Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 210

Thread: Occupy Wall Street

  1. #26
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,587
    Quote Originally posted by ofos View post
    I understand the anger but I don't understand why it's all targeted at the financial institutions. How can one percenters like George Soros and Michael Moore who support the protests not be seen as part of the problem? Don't they keep their money in financial institutions?
    AFAIK nobody is protesting the keeping of money in financial institutions, its the corporate and wall street control over the political process - and the use of taxpayer, pension, and regular people's savings to leverage their risky bets that are destabilizing the economy. Plus- it seems to me Soros and Moore probably are part of the problem.

    Quote Originally posted by stroskey
    All the reports I've read say there is no cohesive goal between the people
    I agree all of the reports are making them out to be a disgruntled, angry, unprincipled mob with no real goals. The media is even airing interviews with morons who are protesting, but if you look at some of the web sites and blogs and social media information they do have a clear goal - to get wall street out of the political process. I think it's pretty obvious by now that wall street runs the country. The media is in bed with wall street is in bed with the politicians.
    Children in the back seat can cause accidents - and vice versa.

  2. #27
    Cyburbian Coragus's avatar
    Registered
    May 2002
    Location
    The Bluegrass Region . . . for now
    Posts
    1,024
    Here in Lexington:

    Person with megaphone, "BANKS GOT BAILED OUT!"
    Crowd, "WE GOT SOLD OUT!"

    I'm not going to comment much more, except to say that I hope I don't end up on Youtube.
    Maintaining enthusiasm in the face of crushing apathy.

  3. #28
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,587
    It really is a fascinating lesson on how the corporate media and political powers are manipulating the public. The tea party says "we hate the bailout of the banks!" and the OWP says "we hate the bailout of the banks!" and yet the media and political powers have everyone convinced that the tea party and the OWP are polar opposites.
    Children in the back seat can cause accidents - and vice versa.

  4. #29
    Cyburbian TerraSapient's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2009
    Location
    The Glass City
    Posts
    2,610
    From the interviews I have read, many of the protesters believe that the financial institutions have purchased our political system and they have very good reasons for believing that. So, voting people in that will change all that isn't easy. When over 9 out of 10 elected officials simply had more money than their competitors, one has to question how democratic our political system truly is.

    Though I'm not a huge fan of Michael Moore - I like what he is trying to do, I just don't think he does a great job of showing the picture in full scope - he has done a lot of research to bring down the financial institutions' ownership of our legislative process. That is admirable. I don't think anyone is saying, "don't put your money in a bank". Rather, they are saying, "stop letting bankers steal from the people by purchasing our legislative, executive, and judicial processes, and then deregulating themselves so they can steal all our money and property".

    I, personally, want our $700 billion back. I want CEOs and brokers to be held legally and financially accountable for the exotic financing packages and derivatives they developed to steal people's properties from them. I want the regulations on banking that were cut back in the Reagan administration to be repaired. If I was occupying Wall St., these would be my goals.

    I was rather skeptical about this movement when it first got started. We have seen so many groups of people protest in this manner that I think as a nation we are numb to it. This, however, is much more organic. That is the reason it is still alive and attracting more and more people. By remaining open to everyone's grievances, they have effectively attracted everyone who is tired of the middle class vanishing and the poor and destitute multiplying. I really support it now. They have changed my perception of them.

    I plan to be a weekend warrior at the small event here in Hawaii.


    Edit: My bad. I didn't realize there was a second page to this thread now and missed all of Imaplanner's points.
    Occupy Your Brain!

  5. #30
    Cyburbian Tarf's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Encinitas, CA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    It really is a fascinating lesson on how the corporate media and political powers are manipulating the public. The tea party says "we hate the bailout of the banks!" and the OWP says "we hate the bailout of the banks!" and yet the media and political powers have everyone convinced that the tea party and the OWP are polar opposites.

    They may not be opposites per se, but they have little (if anything) in common.

    The Wall Street protesters aren't complaining about the size of the government. They're complaining about corporate influence. Best I can tell, Wall Street protesters would be satisfied with corporate America no longer influencing our politics, all the while keeping government as is (in terms of size). In fact, much of what the Wall Street protesters are saying would suggest they want even *more* government to deal with economic inequality, etc.

    Tea Partiers are generally pro-corporations, but opposed to the size of the government and the extent of government regulations (except, of course, when it comes to things like drug policy, abortion, etc.). Tea Partiers don't care about corporations so much, except where corporations are encouraging the government to spend more tax dollars on investments that help them. Their beef is the size of the government; if the government were to go away, they'd be perfectly happy (until they tried to take the bus), even if that means corporate dominance of public policy.

