|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Occupy Wall Street, London and Evereywhere Else | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 830 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Are you being serious AE or troll AE right now? The picture you paint with your tea party vs OWS is one that suggests you have bought into the media hype (while at the same time decrying the media?). It is through the media that this has become a conservative/liberal thing. This is something that I don't really understand: why the divide? Why are conservatives REALLY anti-OWS (aside from Fox news telling them to be against it)? What is the real reason? What does the OWS movement stand for (facts please) that has the conservative base so upset? And please, don't say "people asking for handouts" because that is not what the movement is about....
I expect you to answer seriously since, if you are in troll mode, you can take the role of conservative and provide reasons. Or, if you're serious: we all know you are a conservative at heart and can still provide evidence. At least just answer some basic questions without silly cartoons that are exceptionally skewed."Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2979 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
But most of the occupiers I know are educated, articulate, motivated and have busy lives including, in many cases, jobs That's very true for Occupy Wall Street as well. From my end, a lot of comics have taken to the protesting. I don't know why, maybe because we have free time to protest. Here's a great video by Ted Alexandro, a comic, that really shows the true nature of the protest. Older people, young people, women, men, students, workers, and except for the gay meditation cirlce, it looks safe and it is safe. Having been down there, it's like a street festival where people are nice and friendly.
I don't see Occupy as the final answer to anything in and of itself. But you have to start somewhere. This seems to be the overall point, as Alexandro states that there is no "End Game" right now. It's just a protest to begin what they feel will be a larger movement that changes the way politics are done. Not that I agree with them and who they're protesting against, having they themselves voted the president that helped his friends in the financial market, but I do agree with their overall point: There needs to be a change in the way corporations influence politics in America and abroad. - Oni
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
non-serious mode of course, did you see how many responses i got. I know what the nerves are here, and how to touch them.
I personally think OWS is a joke. I think this thread is a joke, and as such I have not taken anything about this thread seriously, this is the funniest thread I have seen in at least a week or so. I'll totally let those serious about OWS (lol sorry its hard for me to think that OWS is a serious topic), chat about it, and I'll leave this thread. I'll still lurk, mainly to laugh at the nonsense, but I'll be repsectful and not post anymore, I know there are some fools who are serious about OWS, and I'll leave them to their own discussion. sorry about my last couple posts here, I...just...couldn't...resist. just a parting shot.
LOL
Dr Adequate writes: I shall say to you what I have said to the more cryptic of our creationist friends: it is no use you making oblique allusions to the world in your head, because since I do not live in it I am unable to follow your references to it. If this was true then you would have never responded. but you did respond, why? because the truth hurts, don't it? Edited by Artemis Entreri, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Oni writes: Not that I agree with them and who they're protesting against, having they themselves voted the president that helped his friends in the financial market..... Given the nature of the protest I think it is fair to say that the protesters are pretty dissatisfied with politicians full stop. I doubt many OWSers are rampant advocates of Obama. If they ever were. But you will know better than me - Surely the protesters you know are critical of the present government and president? I find it almost unbelievable that they wouldn't be. As for bank bailouts - What do you think should have been done? These are people's savings, pensions, college funds, trust funds etc. There is a strong case for rescuing the banking sector from collapse. But to do so without major reform, without making the public stake in the banks work to the benefit of society rather than bankers, is negligent and contemptible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2979 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
Surely the protesters you know are critical of the present government and president? I find it almost unbelievable that they wouldn't be. Not so much for the president, if at all. It's mostly against the banks and their influence in politics. Not against politicians and their accepting of said influence.
As for bank bailouts - What do you think should have been done? Not the point I'm making. The point is, the candidate who supported the bailout won the election.
NY Times: Mc Cain warns against hasty mortgage bailout The Obama marketing campaign was stronger than McCain's, backed of course by the financial institutions. It is a CLEAR example, although I'm sure there are many more, of corporate influence in politics, both during the campaign and while elected. - Oni
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Oni writes: Not so much for the president, if at all. It's mostly against the banks and their influence in politics. Not against politicians and their accepting of said influence. Then that is different here. I would say that in the UK a large part of the protest is at the political system and politicians generally and in a way that transcends party politics to a large degree. I'm surprised that the NY protest is not directly critical of the government given the stance being taken.
Oni writes: It's just a protest to begin what they feel will be a larger movement that changes the way politics are done. This to me suggests that the protesters are disenchanted with politicians and the way politics is done rather than just with bankers alone. But I haven't been to the NY protest so you will know better than me.
Oni writes: The point is, the candidate who supported the bailout won the election. OK. But governments of various leanings supported bailouts around the world. Bailouts were arguably necessary. It is the lack of reform and ongoing support of a corrupt and failed system that is the ongoing crime here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Onifre writes: Thanks for sharing...I ended up watching more of Teds videos as well. He seems to be a man in touch with his humanity. My take on all of this (OCCUPY) is that many people do not yet know exactly what the issues are and what the problems and challenges are that face this country and we citizens of an undeniable global community. Here's a great video by Ted Alexandro, a comic, that really shows the true nature of the protest. Its easy to say to pull your money out of Chase and Bank Of America, but just like the questions in Jons Consumerism thread, what would we replace our free market system with? People are frustrated, yes. What sort of long term solutions and reforms should we be thinking about?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 313 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
just a parting shot. If your point was that the police are behaving like jerks, then your point is well-taken. Otherwise, not so much.
