Quote :

"i like that Asian households ares are barely mentioned in that article and not on any of the graphs. Nice and disingenuous. "

Fun fact: Most studies that highlight Asians as a "model minority" making more money than whites on average are themselves disingenuous. This is because Asians disproportionately inhabit urban areas, especially a set of cities with higher costs of living. If you index Asians earnings relative to inhabitants of the same area as them they make substantially less than whites. It's only when you average all these urban Asians in with Appalachian whites that the so-called 'model minority' image appears.

10/24/2011 12:27:57 PM

In other words: People whining about whites not getting affirmative action yet again derive all their talking points by mangling statistics to try and hide their own privilege.

10/24/2011 12:28:36 PM

Quote :

"pretending i'm a social outcast"

No one is pretending to be a social outcast. They call themselves the 99% because they represent the vast middle and lower class a majority which includes yourself and I. They are addressing every man and woman who works for a living and those who wish to work but can't find a job. I understand that you may not feel like you have been wronged by any corporate entity, but if there truly is a disconnect between the protesters' situation and your situation it is merely philosophical because the statistics fully support a common trend concerning stagnating wages, rising inequality spreads, increased corporate profits, and increased campaign spending by corporations. You may be doing exceptionally well for yourself but the statistics dont lie, and they bind you, they unite all of us to the protesters and the 99%.

10/24/2011 12:44:47 PM

10/24/2011 12:55:57 PM

lol bongo drums

10/24/2011 2:26:31 PM

Poll: 49% of Occupy Wall Street Protesters Think the Bank Bailouts Were Necessary.

10/24/2011 2:34:18 PM

Most people want to believe there is an easy, painless way out of the financial crisis. Unfortunately, there isn't, and that's a harsh reality that no one is willing to face. They wanted the bailouts because they didn't want the financial system to implode, but if they want the fairness they claim to want, then the system has to collapse.

[Edited on October 24, 2011 at 2:39 PM. Reason : ]

10/24/2011 2:39:19 PM

I know this is old, but I just found it. Occupy wall-street, 1979 style:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODCvbn_hUDI

10/24/2011 3:29:29 PM

video from inside the citibank arrests:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXArH_TywFA


charged for trespassing. i was always under the impression that you must be asked to leave before you can be charged, not sure what the law is on that (or whether or not they were ever asked to leave). Kind of curious to see if more video makes it out that settles this. or if it just comes down to a he said she said scenario.

[Edited on October 24, 2011 at 5:48 PM. Reason : ]

10/24/2011 5:27:50 PM

as if it wasnt obvious what they were there for?

its not like they were customers...

probably better they got arrested instead of being "lured" into taking out another loan, lol.

10/24/2011 6:32:51 PM

If OWS is to stay relevant and become influential, then there has to be a widespread acceptance that the government is as much to blame for our crisis as the private sector. The regulators failed; the regulators were, in the majority of cases, industry insiders. If you want to see justice, then let the financial institutions fail, even if it comes 3-4 years too late. If you want them to fail, then get some people elected that will allow it to happen, rather than politicians that will try to prop up the system for another two years.

The banksters dug their own graves. Take them off life support and let them rot.

[Edited on October 24, 2011 at 8:59 PM. Reason : ]

10/24/2011 8:57:07 PM

From Outside of Jeff Immelt's Home.



[Edited on October 24, 2011 at 9:06 PM. Reason : "Occupy Immelt"]

10/24/2011 9:05:49 PM

She's cute and also brings up a pretty good point. When we look back to 2011, it will seem ironic that Jim Immelt, CEO of GE, was on the President's "Council on Jobs and Competitiveness".

10/24/2011 9:35:37 PM

Quote :

"The banksters dug their own graves. Take them off life support and let them rot."

only, they won't. we all know that they won't lose their net worth or see any real dent in their assets. they'll just declare bankruptcy, and walk away relatively unharmed. so there really is no current way to punish them. they'll just push the burden down to the people below them.

Quote :

"The regulators failed; the regulators were, in the majority of cases, industry insiders."

