Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: How Do You View the Wall Street Protests?
__roo writes "The New York Times reports that the Occupy Wall Street movement has inspired hundreds of Facebook pages, Twitter posts, and Meetup events, and that 'blog posts and photographs from all over the country are popping up on the WeArethe99Percent blog on Tumblr from people who see themselves as victims of not just a sagging economy but also economic injustice.' What do Slashdotters think? Do you relate to the 99% stories? Do they make you angry — either at the system, or at the protesters? If it's at the protesters, is it rational or a just-world effect?"
Even if you're screaming right outside their door, they're just going to call the cops and crank up the volume on the TV. I don't seriously believe that the Occupy campaign are going to do that much to change what is going on. The 1% already control everything. Everything that you buy, everything that you watch and everything that you do is controlled completely by this 1% group. Just about the only way I can think of to wrest power away from these folks is if the 99% were to stop buying everything for more than 90 days. Once the corporations see their income statements go to zilch then you would see real change.
Just add {In Space!} to anything.
I'd join the protest if I wasn't taking care of my Mother after my Father died. I think it's a crock how things are but I also feel the top 1% aren't fully to blame. The 99% needs to learn to not be asleep at the wheel half the time and learn to say no together in order to get things done like boycotting things and not just go for "I got mine, too bad about yours" deals.
~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
These people are the best chance we've had to turn around a country that's been headed in the wrong direction for at least the past 30 years. We live in a country where Goldman Sachs can commit thousands of acts of felony perjury, and not one person stands trial. They create fraudulent financial instruments, and pay back a small portion of their ill gotten gains as "fines" (bribes). Yet if I were to write a bad check to cover some groceries, I'd be going straight to jail. There's no way to describe this but tyranny.
Barack Obama, the greatest hope in a generation, is either unable or unwilling to do anything about this. If he's unwilling we have a severe political problem. He was elected to bring us change he refuses to deliver, and we have no way to hold him accountable.
On the other hand, if he's unable, we have a much more serious problem. That means democracy is well and truly dead in this country. The corporations have a complete stranglehold on our government. Unfortunately, this is more likely to be the truth.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
End the Wars
Tax the Rich
This isn't Rocket Science
Courtesy of Tom Tomorrow:
http://thismodernworld.com/archives/6027
So, you're saying that unless they are the one person on earth living in the worst possible conditions without actually dieing, they should cheerfully accept their regular ass-raping and just be thrilled that they're not that guy? That sounds like a recipe for disaster.
1) End the Collusion Between Government and Large Corporations/Banks, So That Our Elected Leaders Are Actually Representing the Interests of the People (the 99%) and Not Just Their Rich Donors (the 1%).
2) Investigate Wall Street and Hold Senior Executives Accountable for the Destruction in Wealth that has Devastated Millions of People.
3) Return the Power of Coining Money to the U.S. Treasury and Return to Sound Money
4) Limit the Size, Scope and Power of Banks so that None are Ever Again âoeToo Big to Failâ and in Need to Taxpayer Bailouts
5) Eliminate âoePersonhoodâ Legal Status for Corporations
6) Repeal the Patriot Act, End the War on Drugs and Protect Civil Liberties
7) End All Imperial Wars of Aggression, Bring the Troops Home from All Countries, Cut the Military Budget and Limit The Military Role to Protection of the Homeland
Not sure where this came from, but it was making the rounds on Facebook. Numbers 6 and 7 seem rather "wishlist"-y, but other than that this looks roughly accurate.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
It's interesting to me that Biden says there are similarities between the Tea Party and the Wall St movement, but gets shouted down or mocked by both. Take that a the core principle of the Tea Party is that government has gotten too big, is too wasteful & corrupt and is essentially bankrupting the country you would get a lot of agreement from the public. Take that a core principle of the Wall St movement is that corporations are too big, too powerful & corrupt, and are selling out this country, then that too would probably get a lot of agreement from the public. But still no effort or interest to join together to effect REAL change And of course the fact that the media invariably 'simplifies' the characterizations of one group to be racist rednecks, and the other group to be dirty hippies so that the true 'Middle' type folks won't feel comfortable supporting one or the other and certainly not both. Critical thinking on both sides of the political spectrum would help, but experience has shown that is harder to find in America today than a domestic coding job...