    They may have stuff in common, but they're far more different than they are the same. In fact, the only thing I really see in common between them is the impracticality of what they seem to be asking for - at least when taken to the extreme.
    In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. (Douglas Adams)

  6. #31
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,587
    ^^^ true, but alot of the tea party anger was aimed at the banking bailout and the socializing of private banking losses. At least it seemed like that until Fox News adopted the tea party and it became more of an anti-Obama movement. I still think alot of the anger both movements have stem from the government propping up the shennanigans of wall street.
    Children in the back seat can cause accidents - and vice versa.

  7. #32
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Wherever
    Posts
    1,179
    Except the anger of this movement isn't directed at Wall Street per se but rather how the massive income disparity is allowed to happen by the people in power. That issue seems to be the unifying thing behind all these different protesters. It also seems to be the biggest difference between them and the Tea Party. The Tea Party seems unconcerned with wealth inequality, they just want the government out of everything. This OWS group just sees the government as being bought out by the entities that they were supposed to regulate.

    I'm actually happy that these protests are gaining traction for if nothing else, they're pointing out the glaring wealth inequalities present in this country. I figured the US was overdue for a movement like this considering the employment situation for people in their 20s.

  8. #33
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,587
    I just heard that the total amount of wealth in the world is about 125 trillion dollars US. But the total amount of derivatives traded by wall street exceeds 500 trillion.
    Children in the back seat can cause accidents - and vice versa.

  9. #34
    Cyburbian kalimotxo's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    The Old Dominion
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally posted by stroskey View post
    Nor have the populous solutions.

    The stories about medical problems on that website are pretty sad.
    Exactly what solutions in the last three years would you classify as populist (I'm going to assume that's what you meant)? "Financial" reform was a joke and by many accounts were heading for the same cliff we unwittingly fell off in 2007-2008. I haven't seen a single "populist" solution. Both parties play on populist anger to seek policies that only further entrench the status quo. The Tea Party is a perfect example - the anger is real and palpable, but its proponents are being played like fiddles by the same assholes that got us into this mess.
    Process and dismissal. Shelter and location. Everybody wants somewhere.

  10. #35
    Cyburbian Tarf's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Encinitas, CA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally posted by kalimotxo View post
    Exactly what solutions in the last three years would you classify as populist (I'm going to assume that's what you meant)? "Financial" reform was a joke and by many accounts were heading for the same cliff we unwittingly fell off in 2007-2008. I haven't seen a single "populist" solution. Both parties play on populist anger to seek policies that only further entrench the status quo. The Tea Party is a perfect example - the anger is real and palpable, but its proponents are being played like fiddles by the same assholes that got us into this mess.

    The populism, imo, happened after the bank bailouts. The push back was so hard that the government became unable to continue stimulus spending in other areas of the economy, which would have ultimately brought us out of stagnation (or at least, quicker).

    Instead, we're left fighting over a $450 billion jobs bill that will do practically nothing for fixing the economy, and even that proposal faces a serious uphill battle.

    It almost seems as though the same people complaining about the economy and blaming Obama are also the ones screaming at the top of their lungs not to give Obama the very tools he would need to adequately address the problem.

    Also, going into austerity mode when you're in no danger whatsoever of defaulting on your debt, and in the middle of an historic recession, is simply moronic. And populist as well
    In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. (Douglas Adams)

  11. #36
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Someplace between yesterday and tomorrow.
    Posts
    12,193
    I find it funny that people are using their I-Phones and I-Pads and some even using the Apple Store WIFI to protest big business… like Apple?

    I agree that there is too much corporate corruption, but I don’t think this is the way to solve it. Perhaps public education about these corporations would be better.

    I am going to reach way back and say the answer is for more small businesses on Main Street and I-Street. (internet) We need to revitalize the entrepreneurial spirit. I think that the bail outs were a massive mistake. Those corporations would have gone under, but the demand for services would have remained. This would have resulted in the replacement of one major company with thousands of small businesses.
    Not my monkey, not my circus. - Old Polish Proverb

  12. #37
    Cyburbian stroskey's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2008
    Location
    the delta
    Posts
    1,197
    I really liked this one.
    I burned down the church to atone for my transgressions.

  13. #38
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,587
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    .

    I am going to reach way back and say the answer is for more small businesses on Main Street and I-Street. (internet) We need to revitalize the entrepreneurial spirit. I think that the bail outs were a massive mistake. Those corporations would have gone under, but the demand for services would have remained. This would have resulted in the replacement of one major company with thousands of small businesses.
    Many of the firms that were bailed out provide little to no services to the American people. At the same time, small businesses don't have the capital to start lending - which is the reason for the bailouts. Realistically, the government should have nationalized the banks and used the bailout money to lend to small businesses. Instead we just gave the banks money to continue to invest in derivitives and CEO salaries.

