Occupy Wall Street better defend its identity

[WildCat]

And the threadwreck continues apace. Have fun.

bikerdruid is a self-described communist, it's not a label I put on him.

 

[JihadJane]

How is it a stereotype when they actually want a donation of puppets?

You are attempting to use one thing you think is silly to paint the entire enterprise as silly.

Please provide evidence that the people who showed up at the Community Board 1 meeting last Thursday and said that the protestors were defecatating in their doorways were just gossiping.

I didn't say the people who showed up at the Community Board 1 were just gossiping, I said you were gossiping, on this thread, in preference to engaging in rational discussion. It also appears to be being used to avoid answering straightforward questions, e.g.:

Oh Wall Street isn't that bad. Even the protestors of OWS seem to have forgotten about it. At their last general assembly there was no mention of Wall Street at all. Much disagreement about money though and most of the meeting was taken up by a discussion (again) about drumming. This faux-movement is at the begining of it's end.

http://www.nycga.net/category/minutes/

Gossip.

What do you think are the benefits of Wall Street to the US economy and to the world economy?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Here is an excellent, clear presentation outlining the economic reality out of which OWS has arisen.

The full story, in charts:

'CHARTS: Here's What The Wall Street Protesters Are So Angry About...'

 

[Alt+F4]

What do you think are the benefits of Wall Street to the US economy and to the world economy?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The full story, in charts:

'CHARTS: Here's What The Wall Street Protesters Are So Angry About...'

And? You really think the OWS protestors are going to have any effect on this? They are spending donation money on puppets for a Halloween parade. I would prefer one Alice Paul over a thousand of these clowns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Paul

 

[JihadJane]

I think that those who will bring economic reform will do more than just stand around with signs and say they are mad. They will have goals and a agenda. Can you think of even one successful reform movement that didn't have at least one concrete goal? They will understand the key to economic control is having a political voice which involves voter registration and lobbying. Hey how about starting a viable third party rather than sleeping in a park and spending the money you already have on puppets, more drums and storage bins.

Another question avoided. Here it is again (I'm assuming you are not being serious about Ron Paul):

Who do you think is going to bring about "economic reform"?

Please provide evidence that they are working towards this goal.

And as for their feces, they will do what any normal person does in an industrialized society, use the toilet!

You mean they poop in their drinking water? That's disgusting! What a waste!

 

[Alt+F4]

Another question avoided. Here it is again (I'm assuming you are not being serious about Ron Paul):

Wow, your reading comprehension is very poor. I made reference to Alice Paul, not Ron Paul.

Who do you think is going to bring about "economic reform"?

Someone like Alice Paul.

You mean they poop in their drinking water? That's disgusting! What a waste!

They don't poop in their own water, it's the pigeons that do.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/health_expert_condemns_park_rats_Vk7kl3EMepB4d2DkeFNmFL

 

[respect]

You are not much of a critical thinker if you seriously think that people who defecate in people's doorways are going to bring about economic reform.

What are you talking about? It is a foolproof plan and anyone can do it.

Step 1: Crap in your neighbor's yard.

Step 2: ?

Step 3: Celebrate your great success, executives of financial firms will do your bidding now.

 

[respect]

Anyone who can be personally tied to the crime first and foremost, which according to people here seems to be "nobody". So, failing that let's prosecute the corporation itself.



Prosecute the shareholders? Obviously not, but shareholders losing money on their investment if Wachovia's charter were revoked and assets liquidated as a result of a criminal judgement is a pretty flimsy reason to avoid doing it.

(edit)

Corporate sabotage would be extremely easy under your plan.

 

[Neally]

You are attempting to use one thing you think is silly to paint the entire enterprise as silly.

The entire enterprise is silly. Examples given are just that, examples of their silliness, and as mentioned, 1/3 of them support violence to accomplish their goals.

Attempts to draw the conversation into some sort of rational discussion is not really representative of what they are doing. We all know they are mad, about something and everything. Most are there to just be part of some sort of perceived potential revolution or some sentimental/nostalgic protest scene. Serious political action, not so much.

With the lack of anti-Bush/anti-War events there has been a built up demand for something to rally against. Since they are mostly left leaning, protesting against BO is out, even though he is a top recipient of Wall street money. Wall street has filled that void.

 

[RandFan]

With the lack of anti-Bush/anti-War events there has been a built up demand for something to rally against.