I want to know two things:
1) What are your problems? Not some random vague laundry list like "Wall street is bad," or "The rich suck." A short, specific, list of the things you believe are big enough problems that they warrant protesting over.
2) What shall we do about them? Just whining that there are problems is not useful. Propose solutions. Real, workable, solutions. Understand what the tradeoffs for those solutions are (all actions have cost) and be ok with that.
If you can't identify what it is your goals are and how you might go about achieving them, then I can't really support you because I don't know what I'd be supporting. Also I don't think there is much chance of success.
If you look at the successful stuff along these lines. Like, say, the civil rights movement they had precisely what I was talking about. They could clearly define the problem (that minorities were not treated the same as whites) and the solution (require the same treatment under the law) they desired. There was a goal being worked towards. It was something people could rally behind, and did.
So these people need to figure out what they want and how it should be done, and be able to state that in a cohesive fashion. Until then, I can't be supportive because I won't support something unless I understand what it is I'm supporting.
The three aspects of Occupy Wall St that are like the Tea Party are:
1. It's without question a populist movement.
2. It's emphasizing peaceful protest as a way of getting what you want.
3. It's not coming from either major party's political apparatus.
That's about where the similarities end. Some of the more significant differences:
1. Police have generally been favorable to or at least tolerant of Tea Party protests. They have been hostile and violent towards Occupy Wall St.
2. As of yet, there have been no indications that Occupy Wall St will turn into "elect Democrats" in a way that the Tea Party turned into "elect Republicans". There are also indications that attempts to turn it into an effort to elect Democrats would likely end in failure.
3. There are no wealthy donors and no major corporations giving money to Occupy Wall St, in the way that the Tea Party was financially supported by News Corp.
I am officially gone from
To what ends? How far down the drain must things slide before they become worth fighting for?
Bingo. Myself coming from the second poorest country in the Western hemisphere, I find it appalling that Americans criticize other Americans because they are fighting for greater equality, accountability and the preservation of the standard of living which is what makes living in the developed world great.
Like yourself, I'm not exactly sure what the hell these holier-than-though-we-have-it-good morons expect. Should things slide till things degrade to the point the average standard of living is no longer what it should be in a developed country?
The total student loan debt in the country is now surpassing credit card debt. When you used to be able to get a college degree with no more than $15K in debt, now you have to acquire debt 2-3 times that amount at least!. Social mobility is decreasing. There are 14 million people unemployed. People who worked hard for years, decades, are now unemployed because their jobs moved to China, and these same people get derided because they never got additional skills - with what money, with what education system, and if you are over 50, with what opportunities to get hired in a new field again?
You can finish college owing $50K and still not have a chance to get a job. And you have no other educational alternative since we do not have a state-funded post-HS vocational education system. Unemployed are being derided for not being entrepreneur and small business owners, but those who deride them conveniently ignore the little fact that capitalism (or any economic model for that manner) cannot absorb a population entirely made of entrepreneurs.
It is a sad indictment that it is cheaper for someone to travel to a third world country to get basic medical care than here. One would imagine that a country with the highest living standards would provide affordable health care for people making the minimum or close to the minimum. You need to make at least 2.5 or more of minimum wage just to afford medical and dental for yourself, let alone your family if you have one.
This might be a country with a very high standard of living, but you can still be poor and live a shitty live. It is an arrogant thing to say the poor in this country that they still have it better. They do, but just marginally with respect to the cost of living in this country. This from someone (myself) that comes from a country (Nicaragua) where there is still people looking for food and recyclables in garbage fields.
I would dare to say that in my old country, so long as you live within walking/commuting distance to a medical center (that is, you don't live in a remote village up in a mountain), you get a better chance to get basic medical care on a regular basis than a poor person in this country.
And that is the saddest indictment of all. People who deride the protesters, claiming that they have nothing to complain, they really don't know what the f* they are talking about.