    Regarding the sentiment behind stroskey's post, I believe that the majority of the protesters may be concerned about world poverty - but change always begins at home. The 99 percent can't really do much about world poverty - especially considering it is the 1% of Americans who are profitting off of world poverty. I'm sure you are aware that big oil continues to pay nigerian and somalian war lords to murder and displace people who happen to be living on land they need for oil pipelines. There isn't much that the 99% can do about that, so in a way the protest is a protest against all of the problems created by the 1% - and that includes serious social and economic upheavel in the third world.


    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    .
    I find it funny that people are using their I-Phones and I-Pads and some even using the Apple Store WIFI to protest big business… like Apple? .
    As best as I can tell they are not protesting big business itself.
    Children in the back seat can cause accidents - and vice versa.

  14. #39
    Cyburbian TerraSapient's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2009
    Location
    The Glass City
    Posts
    2,610
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    As best as I can tell they are not protesting big business itself.
    I didn't get that impression either. Though, I'm sure there are a few soldiers at OWS who are protesting big business, the general theme seems to be financial institutions.
    Occupy Your Brain!

  15. #40
    Cyburbian Linda_D's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Jamestown, New York
    Posts
    1,667
    Quote Originally posted by kalimotxo View post
    Exactly what solutions in the last three years would you classify as populist (I'm going to assume that's what you meant)? "Financial" reform was a joke and by many accounts were heading for the same cliff we unwittingly fell off in 2007-2008. I haven't seen a single "populist" solution. Both parties play on populist anger to seek policies that only further entrench the status quo. The Tea Party is a perfect example - the anger is real and palpable, but its proponents are being played like fiddles by the same assholes that got us into this mess.
    THIS!!!!!!!

  16. #41
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Someplace between yesterday and tomorrow.
    Posts
    12,193
    Quote Originally posted by imaplanner View post
    Many of the firms that were bailed out provide little to no services to the American people. At the same time, small businesses don't have the capital to start lending - which is the reason for the bailouts. Realistically, the government should have nationalized the banks and used the bailout money to lend to small businesses. Instead we just gave the banks money to continue to invest in derivitives and CEO salaries.

    Regarding the sentiment behind stroskey's post, I believe that the majority of the protesters may be concerned about world poverty - but change always begins at home. The 99 percent can't really do much about world poverty - especially considering it is the 1% of Americans who are profitting off of world poverty. I'm sure you are aware that big oil continues to pay nigerian and somalian war lords to murder and displace people who happen to be living on land they need for oil pipelines. There isn't much that the 99% can do about that, so in a way the protest is a protest against all of the problems created by the 1% - and that includes serious social and economic upheavel in the third world.
    Other than your idea to nationalize the banks, I agree. Regarding the oil issue, I think we as a nation need to work harder to eliminate our demand for foreign oil with a combination of alternative energy sources, including bio-diesel, and domestic drilling for oil.

    Have the protesters offered any suggestions on how to address their concerns?
    Not my monkey, not my circus. - Old Polish Proverb

  17. #42
    Cyburbian MacheteJames's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC area
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    Other than your idea to nationalize the banks, I agree. Regarding the oil issue, I think we as a nation need to work harder to eliminate our demand for foreign oil with a combination of alternative energy sources, including bio-diesel, and domestic drilling for oil.

    Have the protesters offered any suggestions on how to address their concerns?
    You're aware that any potential oil that could be domestically extracted would be sold on the open world market, right?

    The most salient point articulated at OWS has been to get all of the damn corporate and Wall Street money of out the election cycle so that we can get a range of candidates that represent the will of the people, rather than the special interests. Yeah, I know someone is going to say something about 'Big Labor' now, but Big Labor doesn't have but a fraction of the lobbying muscle that the corporations/financiers do.

    Getting the corporate money of elections is something that a whole lot more people than just lefties can get behind.

  18. #43
    Cyburbian Tarf's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Encinitas, CA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally posted by MacheteJames View post
    You're aware that any potential oil that could be domestically extracted would be sold on the open world market, right?

    The most salient point articulated at OWS has been to get all of the damn corporate and Wall Street money of out the election cycle so that we can get a range of candidates that represent the will of the people, rather than the special interests. Yeah, I know someone is going to say something about 'Big Labor' now, but Big Labor doesn't have but a fraction of the lobbying muscle that the corporations/financiers do.

    Getting the corporate money of elections is something that a whole lot more people than just lefties can get behind.

