#occupy<insertlocalehere>

[stev0]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

So if all these asshats made it significantly difficult in some way for you to run your businesses or for customers to direct their patronage to your businesses, you'd be fine with that? You'd have no problem with just saying "Big deal, there are much larger issues at play here"?

No, I wouldn't be fine with it... but I'm one person, in the big scheme of things there are much larger issues.

[stev0]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Parts of this movement deserve to be mocked. Truthers, hippies, people begging for condoms and toilet paper that they can go get themselves. People who have no clue what they are protesting about, but dammit, we're gonna camp in Olympic Plaza anyway!

There's always going to be bandwagoners willing to jump on a cause...

Here are the demands by Occupy Wall Street. How can anyone with half a brain not agree? I'm pretty sure the only people that have no idea what is being protested are the ones sitting back trolling forums and criticizing the protesters for being there.

-------------
paste
------------

CONGRESS PASS HR 1489 REINSTATING GLASS-STEAGALL ACT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act --- Wiki entry summary: The repeal of provisions of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999 effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. The deregulation also removed conflict of interest prohibitions between investment bankers serving as officers of commercial banks. Most economists believe this repeal directly contributed to the severity of the Financial crisis of 2007–2011 by allowing Wall Street investment banking firms to gamble with their depositors' money that was held in commercial banks owned or created by the investment firms. Here's detail on repeal in 1999 and how it happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act#Repeal . If we wanted to have a BIG IMPACT and we were able to have only one slogan that we could paint on signs and chant during marches within earshot of press, it would be "PASS HR 1489. REINSTATE GLASS-STEAGALL" or "RE-IN-STATE the ACT GLASS-STEAGALL. IT MAKES THE WALL STREET GAMES ILLEGAL"

USE CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY AND OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCIES FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS who clearly broke the law and helped cause the 2008 financial crisis in the following notable cases: (insert list of the most clear cut criminal actions). There is a pretty broad consensus that there is a clear group of people who got away with millions / billions illegally and haven't been brought to justice. Boy would this be long overdue and cathartic for millions of Americans. It would also be a shot across the bow for the financial industry. If you watch the solidly researched and awared winning documentary film "Inside Job" that was narrated by Matt Damon (pretty brave Matt!) and do other research, it wouldn't take long to develop the list.

CONGRESS ENACT LEGISLATION TO PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY BY REVERSING THE EFFECTS OF THE CITIZENS UNITED SUPREME COURT DECISION which essentially said corporations can spend as much as they want on elections. The result is that corporations can pretty much buy elections. Corporations should be highly limited in ability to contribute to political campaigns no matter what the election and no matter what the form of media. The Supreme Court decision is really weird. Read it when you have a chance. The justices who argued for unlimited corporate contributions thought that wouldn't have an adverse effect on democracy and wouldn't undermine the citizen's view of legitimacy of elections. I'm not sure there's a word for that it's so strange.

CONGRESS PASS THE BUFFETT RULE ON FAIR TAXATION SO THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE & CLOSE CORPORATE TAX LOOP HOLES AND ENACT A PROHIBITION ON HIDING FUNDS OFF SHORE. No more GE paying zero or negative taxes. Pass the Buffet Rule on fair taxation so the rich pay their fair share. (If we have a really had a good negotiating position and have the place surrounded, we could actually dial up taxes on millionaires, billionaires and corporations even higher...back to what they once were in the 50's and 60's.

CONGRESS COMPLETELY REVAMP THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION and staff it at all levels with proven professionals who get the job done protecting the integrity of the marketplace so citizens and investors are both protected. This agency needs a large staff and needs to be well-funded. It's currently has a joke of a budget and is run by Wall St. insiders who often leave for high ticket cushy jobs with the corporations they were just regulating. Hmmm.

CONGRESS PASS SPECIFIC AND EFFECTIVE LAWS LIMITING THE INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AND ELIMINATING THE PRACTICE OF LOBBYISTS WRITING LEGISLATION THAT ENDS UP ON THE FLOOR OF CONGRESS.

CONGRESS PASSING "Revolving Door Legislation" LEGISLATION ELIMINATING THE ABILITY OF FORMER GOVERNMENT REGULATORS GOING TO WORK FOR CORPORATIONS THAT THEY ONCE REGULATED. So, you don't get to work at the FDA for five years playing softball with Pfizer and then go to work for Pfizer making $195,000 a year. While they're at it, Congress should pass specific and effective laws to enforce strict judicial standards of conduct in matters concerning conflicts of interest. So long as judges are culled from the ranks of corporate attorneys the 1% will retain control.

ELIMINATE "PERSONHOOD" STATUS FOR CORPORATIONS

RE-ESTABLISH THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES IN THE U.S. SO THAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES ARE GIVEN EQUAL TIME FOR FREE AT REASONABLE INTERVALS IN DAILY PROGRAMMING DURING CAMPAIGN SEASON. The same should extend to other media.

