Pro-tax Occupation Protests Held Across U.S. (O.W.S. Thread)

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i get the idea, and i'm angered myself... i just never saw the point of sitting in a park freezing your butt off without any end game

[Tiger Edge]

Especially when so many awesome video games have been released as of late.

take it home, losers

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

i get the idea, and i'm angered myself... i just never saw the point of sitting in a park freezing your butt off without any end game

yes. ditto.

i get it. i admire some of it. they're angry about the same thing as the Tea Party, only they have the correct target in their sights (big business, which has bought out the government).

and i don't see what sitting in a park actually accomplishes. i could see in the beginning that just being a body on the street helps to make a point, like participating in a protest against the Iraq War (like i did back in 2003), but for weeks on end? just what is the endgame here?

[Canadiens1131]

Originally Posted by Tiger Edge

Grammar

Holy shit (a phrase which can be equally used in parentheses, such as this one) is not essential to the sentence and can therefore be offset by commas. You can reread your statement without the "holy shit" and it will still make sense.

Yeah, it's a non-essential, independent something or other clause thingie?

I also feel people are not using hyphens with multiple adverbial somethings as much as they should be. You know, when there's like, two words being used as an adjective?

I don't even know anymore.

[deep]

It was never well thought-out.

In Wisconsin, they occupied the statehouse for a purpose. To stop Walker and the GOP from stripping worker rights. They had a defined target, a defined issue and an end game.

In Israel, those people had the same, and a coalition type of government that collapses if demands are not given a serious hearing.

This occupy Wall Street, the Park, main street or what ever and staying over night has been nothing but a negative. Occupying public, private places 24/7 is not looked upon favorably by the over whelming majority of the American people.

If anything this played into the hands of the financiers.

[Irvine511]

it's just so typical of the left.

the problem with the American left is that it's a tenuously held together coalition of groups who have different historical grievances but little else in common. it's much harder to get them to effectively protest anything, especially when opposed to the right, which is a group of similar people bound together by imagined fears and longing for a past that ever existed.

[financeguy]

It's true that the public were increasingly irritated by the size of the protest, inconvenience to commuters, hygiene issues, and the like. Bloomberg is a smart guy and he would not have allowed the cops to clear the area without the knowledge that the public would support the move.

[yolland]

I don't know, are the intrinsic differences really any greater than those between fiscal libertarians, reactionary populists, religious fundamentalists and foreign policy hawks? That too requires a carefully constructed and maintained unifying narrative, no?


(Bureau of Labor Statistics)

^ Civic unrest is exactly what you'd expect to see in many if not most countries in response to that. I doubt this will be the end of it.

[Canadiens1131]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

especially when opposed to the right, which is a group of similar people bound together by imagined fears and longing for a past that ever existed.

I keep an open mind about the right, mostly because I believe in fiscal conservatism in general and the fact that many things should be state issues and not national ones.

It's just a shame you have to have those two reasonable ideals bundled together with wacky, antiquated/exclusionary/discriminatory social policies, hysterical anti-government fervour, hypocritical stance on gov't spending (spend hundreds of billions on American addiction to the military-industrial complex), anti-immigrant bias for whatever the group of the day to pick on is (right now it's Mexis, in 20 years we will have moved on fully to browner folks like Muslims, and (let's face it) a little bit of historical racial prejudice lingering around in the bottom of the conservative well somewhere.

[financeguy]

Originally Posted by yolland

I doubt this will be the end of it.

You can take that to the bank. If you want my opinion, in Europe and America, it has barely started.

[financeguy]

Originally Posted by Canadiens1131

I keep an open mind about the right, mostly because I believe in fiscal conservatism in general and the fact that many things should be state issues and not national ones.

It's just a shame you have to have those two reasonable ideals bundled together with wacky, antiquated/exclusionary/discriminatory social policies, hysterical anti-government fervour, anti-immigrant bias for whatever the group of the day to pick on is (right now it's Mexis, in 20 years we will have moved on fully to browner folks like Muslims, and (let's face it) a little bit of historical racial prejudice lingering around in the bottom of the conservative well somewhere.

