Occupy Wall Street - Page 52

On October 11 2011 01:01 -Archangel- wrote:
Guys, who cares about this. There is the preview of the new Zerg unit out!! :D

On October 11 2011 01:01 -Archangel- wrote:
Guys, who cares about this. There is the preview of the new Zerg unit out!! :D

Actually this is the explanation why OWS will not succeed
Most people simply don't give a shit.

The constant polarizing of this situation is abhorrent. You must be a liberal, you must be a communist. Fuck that, using the political guise of left or right, communist or capitalist up or down black or white, is a total cop out used by morons to degenerate the topic into the same old bullshit.

On October 11 2011 01:27 DeepElemBlues wrote:
No, the constant polarization is quite frankly awesome. It is a sign of a vigorous and healthy democracy.

On October 10 2011 10:16 snakeeyez wrote:
I dont really see the point of something like this. We all know capitalism is a system of classes and it always will be with the majority on the very bottom like working at 2 minimum wage jobs trying to make ends meet. Its just the way it works and there will never be a way to change that unless you try to change your own individual circumstances.
Also what does corrupt even mean? I mean people trying to make the most money possible that is just capitalism there is no such thing as corruption unless someone is cheating the system.

On October 11 2011 01:27 DeepElemBlues wrote:
You need to ask why most people simply don't give a shit.

On October 11 2011 01:40 DrainX wrote:

Ever been to Europe? Huge inequality is not at all necessary in a democratic society based on a regulated capitalist economy.

On October 11 2011 01:45 Offhand wrote:


What most Americans don't understand is that we could have that kind of society, we just need to tax our rich like the rest of the first world does.

On October 11 2011 01:42 GeyzeR wrote:
I guess because they do not see how it is connected with their everyday life.

On October 11 2011 01:42 GeyzeR wrote:
They do not understand why banks and corporation are the ones to blame.

On October 11 2011 01:42 GeyzeR wrote:
And, the most important, they do not understand what do the protesters want.

On October 11 2011 01:48 mud123 wrote:
pure unabashed communism just look at their demands.. they literally want every american to get $800/week even if they don't work. i tell you what i'd do if that were the case. I WOULDN'T WORK! who would?! fucking commies i swear make me so mad.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-for-occupy-wall-st-moveme/

Admin note: This is not an official list of demands. This is a forum post submitted by a single user and hyped by irresponsible news/commentary agencies like Fox News and Mises.org. This content was not published by the OccupyWallSt.org collective, nor was it ever proposed or agreed to on a consensus basis with the NYC General Assembly. There is NO official list of demands.

On October 11 2011 01:48 mud123 wrote:
pure unabashed communism just look at their demands.. they literally want every american to get $800/week even if they don't work. i tell you what i'd do if that were the case. I WOULDN'T WORK! who would?! fucking commies i swear make me so mad.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-for-occupy-wall-st-moveme/

Panic of the Plutocrats
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: October 9, 2011

It remains to be seen whether the Occupy Wall Street protests will change America’s direction. Yet the protests have already elicited a remarkably hysterical reaction from Wall Street, the super-rich in general, and politicians and pundits who reliably serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent.

And this reaction tells you something important — namely, that the extremists threatening American values are what F.D.R. called “economic royalists,” not the people camping in Zuccotti Park.

Consider first how Republican politicians have portrayed the modest-sized if growing demonstrations, which have involved some confrontations with the police — confrontations that seem to have involved a lot of police overreaction — but nothing one could call a riot. And there has in fact been nothing so far to match the behavior of Tea Party crowds in the summer of 2009.

Nonetheless, Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, has denounced “mobs” and “the pitting of Americans against Americans.” The G.O.P. presidential candidates have weighed in, with Mitt Romney accusing the protesters of waging “class warfare,” while Herman Cain calls them “anti-American.” My favorite, however, is Senator Rand Paul, who for some reason worries that the protesters will start seizing iPads, because they believe rich people don’t deserve to have them.

Michael Bloomberg, New York’s mayor and a financial-industry titan in his own right, was a bit more moderate, but still accused the protesters of trying to “take the jobs away from people working in this city,” a statement that bears no resemblance to the movement’s actual goals.

And if you were listening to talking heads on CNBC, you learned that the protesters “let their freak flags fly,” and are “aligned with Lenin.”