-------------
end paste
------------

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by stev0

There's always going to be bandwagoners willing to jump on a cause...

Here are the demands by Occupy Wall Street. How can anyone with half a brain not agree? I'm pretty sure the only people that have no idea what is being protested are the ones sitting back trolling forums and criticizing the protesters for being there.

-------------
paste
------------

CONGRESS PASS HR 1489 REINSTATING GLASS-STEAGALL ACT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act --- Wiki entry summary: The repeal of provisions of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999 effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. The deregulation also removed conflict of interest prohibitions between investment bankers serving as officers of commercial banks. Most economists believe this repeal directly contributed to the severity of the Financial crisis of 2007–2011 by allowing Wall Street investment banking firms to gamble with their depositors' money that was held in commercial banks owned or created by the investment firms. Here's detail on repeal in 1999 and how it happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act#Repeal . If we wanted to have a BIG IMPACT and we were able to have only one slogan that we could paint on signs and chant during marches within earshot of press, it would be "PASS HR 1489. REINSTATE GLASS-STEAGALL" or "RE-IN-STATE the ACT GLASS-STEAGALL. IT MAKES THE WALL STREET GAMES ILLEGAL"

USE CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY AND OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCIES FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS who clearly broke the law and helped cause the 2008 financial crisis in the following notable cases: (insert list of the most clear cut criminal actions). There is a pretty broad consensus that there is a clear group of people who got away with millions / billions illegally and haven't been brought to justice. Boy would this be long overdue and cathartic for millions of Americans. It would also be a shot across the bow for the financial industry. If you watch the solidly researched and awared winning documentary film "Inside Job" that was narrated by Matt Damon (pretty brave Matt!) and do other research, it wouldn't take long to develop the list.

CONGRESS ENACT LEGISLATION TO PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY BY REVERSING THE EFFECTS OF THE CITIZENS UNITED SUPREME COURT DECISION which essentially said corporations can spend as much as they want on elections. The result is that corporations can pretty much buy elections. Corporations should be highly limited in ability to contribute to political campaigns no matter what the election and no matter what the form of media. The Supreme Court decision is really weird. Read it when you have a chance. The justices who argued for unlimited corporate contributions thought that wouldn't have an adverse effect on democracy and wouldn't undermine the citizen's view of legitimacy of elections. I'm not sure there's a word for that it's so strange.

CONGRESS PASS THE BUFFETT RULE ON FAIR TAXATION SO THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE & CLOSE CORPORATE TAX LOOP HOLES AND ENACT A PROHIBITION ON HIDING FUNDS OFF SHORE. No more GE paying zero or negative taxes. Pass the Buffet Rule on fair taxation so the rich pay their fair share. (If we have a really had a good negotiating position and have the place surrounded, we could actually dial up taxes on millionaires, billionaires and corporations even higher...back to what they once were in the 50's and 60's.

CONGRESS COMPLETELY REVAMP THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION and staff it at all levels with proven professionals who get the job done protecting the integrity of the marketplace so citizens and investors are both protected. This agency needs a large staff and needs to be well-funded. It's currently has a joke of a budget and is run by Wall St. insiders who often leave for high ticket cushy jobs with the corporations they were just regulating. Hmmm.

CONGRESS PASS SPECIFIC AND EFFECTIVE LAWS LIMITING THE INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AND ELIMINATING THE PRACTICE OF LOBBYISTS WRITING LEGISLATION THAT ENDS UP ON THE FLOOR OF CONGRESS.

CONGRESS PASSING "Revolving Door Legislation" LEGISLATION ELIMINATING THE ABILITY OF FORMER GOVERNMENT REGULATORS GOING TO WORK FOR CORPORATIONS THAT THEY ONCE REGULATED. So, you don't get to work at the FDA for five years playing softball with Pfizer and then go to work for Pfizer making $195,000 a year. While they're at it, Congress should pass specific and effective laws to enforce strict judicial standards of conduct in matters concerning conflicts of interest. So long as judges are culled from the ranks of corporate attorneys the 1% will retain control.

ELIMINATE "PERSONHOOD" STATUS FOR CORPORATIONS

RE-ESTABLISH THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES IN THE U.S. SO THAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES ARE GIVEN EQUAL TIME FOR FREE AT REASONABLE INTERVALS IN DAILY PROGRAMMING DURING CAMPAIGN SEASON. The same should extend to other media.

-------------
end paste
------------

All three of the bolded portions are essentially out of congresses hands, the supreme court's decisions are essentially final,
you cant just tell them what to do.
And there is a huge difference between thinking someone is guilty of something and proving it.
And of course all of this ignores completely the fact that the vast majority of the voting public are on the other side of the issue.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

And of course all of this ignores completely the fact that the vast majority of the voting public are on the other side of the issue.