This is pretty much true, and every president since reagan has been complicit in inviting these people into the white house. but the regulations didn't fail, they were just castrated. inviting former ceo's of goldman sachs to be the treasury secretary makes no sense, and we've been doing it for 30 years now. you would need someone who has no conflict of interest so that he/she could do their fucking job, but finding someone with that kind of intimate knowledge without having the banking background is probably impossible.

[Edited on October 24, 2011 at 10:32 PM. Reason : ]

10/24/2011 10:18:38 PM

Quote :

"as if it wasnt obvious what they were there for? its not like they were customers..."

Perhaps not all of them, but at least some of them were customers - they were protesting by closing their accounts.

10/25/2011 12:51:59 AM

Further to TurdFerguson's post:

Quote :

"The 1318 transnational corporations that form the core of the economy. Superconnected companies are red, very connected companies are yellow. The size of the dot represents revenue."

P.S. Reading the article send shivers down my spine... it sounded like reading about some planet inhabited by intelligent beings whose brains can communicate with each other and perform as one mega-connected super-brain.



[Edited on October 25, 2011 at 4:20 AM. Reason : ]

10/25/2011 4:05:42 AM

Quote :

"charged for trespassing. i was always under the impression that you must be asked to leave before you can be charged"

Sometimes it requires more than just being asked to leave. As it was explained to me years ago when a student's mother went to the school my mother worked at to harass her in order to charge with trespassing you have to tell them to leave AND they have to actually leave and come back. Just telling somebody to leave isn't enough.

Of course the laws probably vary state-to-state and I could see a post 9/11 New York haveing a stricter version.

10/25/2011 8:04:53 AM

NC Law on trespassing:

Quote :

"§ 14-159.11. Definition. As used in this Article, "building" means any structure or part of a structure, other than a conveyance, enclosed so as to permit reasonable entry only through a door and roofed to protect it from the elements. (1987, c. 700, s. 1.) § 14-159.12. First degree trespass. (a) Offense. – A person commits the offense of first degree trespass if, without authorization, he enters or remains: (1) On premises of another so enclosed or secured as to demonstrate clearly an intent to keep out intruders; or (2) In a building of another. (b) Classification. – First degree trespass is a Class 2 misdemeanor. (1987, c. 700, s. 1; 1993, c. 539, s. 101; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).) § 14-159.13. Second degree trespass. (a) Offense. – A person commits the offense of second degree trespass if, without authorization, he enters or remains on premises of another: (1) After he has been notified not to enter or remain there by the owner, by a person in charge of the premises, by a lawful occupant, or by another authorized person; or (2) That are posted, in a manner reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, with notice not to enter the premises. (b) Classification. – Second degree trespass is a Class 3 misdemeanor. (1987, c. 700, s. 1; 1993, c. 539, s. 102; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)"

NY Law:

Quote :

" § 140.00 Criminal trespass and burglary; definitions of terms. The following definitions are applicable to this article: 1. "Premises" includes the term "building," as defined herein, and any real property. 2. "Building," in addition to its ordinary meaning, includes any structure, vehicle or watercraft used for overnight lodging of persons, or used by persons for carrying on business therein, or used as an elementary or secondary school, or an inclosed motor truck, or an inclosed motor truck trailer. Where a building consists of two or more units separately secured or occupied, each unit shall be deemed both a separate building in itself and a part of the main building. 3. "Dwelling" means a building which is usually occupied by a person lodging therein at night. 4. "Night" means the period between thirty minutes after sunset and thirty minutes before sunrise. 5. "Enter or remain unlawfully." A person "enters or remains unlawfully" in or upon premises when he is not licensed or privileged to do so. A person who, regardless of his intent, enters or remains in or upon premises which are at the time open to the public does so with license and privilege unless he defies a lawful order not to enter or remain, personally communicated to him by the owner of such premises or other authorized person. A license or privilege to enter or remain in a building which is only partly open to the public is not a license or privilege to enter or remain in that part of the building which is not open to the public. A person who enters or remains upon unimproved and apparently unused land, which is neither fenced nor otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders, does so with license and privilege unless notice against trespass is personally communicated to him by the owner of such land or other authorized person, or unless such notice is given by posting in a conspicuous manner. A person who enters or remains in or about a school building without written permission from someone authorized to issue such permission or without a legitimate reason which includes a relationship involving custody of or responsibility for a pupil or student enrolled in the school or without legitimate business or a purpose relating to the operation of the school does so without license and privilege. § 140.05. Trespass. A person is guilty of trespass when he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in or upon premises. Trespass is a violation. "

[Edited on October 25, 2011 at 1:03 PM. Reason : law]

10/25/2011 1:02:41 PM

Quote :

"They wanted the bailouts because they didn't want the financial system to implode, but if they want the fairness they claim to want, then the system has to collapse."

