Occupy Wall Street

[sls.stormyrider]

200.  Huge sample size.  Thanks WSJ.

Out of 1,000 protesters (if that)? I'd say that's a pretty credible sample size.

Are you not aware that there are parallel protests occurring in just about every major city in the country?

Understood, but this was a survey of the protesters on Wall St. It was conducted by a professional pollster. I'm pretty sure they know whether or not their study is representative of the group.

Isn't 36 statistically accurate sample size?  Puts you at 2 standard devs I believe.  at 200 out of a thousand it is considered a very large sample size.   If you read the article it sounds pretty accurate about the composition of the people there.  Of course it has the WSJ slant to it which is why I am just looking at what it says for details and not conclusions.     

I don't agree with the occupy movement in many respects, I don't try to hide that. I grew up very lower middle class.  Winter coat was a common Xmas present, I started caddying and a newspaper route in 4th grade to start buying things I needed. A blue collar town where I didn't get the top notch education and had to make my own way.  There was no pressure from my parents so I don't know where the drive came from.   I fought my ass off to get where I am now and I want to throw up when I see what I pay in taxes each year.   I also don't agree that people can't move up and can't get ahead.  I did it, my boss did it, I have friends who did it, (including 1 growing up on the wrong side of Apartheid) .  It is a matter of drive and ability; unpopular to say, but I believe more people need to hear it. Many have the drive, but not the ability (conceptual thought, critical thinking, clear logic, etc).  Others are incredibly intelligent and lack drive, I have a family member like this.

The way I see it some things make sense and others seem misguided and rooted in inaccuracies.   That said there are changes needed in this country and those don't come from the middle.  Change starts with "radical" fringe of the population and then some of those ideas work their way into the middle and you get that change.   Without the civil disobedience those ideas don't get into the middle and the change doesn't occur.  So while I don't agree, I respect their right to protest and feel that this type of thing can be healthy for society.

agree with much of what you're saying - fwiw my own situation is a little different-started working part time in 9th grade during the school year, full time over the summers, and had the benefit of a good local school district and parents who pushed me. I was lucky for those things, I was good at school, and I worked pretty hard.

I also benefited from low interest GSLs and state supported higher ed (pvt undergrad, SUNY for med school). A sign of the times -  4 yrs of med school for me cost a bit less than 1/2 of 1 year of pvt undergrad now. The price of education and the greater income inequality make it seem as if upward mobility is more difficult, but not impossible.

Like you, I get upset when people think they "deserve" things. work for it.
i believe in capitalism and the free market.
but- history has taught us that an unregulated free market is just as tyrannical as any dictatorship. Say what you want about organized labor, unions came about early in the 1900s for good reasons. We can thank them for the disappearance of the kind of sweat shops my grandmother worked in, thank them for the "40 hr work week", child labor laws, mandatory education, and humane treatment of workers. We can thank the govt for GSLs, state supported higher ed, and improving our lives with funding for the National Academy of Sciences, NIH, NHLBI among other things.

I also get upset when people use $ for power, or power for $.
What's worse is the "1 % ers" who continue to rig the game so they can get even more and the rest get less - without any fear of the consequences.
That's why I support OWS - not just to "tax the rich and give to the poor", but to make the upper echelon responsible and hopefully get us to return to democracy instead of rule of $.

[Guyute]

Absolutely fantastic.   Can you imagine fighting, watching friends die to protect the Constitution and then seeing the people you fought to protect harmed for executing the rights you sought to protect?   He has every right to be angry.

[rowjimmy]

agree with much of what you're saying - fwiw my own situation is a little different-started working part time in 9th grade during the school year, full time over the summers, and had the benefit of a good local school district and parents who pushed me. I was lucky for those things, I was good at school, and I worked pretty hard.

I also benefited from low interest GSLs and state supported higher ed (pvt undergrad, SUNY for med school). A sign of the times -  4 yrs of med school for me cost a bit less than 1/2 of 1 year of pvt undergrad now. The price of education and the greater income inequality make it seem as if upward mobility is more difficult, but not impossible.