If this was true then you would have never responded. but you did respond, why? because the truth hurts, don't it? Because it is true that I didn't see what your point is, therefore I responded by saying that I couldn't see what your point is. Perhaps someone could buy you a copy of Thinking For Dummies for Christmas. If you still don't want to say what your point is, that's quite understandable, given that it was probably gormlessly stupid.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 313 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Why are conservatives REALLY anti-OWS (aside from Fox news telling them to be against it)? Does there have to be another reason why conservatives have opinions? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 830 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Of course not. But, even in light of all the evidence to the contrary, I'd like to think that people who label themselves conservative actually do think for themselves and base their opinion on at least some speck of reality.
"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Son Member (Idle past 3858 days) Posts: 346 From: France,Paris Joined:
|
For the bailouts, they just needed the banks to go through bankruptcy, sell their assets and use those to reimbourse those who have lost their money(in short, the normal procedure). It's much less expensive this way and you get rid of the banks who put us in this mess in the first place, preventing them from pulling this same trick again. Healthy banks would have been rewarded and if more banks had been needed, you could create a public bank with the money you didn't use on the bailouts making sure the benefits from this new bank gets directly to the taxpayer(this bank would have only been for lending/depositing avoiding the mess in the markets).
Edited by Son, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2979 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
I'm surprised that the NY protest is not directly critical of the government given the stance being taken. Because they still support Obama. Not to generalize but, banks represent capitalism, corporate institutions and republicanism - it seems to be the enemy. The true enemy, IMO, is politicians who allow this too be the way government is run.
This to me suggests that the protesters are disenchanted with politicians and the way politics is done rather than just with bankers alone. But I haven't been to the NY protest so you will know better than me. Yes, but the chants are "Lets make sure corporations don't influence our government" - rather than "Lets make sure our government doesn't get influenced by corporations." Corporation will do what corporations do. We need to vote politicians in that, when they say Washington won't be influenced by lobbyist, they mean it. But we keep voting these corporate puppets in and blaming the corporations for being evil. It's backwards.
But governments of various leanings supported bailouts around the world. Bailouts were arguably necessary. It is the lack of reform and ongoing support of a corrupt and failed system that is the ongoing crime here. It's the bailouts, too. It was criminal. Oddly enough, it may be the single issue that unites OWS & The Tea Party.
quote: - Oni
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
It sounds simple. But when for decades we have been employing many of our most educated people to (rather than do anything socially useful) conceive of ever more ingenious methods of selling intertwined debt to each other things get more complicated. Simply letting failed banks go to the wall is an option. But if the result of letting a huge bank with billions of interbank liabilities fail is a domino effect of banking collapses, a complete collapse of the short-term money market and the eventual collapse of the global financial system then that isn't really a good thing for anyone.
People with money in accounts would not have been able to access it and might never have seen it again. Companies with accounts there would not have been able to pay salaries or suppliers. Conceivably a point where cash machines just stopped working would come about. Imagine the social consequences of all of this. Complete economic paralysis and an almost overnight contraction of the entire economy would have made what actually has happened look like a walk in the park. Now - Frankly - I am not knowledgeable enough about economics to know whether the above would have occurred or not. But the "oh just let them fail" approach seems rather simplistic. If it were bankers citing the horror scenario above I would be more cynical on the basis that they were simply justifying the huge amounts of money used to save their asses. But left wing economists and advocates of deepseated banking (and wider political and economic) reform also paint this picture. It seems the bailouts might well have been necessary. The failure was (and continues to be) the lack of any action to fundamentally change what caused the problem in the first place. Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Oni writes: Because they still support Obama. They might well vote for Obama over any vaguely likely alternative. But that isn't really the same thing. I have had a look at the links Mod provided. The following doesn't sound like an endorsement of any current politician or the existing political process. The exact opposite in fact. But judge for yourself:
Link Link writes: This statement has been issued by the Political Action and Impact working group of Occupy Wall Street. Our purpose here is to create a general yet focused understanding of the aims of this movement. This document does not represent all the goals and concerns of all the members of OWS. We are hoping the average citizen will come to understand who we are and how our goals are in their interests. We are letting politicians know that we are here, growing stronger every day, and that what they read below is the agenda for the future.
Do not assume that the issuance of this statement means we are seeking to engage in politics as usual. Our whole point is we will no longer tolerate politics as usual. The aforementioned goals will be pursued vigorously, both within the system and without. We will be active in thepolitical arena and marching on the streets. We will debate when able and agitate if necessary. We are patient in that we will remain steadfast in our struggle; we will not be patient in the face of typical bureaucratic sloth, political shenanigans, and attempts to nullify progress on these issues. Whatever you think of the stated aims it certainly doesn't come across as supportive of anyone at all currently in office.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
It sounds simple. But when for decades we have been employing many of our most educated people to (rather than do anything socially useful) conceive of ever more ingenious methods of selling intertwined debt to each other things get more complicated. Simply letting failed banks go to the wall is an option. But if the result of letting a huge bank with billions of interbank liabilities fail is a domino effect of banking collapses, a complete collapse of the short-term money market and the eventual collapse of the global financial system then that isn't really a good thing for anyone. People with money in accounts would not have been able to access it and might never have seen it again. Companies with accounts there would not have been able to pay salaries or suppliers. Conceivably a point where cash machines just stopped working would come about. Imagine the social consequences of all of this. I don't know what I'm talking about.... But couldn't you just let those banks fail, and then we people weren't getting their money from their accounts, then you just bail out those people? Isn't that kinda what the whole FDIC thing is?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024