Not that I disagree, but do you have a source for this?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

And of course all of this ignores completely the fact that the vast majority of the voting public are on the other side of the issue.

I think the vast majority of the voting public are "against" this protest, but not many of them would disagree with prosecuting Wall Street fatcats if they committed a crime and limiting the role of lobbyists in public policy.

Whether or not Congress can do this I don't know, but these aren't solely radical/smelly-hippie ideas.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Not that I disagree, but do you have a source for this?

The last election, the existance of the tea party, 'junkie' Limbough, foxnews etc.

In the imortal words of Mel Brooks americans 'are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons.'

[freedogger]

On Bailouts of banks and car companies - if you require a public bailout, then your executive should be compensated going forward to the same level as a public servant. I don't care if you paid it back, that is like a gambler saying, look, I'm up now and I don't need you anymore. The banks in the US were bailed out in 1983 by Reagan, and look, here we are again. Without the bailouts these companies would have failed. Instead, last year they get record bonuses. This isn't capitalism, its the definition of fascism.

[macker]

Let's start a war for the kids
A purpose for which to unite
Make them some words they can mince
What they don't know, They won't mind

Find them a foe for the fight
And stories to tell as they age
Then maybe time will decide
Which ones keep and which ones fade

There's the deepest sleep in my life,
from which I am slowly coming to
And every morning I wait for the news
oh this is, this is post war blues



Dan Mangan : Post-War Blues

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by freedogger

On Bailouts of banks and car companies - if you require a public bailout, then your executive should be compensated going forward to the same level as a public servant. I don't care if you paid it back, that is like a gambler saying, look, I'm up now and I don't need you anymore. The banks in the US were bailed out in 1983 by Reagan, and look, here we are again. Without the bailouts these companies would have failed. Instead, last year they get record bonuses. This isn't capitalism, its the definition of fascism.

Really?

[CaptainCrunch]

On Bailouts of banks and car companies - if you require a public bailout, then your executive should be compensated going forward to the same level as a public servant. I don't care if you paid it back, that is like a gambler saying, look, I'm up now and I don't need you anymore. The banks in the US were bailed out in 1983 by Reagan, and look, here we are again. Without the bailouts these companies would have failed. Instead, last year they get record bonuses. This isn't capitalism, its the definition of fascism.

It would be nice to actually know what fascism is before you start throwing the word around.

[afc wimbledon]

I'd also suggest looking up the defintion of 'dogging' as well

[BloodFetish]

nm

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

There are a lot of topics that need to be addressed. There has been a lot of ignorance over the last 10 years. There is a lot to answer for throughout the Colonies, not just the USA. But the most important is economic stability, and the right for due process and Justice when banking criminals get away with economic murder.

Rhetoric is fine and dandy, but at least stev0 provided some concrete suggestions as to what the OWS crowd is demanding. Among the things I don't see in that list is a demand to remove the tax deductions on mortgage interest. Nor do I see a demand for the US to move away from its rampant consumerism toward a more balanced economy (assuming such a thing is even possible).

In short, while everything needs to change, it seems that most people simply want to change everyone else. They aren't interested in making sacrifices themselves.

Who cares if they ask for toilet paper and condoms, (jeez, I'd think you'd support the fact that they don't want to reproduce) if they don't get it or the do there is no harm in asking! IMO it is being responsible not to crap where you sleep. If you don't get your request then get it yourself.

Things like this only reveal the true heart of the "movement", as far as Calgary goes at least. Begging for handouts. Begging for freebies. Thanks, but no. Don't beg for things you can easily get yourself. Take responsibility for your own situation.

Resolute 14 - You are one of the worst in this thread for back handed-bully comments and you expect a respectful response?

If you want your arguments to be taken seriously, yes. And FWIW, my back-handed comments have been far worse in the Occupy Calgary thread, mostly because Occupy Calgary is stupid. In this thread, however, we have people comparing the protestors to those fighting for freedom in Egypt. We have one trying to claim this movement is more important than Ghandi's fight for Indian freedom. We have a guy wanting to restrict the free speech of others because they don't agree with him.

It is hard to take some elements of this debate seriously. For every reasoned argument made about reforming the banking system, fixing the tax system or attempting to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor, there is one of these:

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

All three of the bolded portions are essentially out of congresses hands, the supreme court's decisions are essentially final,
you cant just tell them what to do.
And there is a huge difference between thinking someone is guilty of something and proving it.
And of course all of this ignores completely the fact that the vast majority of the voting public are on the other side of the issue.

I agree.