Come on. I find this so dishonest. Can't we just accept that people are pissed off at the high unemployment rate and the @#$%ing we got when the banks and financial institutions lubed us up and bent us over without so much as a kiss? Seriously, these guys loaded up complex derivatives with toxic assets and knowingly sold them to pension funds and other investors. They then bet against the derivatives. A lot of people lost their homes when the US govt gave the banks money to fix the cluster@#$% Wall Street handed us AND THEN they kept the money AND repossessed the homes and paid bonuses to the CEO's with public money. No one went to jail they just made lots of money by screwing everyone. People are out of work and the banks and corporations are making record profits. Look, personally I don't blame wall street or main street. They are amoral and their purpose is to make money. I'd like to think if I were in their position I wouldn't act like an immoral rat's ass but I can't say. I've never been in that position. Thing is, we desperately need to regulate.

I don't mind philosophical disagreement. But ad hominem poisoning the well shouldn't be tolerated on a skeptics site.

Do me a favor, please, don't pull that here?

 

[respect]

Come on. I find this so dishonest. Can't we just accept that people are pissed off at the high unemployment rate and the @#$%ing we got when the banks and financial institutions lubed us up and bent us over without so much as a kiss? Seriously, these guys loaded up complex derivatives with toxic assets and knowingly sold them to pension funds and other investors. They then bet against the derivatives. A lot of people lost their homes when the US govt gave the banks money to fix the cluster@#$% Wall Street handed us AND THEN they kept the money AND repossessed the homes and paid bonuses to the CEO's with public money. No one went to jail they just made lots of money by screwing everyone. People are out of work and the banks and corporations are making record profits. Look, personally I don't blame wall street or main street. They are amoral and their purpose is to make money. I'd like to think if I were in their position I wouldn't act like an immoral rat's ass but I can't say. I've never been in that position. Thing is, we desperately need to regulate.

I don't mind philosophical disagreement. But ad hominem poisoning the well shouldn't be tolerated on a skeptics site.

Do me a favor, please, don't pull that here?

Doesn't it seem they are angry with the wrong people then? Shouldn't it be Occupy Washington D.C.? Certainly actual cases of criminal wrongdoing should be investigated and prosecuted although it seems most claims in this regard are very vague, but banks, investment firms etc can hardly be blamed for pursuing their own interests when they play by the rules. And stripping shareholders (and union members) of their right to free speech because they have the nerve to belong to organizations that pool resources is hardly the answer. If people are upset about the cozy relationship between some businesses and politicians they should be demanding a better class of politicians. We should expect that business employees work for their employer and we should expect that politicians work for us as we are their employer.

(Note-as disgusting as it may seem, the government was probably right to bail out banks and financial firms, as bad as the economy is now, throughout modern history, the difference between a recession and a depression is generally widespread banking collapses, things would be much worse had that happened despite what Ron Paul fans think.)

 

[RandFan]

Doesn't it seem they are angry with the wrong people then? Shouldn't it be Occupy Washington D.C.?

I argued that for awhile. But now, no. There's nothing wrong with being angry with the behavior (and I am) and holding our elected politicians accountable. I actually think this is a better tactic now as it makes it clear to our politicians that we are upset at the fact that these immoral bastards are hurting people. Seriously hurting people.

Certainly actual cases of criminal wrongdoing should be investigated and prosecuted although it seems most claims in this regard are very vague, but banks, investment firms etc can hardly be blamed for pursuing their own interests when they play by the rules.

Not at all clear cut.

Matt Taibbi: Why Isn't Wall Street In Jail?

And stripping shareholders (and union members) of their right to free speech because they have the nerve to belong to organizations that pool resources is hardly the answer.

Not my argument but publicaally funded elections would be a big improvement. There is no right and wrong answer on this one. Surely donations need to be transparent and that's the one thing that is such a joke in our current system. Steven Colbert started a PAC to show how easy it is to get rid of transparency. BUT DAMN IT, REGULATE. That's what we used to do. That's what Canada does and they don't have this kind of @#$%.

Look, this isn't hard. It's not mysterious. We know what to do. We figured most of it out during the depression. We passed laws that kept our financial entities largely healthy and competitive until someone forgot the past and chose to repeat out mistakes. The Canadians and other nations know what to do. We don't do it because our elected leaders are in the pockets of the corporations pure and simple.

(Note-as disgusting as it may seem, the government was probably right to bail out banks and financial firms, as bad as the economy is now...

If someone is holding a gun to my wife's head it's probably right to do as the gunman says, it's still disgusting.

 

[Alt+F4]

No one went to jail they just made lots of money by screwing everyone.

I think what was done was irresponsible, unethical and immoral but not criminal. Exactly what illegal activities did the CEOs and executives of any of the big banks do? What specific part of the criminal code of a muncipality, state or the federal government was broken? Which individuals, by name, did it?