Thats strictly a paper loss, the Wilpons profited from their relationship with Madoff. They deposited about $700 million and withdrew about a billion over the course of 5 years, their only losses were the ficticious profits they hadn't yet withdrawn. A recent ruling limited their liability to only what was invested in the last 2 years, and likely only the profit they made of about $83 million.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/29/business/mets-ruling-may-reduce-payout-to-madoff-victims.html
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/madoff-ruling-a-big-win-for-mets-owners-2011-09-28
Very solid advice. I'd add a few more:
- If you get married, learn to live on one income.
- If you do have a second income, use it to pay down debt as aggressively as you can, then to save up for big-ticket items such as a down-payment on a house, a used car, retirement, etc.
- If you plan to have children, don't count on a second income until the youngest is of school age. It's a full-time job to care for very young children. It makes sense to maintain business contacts, go to professional events, and do short contract work to keep your resume current, just don't count on the income. Take care of the kids first, then ease back into work -- and apply that extra income to getting debt-free.
- Don't spend a lot of money on "premiere" vacations while kids are very young. They won't remember any of it when they get older, and it's incredibly stressful on the whole family. Take the kids to the great outdoors instead. National and state parks are amazingly good vacations, and cheap, too.
- Invest early. It takes decades to build up a nest egg. The goal is to have a big enough nest egg so you can live 2/3 off the interest income when you retire, the other 1/3 from retirement insurance plans such as Social Security.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
I've been around here long enough to know that top posting unrelated to the prior comment is bad etiquette, but again, I've been around here long enough to know when it is appropriate. I also know the magic formula for getting modded up is to say "I'll probably get modded down for this but.."
I'll probably get modded down for this but it is important enough to risk it.
The Occupy Wall Street movement does not have any leaders or stated goals or structure on purpose. This is an action deliberately taken in order to have broad populist appeal. The same instant they take a side on any issue, the established political system will immediately use that as a wedge issue to label, then divide and conquer the scraps of popular sentiment and kill any interest. Once a leader is selected, they will find one thing that guy/gal has said publicly, label him as a partisan for it and kill the movement. The parties have been doing this for years and have more experience, skill and money to deflate populist action than can be competed against. The only way to win that game is not to play.
The movement does have a goal and that is to take back our democracy. Get people talking about the issues again without having predetermined party lines or agendas. Once those lines are drawn, almost everyone stops listening or thinking and just go like lemmings how they have always done. The only thing this movement wants is an equal shake at a fair government. They want their representatives to actually represent them instead of representing the highest bidder: usually the rich and the corporations.
The purpose here is not to take any specific issue to congress, it's to overturn congress with people who actually listen to their electorate. If that means voting incumbents out, great, or at least put the fear of the people back into them, good too.
What is their stand on abortion? None. But once we have fair representation, we can talk about it democratically.
What is their stand on gay rights? The environment? Housing? Taxation? Big Government? None. But once we have fair representation, we can talk about it democratically.
What is their stand on any issue? TBD but we'll talk about it democratically once we have fair representation.
You don't have to agree with this movement on any specific issue and you don't have to hold off on support because they don't have talking points or take stands on your personal hot-button issue. For now it's enough to say that all the issues are TBD until such time as we have fair representation and can figure it all out democratically.
There is a sentiment of discontent in everyone I talk to. Everyone knows the system is broken but nobody has the power to change that. Voting is supposed to solve these problems but voting either way is a vote for the same thing.
Slashdot is typically an open minded place, I think this movement should speak to each of you. The only thing they want is more democracy. I don't blame anyone for thinking there is a hidden agenda, because there almost always is. But this movement has reached enough of a mass with the cause of having no purpose that it would be hard to argue that there is one. When the only underlying cause visible in their message is "More democracy!", I don't see how anyone can be against that. Want to change something about that platform, get out there and discuss it democratically instead of sniping at it from the comfort of slashdot.
This is a movement that is outside of and has rejected the established political system. And it's the only one I've seen in my lifetime that has rejected playing the two-party game. I am very excited that it has even gained some traction and has people talking!!! To me it is a moral imperative that we support this. Even if all it means is getting some people you know to talk out the issue.... even that alone is progress.