The economic fallout from this would decimate the livelihoods and savings of millions of people (possibly billions as it propagated worldwide) who did absolutely nothing wrong to deserve it. How can you even begin to call that outcome anything resembling "fairness" ? I mean you can say what you want about whether firms should fail or not, but the reason many supported the bailouts (myself included) was because the alternative would be decidedly unfair to millions of people.

Again, say what you want about whether firms should fail or not, but there's no way you can construe the malfeasance of a few leading to the impoverishment of the many as "fairness", that's just attaching rosy words to your position that don't actually apply.

10/25/2011 2:03:49 PM

Yes, because of the bailouts unemployment is not about 9% for yet another year.

Quote :

"The economic fallout from this would decimate the livelihoods and savings of millions of people "

And we disagree. Financial panics are not new.

Look, the government guarantees we have on the books protect us already. Yes, without the bailouts the FDIC would have gone deeper into debt. But thanks to the FDIC, our bank savings were fine. Many money market funds would have broken a buck, but no one would have lost everything. There would not have been that many more bank runs than we had anyways. The bailouts didn't prevent the recession. It didn't stop house prices from falling. So, instead of accepting the losses to our money market accounts, we now must accept them through the tax code. Americans as a whole are not better off because of this. All it did was turn private problems of mostly rich people into public problems of mostly non-rich people.

Yes, house prices would have fallen far faster and further than they did. But this isn't a problem, cheaper housing is a solution. People have the right to walk away from mortgages, so their lives wouldn't have been ruined (unlike student loans). The sound banks would have quickly acquired capital (customers via FDIC operations) and fulfilled the lending needs of the economy.

I and many economists believe all the bailouts did was save finance jobs, prevent losses among some other government agencies, and slow the housing correction. Not something anyone should be proud of.

[Edited on October 25, 2011 at 2:21 PM. Reason : .,.]

10/25/2011 2:19:16 PM

Quote :

"This is because Asians disproportionately inhabit urban areas, especially a set of cities with higher costs of living. If you index Asians earnings relative to inhabitants of the same area as them they make substantially less than whites."

Please, show me a study that adjust for location and compares the various ethnic groups, I'm interested in what it shows.

10/25/2011 2:22:08 PM

1337 b4k4: ah, so the cop who went to my Mom's school was just a dumbass. Thanks for posti g that.

[Edited on October 25, 2011 at 2:30 PM. Reason : .]

10/25/2011 2:29:56 PM

Quote :

"And we disagree. Financial panics are not new. "

Financial panics? The fourth largest investment bank in the US, with $600 billion of assets with exposure all over the globe, went bankrupt. That's not a panic, that's a disaster. I swear the god, the revisionist history about an event that occurred only 3 years ago is mind boggling. They want us to believe that the whole thing was just a minor blip on the radar and that TARP was some massive overreaction to what should have been a simple "market correction". It's no surprise that these are also the same people who don't believe in global warming.

10/25/2011 4:09:12 PM

Quote :

"Further to TurdFerguson's post: "

I'm glad someone else got something else out of that!!! Chaotic system theory is a little
but it's easy to see that while our system is complex, it is sorta controlled by a "relatively" few number of people. I don't really want to sit here and argue why that is bad, but for some reason I think most people's intuition favors something that is much more decentralized. I don't like to consider myself someone that relies only on logic or the scientific method, but I really liked this quote:

Quote :

"Reality is so complex, we must move away from dogma, whether it's conspiracy theories or free-market," says James Glattfelder. "Our analysis is reality-based.""

10/25/2011 5:11:04 PM

Quote :

"fourth largest investment bank in the US, with $600 billion of assets with exposure all over the globe, went bankrupt. That's not a panic, that's a disaster"

Fine. Its a disaster. Is semantics really all you want to play?