Thing is, we desperately need to regulate.

Yes we do. But until that happens it's wrong to make accusations of criminal activity without identifing either the law(s) that were broken or who the perpetrators are.

 

[RandFan]

I think what was done was irresponsible, unethical and immoral but not criminal. Exactly what illegal activities did the CEOs and executives of any of the big banks do? What specific part of the criminal code of a muncipality, state or the federal government was broken? Which individuals, by name, did it?

A.) Did you read the article? B.) Isn't that what investigations are for?

Yes we do. But until we do it's wrong to make accusations of law breaking without citing either the law or the accused.

No, I'm perfectly fine with that. I'm not an expert and I'm happy to subscribe to the concept in the law "innocent until proven guilty", but I'm entitled to form an opinion and I can even express that opinion within libel and slander limitations. So, yeah, let's have an investigation, I think there was criminality.

 

[respect]

I argued that for awhile. But now, no. There's nothing wrong with being angry with the behavior (and I am) and holding our elected politicians accountable. I actually think this is a better tactic now as it makes it clear to our politicians that we are upset at the fact that these immoral bastards are hurting people. Seriously hurting people.

Who are you angry for?

Not at all clear cut.

Matt Taibbi: Why Isn't Wall Street In Jail?

That childish, conspiracy theory propaganda article has already been discussed in this thread.

Not my argument but publicaally funded elections would be a big improvement. There is no right and wrong answer on this one. Surely donations need to be transparent and that's the one thing that is such a joke in our current system. Steven Colbert started a PAC to show how easy it is to get rid of transparency. BUT DAMN IT, REGULATE. That's what we used to do. That's what Canada does and they don't have this kind of @#$%.

Look, this isn't hard. It's not mysterious. We know what to do. We figured most of it out during the depression. We passed laws that kept our financial entities largely healthy and competitive. The Canadians and other nations know what to do. We don't do it because our elected leaders are in the pockets of the corporations pure and simple.

I didn't say it was your argument, I just addressed it as it has come in this thread a lot. Demanding transparency is one thing, demanding that people be denied the right to participate in the political process because they are better at lobbying is a whole other issue. And certainly demanding that it is okay for the government to ban documentaries, books etc when corporate money is involved takes that to a whole other level of censorship. Wildcat is quite right that most, if not all, people opposed to the Citizen's United ruling have no idea what it was about.

If someone is holding a gun to my wife's head it's probably right to do as the gunman says, it's still disgusting.

Right, the free marketer in me would like to see businesses with bad business models go the way of the dodo bird, but the part of me that recognizes that sometimes efficiency needs to be set aside to alleviate the suffering of individuals realizes that a widespread banking collapse would make the current suffering look like child's play.

On a side note, a lot of what is coming out of the Occupy Wall Street movement seems to have little to do with anger at Wall Street or politicians. Marxists show up to blast capitalism, Ron Paul fans show up to blast the Fed and what is with the crying about student loans? It seems plenty of people just want a place to vent about what they would be mad about regardless of the current recession.

 

[RandFan]

You can go to jail for stealing someone's wallet. Gamble thousands of people's pensions on shaky mortgages and the govt will bail you out and let you collect a huge bonus.

"You put Lloyd Blankfein in pound-me-in-the-ass prison for one six-month term, and all this ******** would stop, all over Wall Street," says a former congressional aide. "That's all it would take. Just once."

 

[RandFan]

Who are you angry for?

People lost their homes, their pensions, their savings, their jobs. That's includes my mother BTW, but if I can't get angry over that why get angry over anything?

That childish, conspiracy theory propaganda article has already been discussed in this thread.

Ad hominem poisoning the well. Matt has earned respect from many on the right for his investigative reporting.

Right, the free marketer in me would like to see businesses with bad business models go the way of the dodo bird, but the part of me that recognizes that sometimes efficiency needs to be set aside to alleviate the suffering of individuals realizes that a widespread banking collapse would make the current suffering look like child's play.

Yet other nations like Canada just don't have to up put up with this BS.

On a side note, a lot of what is coming out of the Occupy Wall Street movement seems to have little to do with anger at Wall Street or politicians. Marxists show up to blast capitalism, Ron Paul fans show up to blast the Fed and what is with the crying about student loans? It seems plenty of people just want a place to vent about what they would be mad about regardless of the current recession.

And you control for confirmation bias when you compile your statistics by... Oh, and exactly how do you compile your statistic. That's disappointing for a skeptics forum. Dude, you can do better. Much better. I expect that kind of BS on facebook and other sites but I just expect more from people who've spent any amount of time at the JREF.