Like you, I get upset when people think they "deserve" things. work for it.
i believe in capitalism and the free market.
but- history has taught us that an unregulated free market is just as tyrannical as any dictatorship. Say what you want about organized labor, unions came about early in the 1900s for good reasons. We can thank them for the disappearance of the kind of sweat shops my grandmother worked in, thank them for the "40 hr work week", child labor laws, mandatory education, and humane treatment of workers. We can thank the govt for GSLs, state supported higher ed, and improving our lives with funding for the National Academy of Sciences, NIH, NHLBI among other things.

I also get upset when people use $ for power, or power for $.
What's worse is the "1 % ers" who continue to rig the game so they can get even more and the rest get less - without any fear of the consequences.
That's why I support OWS - not just to "tax the rich and give to the poor", but to make the upper echelon responsible and hopefully get us to return to democracy instead of rule of $.

Well stated.

[mattstick]

A lot of fantastic media has been created about the "Occupy" movement. I was watching one video in particular and commented to a friend, "Wow, seeing all those super smart hot chicks at the protest makes me want to be there." He replied, "Hmmm... Yeah, let's go with that."

We instantly went to Tumblr and made hotchicksofoccupywallstreet.tumblr.com. Our original ideas were admittedly sophomoric: Pics of hot chicks being all protesty, videos of hot chicks beating drums in slow-mo, etc. But when we arrived at Zuccotti Park in New York City, it evolved into something more.

There was a vibrant energy in the air, a warmth of community and family, and the voices we heard were so hopeful and passionate. Pretty faces were making signs, giving speeches, organizing crowds, handing out food, singing, dancing, debating, hugging and marching.

It made me want to pack my bags and pitch a tent on Wall Street. And it's in the light that we created this video.

And we hope it makes you want to be there too.

EDIT: Apparently a lot of controversy has erupted online from people passionately opining (among many things) that this is sexist, offensive, and dangerously objectifies women. It was not my intent to do that and I think the spirit of the video, and the voices within, are honorable and inspiring.

However, if you disagree with me, I encourage you to use that as an excuse to create constructive discussions about the issues you have. Because, to be honest, any excuse is a good excuse to bring up the topic of women’s rights.

CAMERA: Two Canon 7Ds.
LENS: 17-55mm, 70-200mm, 18-135mm
AUDIO: Rode Video Mic Pro
Shot in 60 fps

Music: Theme from "Fast, Cheap and Out of Control" by Caleb Sampson

[phil]

[gah]

Phil, if you're hiding money under your mattress, you're still getting fucked. If you don't understand that, get yourself an education.

Lots of catching up to do in here.

[phil]

Phil, if you're hiding money under your mattress, you're still getting fucked. If you don't understand that, get yourself an education.

Lots of catching up to do in here.

I moved it from under the mattress. Too many people know about my hiding spot.

[runawayjimbo]

[kellerb]

Phil, if you're hiding money under your mattress, you're still getting fucked. If you don't understand that, get yourself an education.

Lots of catching up to do in here.

I moved it from under the mattress. Too many people know about my hiding spot.

Only 1%

[gah]

Phil, if you're hiding money under your mattress, you're still getting fucked. If you don't understand that, get yourself an education.

Lots of catching up to do in here.

I moved it from under the mattress. Too many people know about my hiding spot.

Only 1%

Well played, good sir! 

[VA $l!m]

reading a bit of this:



sorta interesting in relation to this 'occupy' thingie people are talking about.

[mattstick]

[runawayjimbo]

http://www.economist.com/node/21533400

Rage against the machine
People are right to be angry. But it is also right to be worried about where populism could take politics

FROM Seattle to Sydney, protesters have taken to the streets. Whether they are inspired by the Occupy Wall Street movement in New York or by the indignados in Madrid, they burn with dissatisfaction about the state of the economy, about the unfair way that the poor are paying for the sins of rich bankers, and in some cases about capitalism itself.

In the past it was easy for Western politicians and economic liberals to dismiss such outpourings of fury as a misguided fringe. In Seattle, for instance, the last big protests (against the World Trade Organisation, in 1999) looked mindless. If they had a goal, it was selfish—an attempt to impoverish the emerging world through protectionism. This time too, some things are familiar: the odd bit of violence, a lot of incoherent ranting and plenty of inconsistency (see article). The protesters have different aims in different countries. Higher taxes for the rich and a loathing of financiers is the closest thing to a common denominator, though in America polls show that popular rage against government eclipses that against Wall Street.

