? As I understand things, those online trades are only made possible by actions taken in brick-and-mortar stock exchanges. Can I also ask you why you seem to consider banks to be the only troublesome entity? Don't get me wrong, I think they are to blame too, but you and I seem to place varying amounts of emphasis on some of the same involved parties. Don't you think that symbolism carries any importance in and of itself? It seems to be that rallying against this symbol seems to have inspired many. It is a symbol precisely because it represents something to people. The way I see it, even if it is a mere symbol... when you attack the symbol, you attack what it represents. Would you be okay with it if I burned an American flag and claimed it was just a fucking symbol? Or would you be offended as an American represented by it?
Again, I don't know how many different ways to say this, if you want to make a difference, protest the people with the ability to change the rules, not the people who work within them.
I think you're perhaps making a stretch here. This assertion is something that needs to be justified, not simply taken by the reader to be fact. I think there are a lot of people out there would disagree with the notion that Wall Street (and the financial sector itself) is full of "people who work within [the rules.]" There are many, I think, but not nearly enough.
By all means, rip through this post if you like. The fact remains that the people protesting on "Wall Street" (again, they're blocks away) do not have a common cause, do not have a singular voice, and are giving a convoluted message.
I will agree that the message could use some unity and clarification, but I do believe there is a common cause here.
Wax poetic about change all you want. But whether it's quick or slow, it does not come from protesting the wrong F-ing people. I seriously don't even understand why you're fighting with me. The people at OWS are 30% legitimate and the rest are a fucking joke. If you disagree, go there. But you won't, or can't, and will keep going off of hearsay instead of fact. I have been there. You have not.
I'll bite and take you up on your assumption that these people are misdirecting their anger. Their attack on a symbol sure seems to have mobilized a lot of resentment against what that symbol represents. Attacking this symbol has mobilized thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people. There are a lot of points where lower levels of pressure are being applied against our system, and when so much pressure is applied at various local levels, the pressure will work its way up into greater pressure on this system as a whole. Even if their anger is completely misdirected, it's still going somewhere. (And this is the worst-case scenario in which OWS is completely off-base...) I'm not fighting with you. I'm disagreeing with you, and it seems you have a bit of a persecution complex. I don't know about the legitimacy of the people at the protest, but I agree with their message. I don't know what makes you the authority on who is and isn't legitimate at that protest. As far as I know, you went down there one day as an observer. I would go there myself if I could, but I have distance and money issues.
I'm done on this subject. I will just post a bunch of videos to the OWS crowd and you can tell me how these people are doing any good whatsoever. It's a god damn joke, and you're celebrating a bunch of smurfs who don't need to work for a living getting involved with a real "movement".
Good job dude, here are the dickbags you're supporting (can't wait to see you defend these asshats):
I'm actually going to agree with you when you say "Get a fucking clue" to most of these people.
The first guy seems genuinely concerned, but underinformed. His grasp of the issues underwhelms me, but I think he's at least put some (but not enough) effort into it. I actually think that puts him on par with your average American myself. The second guy... I'll just make sure everyone here is familiar with Godwin's Law and render your own verdicts on flanzo for sharing this. The third guy looks like a native New Yorker to me. I almost think you should be justifying your shared association with guys like him more than I should, because I sure don't remember seeing anyone like that back in Madison. The fourth guy I think also ties more into the NYC venue than the Occupy movement as a whole. I haven't seen any 9/11 Truth involvement in any Occupy locations other than this one closest to the old World Trade Center. As I said before, local issues are springing up in the varying Occupy locations.
A couple things I'm curious about... You originally wrote a lengthy post about your visit down there, and you said the protesters were "trust-fund baby hipsters" and that "their hearts may be in the right place." Were you aware of such people being there when you made these statements? I would imagine people like this would stick out and be more worth mentioning than "trust-fund baby hipsters" myself... but you didn't mention them. Did you find these videos before or after you paid a visit to Occupy Wall Street? Are you a regular consumer of The National Review, or is it just happenstance that these videos come from that publication? How normal of an occurrence is this level of crazy in NYC under regular circumstances?
I'm done with posting in this thread for now, and I'm sorry and disappointed this conversation didn't get off on the right foot, but I want it continue.
I'm particularly curious about your disenchantment with your finance major/career. I found myself similarly disenchanted with my political science major. I happened to learn, as I got deeper into the major, just how inextricably linked politics and economics are. I'm thinking you and I need to have a powwow about our respective disenchantments. I've got a feeling they're quite similar. I've also got a few other things I'd like your opinion on, but I've said enough for now.
[I'm thinking you and I need to have a powwow about our respective disenchantments. I've got a feeling they're quite similar. I've also got a few other things I'd like your opinion on, but I've said enough for now.
Scenes from last night in Worcester, around 1 am. Nobody got arrested after all this, which was surprising. I was expecting a lot of shit to go down, but both sides were civil - which was really nice. Except for one annoying girl from California. The occupants moved from the Common downtown to Lake Park on the east side of the city, when the Worcester Police shown up in heavy force (count at least 16-20 cars) - then later suggested the move to Lake Park.
The guy around 12:00 was co-facilitating with me last night at our 4th GA, and also was one of the 129 (147?) arrested in Boston when BPD broke up the North Camp last Monday.
I wish I caught this on Saturday afternoon. I moved my car from the starting point to the Common (finish point), then missed the bus to head back down to the starting point. So just stuck around at the Common.
Not sure if anyone's paying attention, just wanted to show that we're not a big city but still got things going on - and still facing some struggles like the bigger cities nearby (Boston, New York).
I loved this article (credit goes to LLL for finding it). The City of Cleveland prohibited protesters from bringing in tents to the Occupy Cleveland site. So the Cleveland Police went out and provided tents to the protesters for shelter from the elements
Something similar took place at #OccupyMN in the Twin Cities. Police told protesters they did not want tents up because they wanted a view of what they were doing... so the protesters acquired see-through tents.
Occupy Wall Street claims that it has received donations in excess of $300K in finances as well as storage space in lower Manhattan. Needless to say in light of this, they claim to be in this for a long haul.
President Obama referenced Occupy Wall Street during his speech dedicating the MLK Jr. memorial on the National Mall: “If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there. Those with power and privilege will often decry any call for change as divisive. They’ll say any challenge to the existing arrangements are unwise and destabilizing. Dr. King understood that peace without justice was no peace at all.”
Post by ClarkGriswold on Oct 18, 2011 0:10:41 GMT -5
Those with power and privilege will often decry any call for change as divisive. They’ll say any challenge to the existing arrangements are unwise and destabilizing.