 

[Alt+F4]

A.) Did you read the article? B.) Isn't that what investigations are for?

No, I'm perfectly fine with that. I'm not an expert and I'm happy to subscribe to the concept in the law "innocent until proven guilty", but I'm entitled to form an opinion and I can even express that opinion within libel and slander limitations. So, yeah, let's have an investigation, I think there was criminality.

I did read the article, much about "shady deals". I don't see the OWS protestors asking for investigations, indictments or trials. I just hear go to jail, directly to jail. Who should go to jail? They have no idea.

 

[RandFan]

I don't see the OWS protestors asking for investigations, indictments or trials. I just hear go to jail, directly to jail. Who should go to jail? They have no idea.

I really, really don't care. Did I say I don't care? We got hosed, bad, really, really bad. That kind of harm usually results in someone going to jail. They are angry that their elected leaders have done nothing. Aside from giving the people who @#$%ed us a lot of money, nothing. So I don't give a flying @#$% if they are yelling go to jail. Somebody needs to wake the hell up and start doing something other than protecting the rich and powerful. Perhaps it would be a good idea for the elected leaders to launch investigations, hey, now that's an idea....

 

[Alt+F4]

We got hosed, bad, really, really bad. That kind of harm usually results in someone going to jail.

Yes, but again, what criminal activity took place? Please...provide names, dates, events. I'm disturbed for the call to throw whoever in jail for whatever reason. This is not Somalia, this is a nation of laws. I refuse to acquiesce to mob justice just because people are mad.

Somebody needs to wake the hell up and start doing something other than protecting the rich and powerful.

Yup, but OWS isn't it. It's not a movement about fixing the wrongs in our society, it's about making a society to replace it.

 

[respect]

People lost their homes, their pensions, their savings, their jobs. That's includes my mother BTW, but if I can't get angry over that why get angry over anything?

To be perfectly frank, people who lost their homes did not pay their debts back. It is a common criticism that lenders gave loans they should have known wouldn't likely be paid back, and it is clearly a valid one, but it doesn't also follow to complain that people who couldn't pay back their mortgages lost the collateral. People who lost investments may have a more valid complaint depending what the investment was, but they all come with risk. If a lack of lending now has cost you your job you wouldn't have had the job without the lending in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that nothing wrong happened, I am saying that many people hurt are themselves partially to blame. It may feel nice to blame the sub prime lender who gave you a mortgage for your home loss after you lied to them about your income and they did a poor underwriting job and didn't discover that. It may feel fantastic to blame the bank for not lending you money to keep your business afloat even though no one made you start up with less capital in reserve. Blaming the ratings agencies for being inaccurate on derivatives may feel great but no one made you listen to them (I'm not saying you did these things, just putting them up as hypothetical scenarios, albeit, ones that have played out a lot). Wall Street screwed up a lot, but they are hardly alone in that.

Ad hominem poisoning the well. Matt has earned respect from many on the right for his investigative reporting.

Again, this was discussed earlier in the thread, his claims that multiple government agencies actively conspire with Wall Street and/or all government employees are too stupid to ever catch an employee on Wall Street breaking the law weren't compelling then. As previously discussed, he also conveniently failed to mention actual investigations into the criminal activities he alleges. For instance, he whines that no one at Lehman Brothers went to prison for the Repo 105 accounting business but fails to mention that there were several investigations into it and government agencies felt that they could not prove a case of fraud in court. And again, as discussed previously, it is a monumental challenge to prove fraud when incompetence could just as easily be the explanation. His whining about conspiracies and how the typical FBI agent is too dumb to balance a checkbook was hardly necessary to account for what has actually gone on. Fraud was likely but rarely prosecuted due to the nature of said fraud. Interestingly enough, the way this came up earlier in the thread was also people claiming that no one has gone to prison for assorted illegal banking activities, yet they posted link after link that talked about people being locked up for assorted illegal banking activities.

Yet other nations like Canada just don't have to up put up with this BS.

Great, we should examine why and see if they are doing something we should also do.

If we, I don't know, had a better class of politicians, that might actually happen.

And you control for confirmation bias when you compile your statistics by... Oh, and exactly how do you compile your statistic. That's disappointing for a skeptics forum. Dude, you can do better. Much better. I expect that kind of BS on facebook and other sites but I just expect more from people who've spent any amount of time at the JREF.

No stats, just judging from the signs I have seen them waving around the country. I know, I know, just because some are lunatics doesn't mean that they generally are...that would be easier to judge if they were clear about a general agenda.