The way to understand all of this is to realize that it’s part of a broader syndrome, in which wealthy Americans who benefit hugely from a system rigged in their favor react with hysteria to anyone who points out just how rigged the system is.

Last year, you may recall, a number of financial-industry barons went wild over very mild criticism from President Obama. They denounced Mr. Obama as being almost a socialist for endorsing the so-called Volcker rule, which would simply prohibit banks backed by federal guarantees from engaging in risky speculation. And as for their reaction to proposals to close a loophole that lets some of them pay remarkably low taxes — well, Stephen Schwarzman, chairman of the Blackstone Group, compared it to Hitler’s invasion of Poland.

And then there’s the campaign of character assassination against Elizabeth Warren, the financial reformer now running for the Senate in Massachusetts. Not long ago a YouTube video of Ms. Warren making an eloquent, down-to-earth case for taxes on the rich went viral. Nothing about what she said was radical — it was no more than a modern riff on Oliver Wendell Holmes’s famous dictum that “Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.”

But listening to the reliable defenders of the wealthy, you’d think that Ms. Warren was the second coming of Leon Trotsky. George Will declared that she has a “collectivist agenda,” that she believes that “individualism is a chimera.” And Rush Limbaugh called her “a parasite who hates her host. Willing to destroy the host while she sucks the life out of it.”

What’s going on here? The answer, surely, is that Wall Street’s Masters of the Universe realize, deep down, how morally indefensible their position is. They’re not John Galt; they’re not even Steve Jobs. They’re people who got rich by peddling complex financial schemes that, far from delivering clear benefits to the American people, helped push us into a crisis whose aftereffects continue to blight the lives of tens of millions of their fellow citizens.

Yet they have paid no price. Their institutions were bailed out by taxpayers, with few strings attached. They continue to benefit from explicit and implicit federal guarantees — basically, they’re still in a game of heads they win, tails taxpayers lose. And they benefit from tax loopholes that in many cases have people with multimillion-dollar incomes paying lower rates than middle-class families.

This special treatment can’t bear close scrutiny — and therefore, as they see it, there must be no close scrutiny. Anyone who points out the obvious, no matter how calmly and moderately, must be demonized and driven from the stage. In fact, the more reasonable and moderate a critic sounds, the more urgently he or she must be demonized, hence the frantic sliming of Elizabeth Warren.

So who’s really being un-American here? Not the protesters, who are simply trying to get their voices heard. No, the real extremists here are America’s oligarchs, who want to suppress any criticism of the sources of their wealth.

On October 11 2011 01:59 PlayX wrote:
I'm wondering if the majority of the americans support that protest. Or is it a rather "small" movement like the tea party thing?

On October 11 2011 01:59 PlayX wrote:
I'm wondering if the majority of the americans support that protest. Or is it a rather "small" movement like the tea party thing?

On October 11 2011 01:59 PlayX wrote:
I'm wondering if the majority of the americans support that protest. Or is it a rather "small" movement like the tea party thing?

On October 11 2011 02:04 Bigtony wrote:


It's would be a valid comparison to say this is a left wing/ liberal counterpart to the tea-party, but less specifically associated with either party.

I have to say while I agree with the implications and some of the goals of this process, I am increasingly uncomfortable with all these "I am the 99%" things floating around of people complaining about their debt and how it's impossible to have a job and how they need help...again I realize we live in tough times, but that makes it even more important that you do not do things you cannot afford. You do not accumulate debt for no reason. You do not go to uni and study something stupid and useless. I'm a young person who went to uni, with little to no debt, worked most of the time, maintained a 3.0+ gpa, did 2 study abroad, and now have a nice full time job.

On October 11 2011 02:09 H0i wrote:


Actually the movement is spreading across the globe and oct 15th it's starting in a lot of major cities in Europe. It's growing every day and a lot of people who are not physically there still support it.

It's hard to really talk about the size, because so many people support it but have not joined the protest (yet). It's also growing and fast, media coverage is only just getting started.

On October 11 2011 02:15 xDaunt wrote:


I can see OWS-type movements becoming really big in Europe where things are about to get really ugly. I just don't see it catching on in the US. First, conditions aren't bad enough in the US (yet). Second, Americans as a whole just are less tolerant of OWS-type movements.