Yet even if the protests are small and muddled, it is dangerous to dismiss the broader rage that exists across the West. There are legitimate deep-seated grievances. Young people—and not just those on the streets—are likely to face higher taxes, less generous benefits and longer working lives than their parents. More immediately, houses are expensive, credit hard to get and jobs scarce—not just in old manufacturing industries but in the ritzier services that attract increasingly debt-laden graduates. In America 17.1% of those below 25 are out of work. Across the European Union, youth unemployment averages 20.9%. In Spain it is a staggering 46.2%. Only in Germany, the Netherlands and Austria is the rate in single digits.

It is not just the young who feel squeezed. The middle-aged face falling real wages and diminished pension rights. And the elderly are seeing inflation eat away the value of their savings; in Britain prices are rising by 5.2% but bank deposits yield less than 1%. In the meantime, bankers are back to huge bonuses.

History, misery and protest

To the man-in-the-street, all this smacks of a system that has failed. Neither of the main Western models has much political credit at the moment. European social democracy promised voters benefits that societies can no longer afford. The Anglo-Saxon model claimed that free markets would create prosperity; many voters feel instead that they got a series of debt-fuelled asset bubbles and an economy that was rigged in favour of a financial elite, who took all the proceeds in the good times and then left everybody else with no alternative other than to bail them out. To use one of the protesters' better slogans, the 1% have gained at the expense of the 99%.

If the grievances are more legitimate and broader than previous rages against the machine, then the dangers are also greater. Populist anger, especially if it has no coherent agenda, can go anywhere in times of want. The 1930s provided the most terrifying example. A more recent (and less frightening) case study is the tea party. The justified fury of America's striving middle classes against a cumbersome state has in practice translated into a form of obstructive nihilism: nothing to do with taxes can get through Washington, including tax reform.

Worryingly, politicians are already in something of a funk. The Republicans first denounced the occupiers of Wall Street, then cuddled up to them. Across Europe social democratic parties have tended to lose elections if they move too far from the centre ground, but leaders, like Ed Miliband in Britain and François Hollande in France (see article), still find the anti-banker rhetoric enticing. Why not opt for a gesture—tariffs, a supertax on the rich—that may only make matters worse? A struggling Barack Obama, who has already flirted with class warfare and business-bashing, might well consider dragging China and its currency into the fray. And it will get worse: austerity and protest have always gone together (see article).

Tackle the causes, not the symptoms

Braver politicians would focus on two things. The first is tackling the causes of the rage speedily. Above all that means doing more to get their economies moving again. A credible solution to the euro crisis would be a huge start. More generally, focus on policies that boost economic growth: trade less austerity in the short term for medium-term adjustments, such as a higher retirement age. Make sure the rich pay their share, but in a way that makes economic sense: you can boost the tax take from the wealthy by eliminating loopholes while simultaneously lowering marginal rates. Reform finance vigorously. "Move to Basel 3 and higher capital requirements" is not a catchy slogan, but it would do far more to shrink bonuses on Wall Street than most of the ideas echoing across from Zuccotti Park.

The second is telling the truth—especially about what went wrong. The biggest danger is that legitimate criticisms of the excesses of finance risk turning into an unwarranted assault on the whole of globalisation. It is worth remembering that the epicentre of the 2008 disaster was American property, hardly a free market undistorted by government. For all the financiers' faults ("too big to fail", the excessive use of derivatives and the rest of it), the huge hole in most governments' finances stems less from bank bail-outs than from politicians spending too much in the boom and making promises to do with pensions and health care they never could keep. Look behind much of the current misery—from high food prices to the lack of jobs for young Spaniards—and it has less to do with the rise of the emerging world than with state interference.

Global integration has its costs. It will put ever more pressure on Westerners, skilled as well as unskilled. But by any measure the benefits enormously outweigh those costs, and virtually all the ways to create jobs come from opening up economies, not following the protesters' instincts. Western governments have failed their citizens once; building more barriers to stop goods, ideas, capital and people crossing borders would be a far greater mistake. To the extent that the protests are the first blast in a much longer, broader battle, this newspaper is firmly on the side of openness and freedom.

[nab]

.

[Undermind]

http://www.relix.com/blogs/exposed/2011/10/24/pete-seeger-tao-seeger-and-arlo-guthrie-at-occupy-wall-street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IPd_OkeVtI&feature=related