    If that is truly what the protesters want, then why haven't they been arguing for publicly-financed elections? It probably wouldn't change things with the whole Citizens United thing, but it would at least get corporations to stop directly contributing to candidates.
    In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. (Douglas Adams)

  19. #44
    Cyburbian kalimotxo's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    The Old Dominion
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally posted by MacheteJames View post
    Getting the corporate money of elections is something that a whole lot more people than just lefties can get behind.
    But corporations are people, and spending money is free speech. Isn't that the "conservative" line of thinking these days?
    Process and dismissal. Shelter and location. Everybody wants somewhere.

  20. #45
    Cyburbian stroskey's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2008
    Location
    the delta
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally posted by kalimotxo View post
    But corporations are people, and spending money is free speech. Isn't that the "conservative" line of thinking these days?
    Not at all. In fact many conservatives were upset when SCOTUS said that.
    I burned down the church to atone for my transgressions.

  21. #46
    Cyburbian safege's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Golden Valley MN
    Posts
    713
    If the protesters had a chant, it would be "we shall not overcome".

    I find this generation to be both refreshing, and humble.
    Psychotics are consistently inconsistent. The essence of sanity is to be inconsistently inconsistent.
    -Larry Wall

  22. #47
    Cyburbian rcgplanner's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Back in SE Texas
    Posts
    1,658
    Quote Originally posted by stroskey View post
    Those "occupying Wall Street" obviously don't have jobs and families to be able to sit there for weeks. That's what gets me about protests - they are done by people who don't have a foot in the "real world". This actually makes me wish I would have pushed off working to travel or something.

    Or are unemployed or college students concerned about their lack of a future...

    I agree that a major point of contention for many of the OWS protesters is getting the corporate control out of government. I think the Citizens United decision was one of the worse SC rulings in quite a while. I find it funny that the Tea Party and OWS have similar grievances, yet many on the right are looking at these protestors as "Unamerican" and "Freedom Haters". I am sick of pretty much everyone in the national government, on both sides of the aisle.

  23. #48
    Cyburbian TerraSapient's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2009
    Location
    The Glass City
    Posts
    2,610
    Quote Originally posted by tarf12345678 View post
    If that is truly what the protesters want, then why haven't they been arguing for publicly-financed elections? It probably wouldn't change things with the whole Citizens United thing, but it would at least get corporations to stop directly contributing to candidates.
    Publicly financed elections. Bingo. Get all the other money out of it. Set a cap. Everyone gets the same amount. I like it, but how would it work? Would it only go to the Ds and Rs? How many candidates from how many parties? Would Independents be included? Who would determine if a candidate was eligible?

    More thought should be given in this direction. Ds and Rs are already getting tax dollars to finance their campaigns, so it makes sense to set this in stone and open up the doors to more potential parties and get corporations and lobbyists out of the picture.
    Occupy Your Brain!

  24. #49
    Cyburbian ofos's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Slightly Off-Center
    Posts
    8,258
    As one of the few here who actually remember the protests of 60's and early 70's, I'm seeing a lot of similarities. The big difference is that the 60's began with a generation that thought we could change politics, the environment, civil rights, etc., so there was a strong positive element to the protest. Today's protests lack that positive element and that really concerns me. What I'm seeing is anger without focus on anything other than "they've got it and we want it". That's a recipe for chaos.
    “Death comes when memories of the past exceed the vision for the future.”

  25. #50
    OH....IO Hink's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hang on Sloopy...land
    Posts
    9,684
    Quote Originally posted by rcgplanner View post
    I find it funny that the Tea Party and OWS have similar grievances, yet many on the right are looking at these protestors as "Unamerican" and "Freedom Haters". I am sick of pretty much everyone in the national government, on both sides of the aisle.
    It seems that there are lots of Tea Party people out as well at OWS. Although most of the Right media (Fox News) is painting it as crazy people protesting. I enjoyed Sean Hannity yesterday where he was trying to argue that "THESE people are just nuts.... they don't know what they stand for. Their argument is incoherent". Then when his guest said, it is just like what you were defending in the Tea Party movement, he says, "No, I knew what they stood for...". Then he finds some of the OWS people who will talk and sound a bit crazy and uses that as his reasoning...

    *Sigh*
    A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 ... LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 4
    Last post: 09 Nov 2012, 1:51 PM
  2. Tempe, AZ will go wall-to-wall wireless
    Economic and Community Development
    Replies: 15
    Last post: 23 Jun 2006, 9:21 PM
  3. Great Wall Street Journal Headline
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 2
    Last post: 28 Feb 2004, 8:05 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last post: 21 Nov 2003, 12:13 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last post: 22 Jul 2001, 6:36 PM