Well, true. Notwithstanding the tenor of some my rants on here recently, I still don't consider myself part of "the left". But, I definitely don't want to be associated with "the right" either. (even the comparatively middle-of-the-road soft right of European politics).

Being part of either seems to involve signing up to a set of ideologies that in some cases I find just plain bizarre.

[Steved1998]

Originally Posted by the iron horse

Can you post a few facts to back that statement?

Yeah, those Tea Party radicals caused a lot of trouble.



I'm getting ready to sleep awhile and go back to work
early in the morning.

[Steved1998]

Originally Posted by PhilsFan

Please. I think the Occupiers had the right idea (Wall Street needs to be accountable more than the government) but went about it the wrong way.

College isn't a blessing. Blessings don't come with tens of thousands of dollars of debt.

You're expected to be in debt from the day you turn 18 until the day you die. If you don't want to go to college, then you have little to no hope of landing a job in the corporate world, education or pretty much anything else.. Trade school you say? They're the same. My brother did that and racked up a ton of debt. Manufacturing or factory work? Good luck!

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

i get the idea, and i'm angered myself... i just never saw the point of sitting in a park freezing your butt off without any end game

It brings attention to their problems with the current system, would give the politicians a kick in the ass, and hopefully would act as a way for the movement to solidify behind a platform. They really need a leader to step forward.

Originally Posted by Irvine511

it's just so typical of the left.

the problem with the American left is that it's a tenuously held together coalition of groups who have different historical grievances but little else in common. it's much harder to get them to effectively protest anything, especially when opposed to the right, which is a group of similar people bound together by imagined fears and longing for a past that ever existed.

Well said.

[LJT]

I would classify myself as probably a mixed up centrist when it comes to fiscal and social policies. I would be fairly to the right when it comes to some tax issues (inheritance tax I find crappy, and I am not the greatest fan of council tax.) I believe in getting good value for tax payers money, efficiently run public services for instance. I am a huge fan of socialised medicine though (I do work for the NHS), but I see healthcare as a basic human right which should be covered by the state, I do not see how introducing competition works or benefits something like healthcare, I believe it should be better run but I don't believe that goes hand in hand with introducing more market ethics to it.

The way we spend so much on the military in the west, on new ways of killing people...I just don't get it, we only ever seem to bother with the weak powers in our democracy expeditions...it's macho posturing and a way of justifying programmes like Trident here in the UK on new nuclear submarines which just aren't needed when cuts are being made every where else.

The absolute moral faith in 'markets' is something I can never wrap my head around, and the idea that I keep hearing in the UK at least that we should become more like China 'less lazy, work longer blah blah blah' is one of the most absurd arguments I've ever heard, as it implies we should basically disregard human rights.

I've found myself angrier that i've ever felt at how badly states are run for the interests of the few. I don't want to destroy capitalism, I want it to benefit more people. The market is not God, it is not inherently a force of good or bad, but may have either affect, it's how we currently employ it that is so messed up at disenfranchising many good people. A revolution of sorts may be needed, as it is hard to imagine any of our current lot of politicians having the nerve or will to make some much needed changes.

I fear i'm rambling. I feel passionately about much of this especially in regards to healthcare issues and what not. I kinda support the Occupy movement but like many of them I struggle with what should be done other than a sort of revolutionary political movement. I know one of the main things would be to end the power of lobbying and campaign finance, but it would take a huge change in some politicians stances around the worlds. Apologies just back from a busy late shift at the hospital, mind a bit frazzled.

[Steved1998]

Originally Posted by LJT

I would classify myself as probably a mixed up centrist when it comes to fiscal and social policies. I would be fairly to the right when it comes to some tax issues (inheritance tax I find crappy, and I am not the greatest fan of council tax.) I believe in getting good value for tax payers money, efficiently run public services for instance. I am a huge fan of socialised medicine though (I do work for the NHS), but I see healthcare as a basic human right which should be covered by the state, I do not see how introducing competition works or benefits something like healthcare, I believe it should be better run but I don't believe that goes hand in hand with introducing more market ethics to it.