As I've stated before, the remedies to these demands are essentially legislative, best argued on the campaign trails, at legislatures or protested at the White House . . . . . which leaves one wondering why the protests ended up on Wall St.

Right now, protesters are typically drawing out somewhere between 3/1000's to 5/1000's of a percent of a local population. Organizors are trying to sell an expansion of locations as indications of momentum but they'll need to be move beyond the roughly 500 "Usual Suspects" per one million local population to be convincing. Right now they don't seem to be "inspiring" the thousands and tens of thousands who wouldn't normally turn their heads at something like this.

On evidence, it looks like Occupy Wall St. represents "the 1%" while the system represents "the 99%."

They're definitely hampered by radical left wing rhetoric and some bent for revenge which the general populace probably doesn't share.

Enhanced regulations and oversight for leverage-creating derivatives in particular, regulations better separating investment banking from regular banking and, in Europe, better regulations ensuring institutions can't carry elevated single lender risk . . . . . would probably be enough to ensure the global financial system remained steadier.

And that is all done at the political level.

Ben Bernanke yesterday was also calling for more central banks to take a more aggressive posture in pre-empting "bubble's" instead of relying on market forces to take care of them, thus lessening volatility risk in the global economy.

Europe recently agreed on an overhaul of derivatives oversight:

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/10/...vatives&st=cse

While banks are loading up again on derivatives in America, even with enhanced oversight on the way.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/09/...vatives&st=cse

Derivatives are a $600 TRILLION industry and, as the stories above both agree, derivatives and the excessive leverage they created was at the heart of the 2008 financial crisis. Its also an industry that was largely without regulatory oversight through the early 2000's as the bubble was building.

On another point, I see a lot of bitterness over executive pay but I generally think, unless I'm a shareholder in the particular company in question, that its none of my business. As a shareholder, its very much my business and you've seen a large increase in shareholder activism in the latter part of the 2000's as a result. Top end compensation HAS become ridiculous. As a common man, not a shareholder, I regard it as an internal company matter.

And, lastly, a good column on this in the National Post today, particularly the last few lines on "Occupy Mumbai," a reminder that we are in a global competition for jobs and many of the companies we are angry with are global in nature and not purely American.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...s-in-the-west/

Cowperson

[corporatejay]

Pretty spectacular article by Editorial editor of the Herald today.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Co...#ixzz1bEQuVEez

my favorite part:

When he’s not working for an evil bank, he’s an artist — a photo illustrator — who just graduated from the Alberta College of Art and Design.
He runs to his tent to fetch his leather-wrapped iPad to show me two June 2011 magazine covers. One is for Oil Week and the other is for Oil and Gas Inquirer. (My jaw drops. I am agog and not because this man/child clearly has some talent.)

“I’m opposed to oil,” he says, reading my shock. He does not ring his singing bowl, despite my desperate need as a result of his violent hypocrisy. “I don’t want to support oil, but I need to build up my portfolio to build up my name. I think we should use electric cars and stop using gasoline,” he says.
Does he know that most of Alberta’s electricity comes from coal-fired plants? He doesn’t.

“We should use tidal power or hydro instead,” he suggests.

We’re landlocked and have a couple of lazy rivers, I point out. His suggestions are akin to saying we should use stardust and unicorn sweat to run those factories that manufacture his iPad.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Corbella+Occupy+Calgary+meeting+funniest+things+wi tnessed+months/5571556/story.html#ixzz1bEyW3Nn0

[Cowperson]

In Los Angeles, the cost of doing "the right thing."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,3365164.story

Cowperson

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

In Los Angeles, the cost of doing "the right thing."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,3365164.story

Cowperson

The protesters should be proactive and form a "fair" banking cooperative to handle LA's financial needs, and show the other "evil" banks how things should work.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

The protesters should be proactive and form a "fair" banking cooperative to handle LA's financial needs, and show the other "evil" banks how things should work.

A columnist in the Toronto Star yesterday, as a matter of fact, suggested Occupy Wall St. form its own Co-Op bank and run it by the "socially responsible" principles it espouses.

His father and a bunch of other guys in the 1950's, each with about $35, did a similar thing - forming their own Co-op - and eventually it built into something significant.

Go fer it. Knock yourself out.

Cowperson

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

A columnist in the Toronto Star yesterday, as a matter of fact, suggested Occupy Wall St. form its own Co-Op bank and run it by the "socially responsible" principles it espouses.

His father and a bunch of other guys in the 1950's, each with about $35, did a similar thing - forming their own Co-op - and eventually it built into something significant.

Go fer it. Knock yourself out.

Cowperson

I actually think it's a great idea. If it gets off the ground, I could see something like that being insanely popular.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Muta

I actually think it's a great idea. If it gets off the ground, I could see something like that being insanely popular.

AKA a 'Credit Union,' we still have a few of those kicking around.