The way we spend so much on the military in the west, on new ways of killing people...I just don't get it, we only ever seem to bother with the weak powers in our democracy expeditions...it's macho posturing and a way of justifying programmes like Trident here in the UK on new nuclear submarines which just aren't needed when cuts are being made every where else.

The absolute moral faith in 'markets' is something I can never wrap my head around, and the idea that I keep hearing in the UK at least that we should become more like China 'less lazy, work longer blah blah blah' is one of the most absurd arguments I've ever heard, as it implies we should basically disregard human rights.

I've found myself angrier that i've ever felt at how badly states are run for the interests of the few. I don't want to destroy capitalism, I want it to benefit more people. The market is not God, it is not inherently a force of good or bad, but may have either affect, it's how we currently employ it that is so messed up at disenfranchising many good people. A revolution of sorts may be needed, as it is hard to imagine any of our current lot of politicians having the nerve or will to make some much needed changes.

I fear i'm rambling. I feel passionately about much of this especially in regards to healthcare issues and what not. I kinda support the Occupy movement but like many of them I struggle with what should be done other than a sort of revolutionary political movement. I know one of the main things would be to end the power of lobbying and campaign finance, but it would take a huge change in some politicians stances around the worlds. Apologies just back from a busy late shift at the hospital, mind a bit frazzled.

You've pretty much summed up how I feel.

[INDY500]

The eyes of the world will be on the retail sector on Black Friday. This is the time to show the 1% that it can't survive without money from the 99%!! There will be no other day to show that!
-Thescreaminghead

Yes, coming soon to your televisions and possibly your cities already drained police budgets and backlogged courts. Occupy Black Friday.

Makes sense really; you have an egocentric group of anti-capitalist/anti-consumerist radicals sensing the whole world is quickly no longer watching and is in fact turning away from their public tantrum just cause. Plus, it will be a stroll down memory lane for these folks when they once again lock arms and shout profanities and inane chants outside of a Wal*Mart? Of course now feeling the urge to "occupy" them as well.

Forum Post: Occupy Black Friday: Suggested Tactics for covert and overt Retail disobedience. | OccupyWallSt.org


This is most illuminating:

Businesses that co-operate and openly support the Occupy movement should of course be left alone

In other words, "This is a nice business you have here. It'd be a shame if anything were to... happen to it."

I think there's a word for that.

[Diemen]

For all the talk of ineffective protests and lack of an endgame, the authorities charged with maintaining order and/or ending these protests sure have made their share of missteps. The latest exhibit in How To Grossly Overreact To Citizens Exercising Their Rights:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjnR7...e_gdata_player

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by Steved1998

It brings attention to their problems with the current system, would give the politicians a kick in the ass, and hopefully would act as a way for the movement to solidify behind a platform. They really need a leader to step forward.

i get that it brings attention... but i don't think this necessarily NEEDS that much attention. we all know. we are all upset. we all want action... only this, from the very start, was a movement incapable of action other than inconveniencing the people they are trying to help.

the only business that was directly effected by occupy wall street at zuccotti park were small business owners in the area who lost customers because wall street clientele stayed away. so in reality, the only people who this protest hurt were the exact same people they set out to help.

they have made it very clear that they do not want a leader. that they are a leaderless movement. there's nothing wrong with leaders, provided the leaders actually stand for the right things.

what is next? what is the endgame? how about we put people in office who don't give a shit about reelection, about political party... just about helping our nation. ya know, what the founding fathers really wanted. let's do that. let's occupy the house with elected people who are truly of the people, by the people. then, and only then, will things actually get done.

[Canadiens1131]

And now for something a bit lighter from the OWS protests:

Drunk banker attacks:
http://youtu.be/MovUbDSECNg

[maycocksean]

A leaderless movement with a clear goal would work.

A movement with strong leadership but with no clear goal could be successful (though probably more in the sense that a cult is successful)

But I don't see how a "movement" that lacks both can accomplish anything.