10/25/2011 5:21:08 PM

Real winners for sure.

10/25/2011 7:11:34 PM

good god ... im all for OWS but some of these people do not need air time. let people print their own money? i hope she meant to say something else but could not articulate her point.

10/25/2011 7:18:41 PM

There's a good point in there, somewhere. Why do dealers get to borrow from the Fed at .25% (which is, essentially, a process of money creation), but not the people themselves?

10/25/2011 7:20:59 PM

what's funny is the several OWS protesters I have spoken with all remind me of this dingbat. they all spoke with the same bullshit. it's no wonder these protesters have no credibility.

10/25/2011 7:35:45 PM

aaaaaaaand, the idiots just killed their cause by attacking police across the country last night. stupid fuckers

10/26/2011 7:04:23 AM

actually, police have fired on protesters and beat protesters for not leaving by a certain time.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/26/us/occupy-wall-steet/indeH

Hopefully the global community will step in with harsh sanctions and urge obama to step down.

10/26/2011 7:31:28 AM

Quote :

"good god ... im all for OWS but some of these people do not need air time. let people print their own money? i hope she meant to say something else but could not articulate her point."

[insert Tea Party comparison]

10/26/2011 8:25:36 AM

oakland cops ruling with an iron fist















http://rt.com/news/occupy-oakland-protest-violence-773/

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/26/us/occupy-wall-steet/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

http://youtu.be/6blAR1Zjcb8


I don't care who you are or what you support, this is obviously excessive. Pretty hard to argue, and I promise you the Oakland occupy group will only get bigger as a result. It's fucking Oakland. If it were Berkeley or Palo Alto, then yeah, maybe they'd go home and be done with it. Not likely in Oakland. This was a stupid move on the city's part.

[Edited on October 26, 2011 at 3:25 PM. Reason : ]

10/26/2011 3:05:26 PM

Quote :

"aaaaaaaand, the idiots just killed their cause by attacking police across the country last night. stupid fuckers"

yes the idiots with their hive minds decided to attack police all around the country

lol sometimes i wonder if humans are still as stupid as when we had monarchists running about; you are living proof

10/26/2011 3:19:25 PM

10/26/2011 3:31:58 PM

Hmm yes, let's focus on the Morning Star and ignore the Evening Star.

10/26/2011 3:33:18 PM

A conservative's argument about government/private collusion extended to prisons: "let em all go"

10/26/2011 3:34:10 PM

Note that the man bleeding is a veteran with Veterans for Peace.

10/26/2011 3:38:51 PM

Are you expecting that to make a difference to the pro-authority, pro-oligarchy, pro-aristocracy conservative neo-monarchists in this thread? All they care about is that hippies are getting clubbed over the head frequently and hard. They could care less that the elderly and children were caught up in that overreaction, and that the protestors were denied basic respect and rights by an out-of-control police state. All that matters to them is that the knife is pointed at the other guy, because they're short-sighted little fucks who hope this corrupt, unjust world chugs along because they are gullible enough to believe the moderate amount of comfort they were scraped out (or handed) relies on the fundamental unfairness they shill for. The masking of this process to themselves is simple-minded alchemy, turning class interests and biases into truths.

The only thing uniting conservative policies is that each and every upshot benefits the hyperwealthy at literally everybody's expense. One thing uniting MANY (but not all of them) is the "freedom" to crush minority groups under your boot if you amass enough private power.

[Edited on October 26, 2011 at 3:46 PM. Reason : .]

10/26/2011 3:45:11 PM

Just another dirty hippie that wants everything for free right guys?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/26/iraq-vet-oakland-police-tear-gas_n_1033159.html

POLICE CRITICALLY INJURE IRAQ WAR VET DURING OCCUPY MARCH

10/26/2011 4:23:46 PM

If you go to Iraq and defend corporate interests, you're an American hero.


If you come back to the US and fight for the American middle class, you're a goddamn dirty hippie.

[Edited on October 26, 2011 at 4:50 PM. Reason : ]

10/26/2011 4:41:50 PM

Worth a watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD1C-buv9o8

10/26/2011 6:35:43 PM

Quote :

"Not likely in Oakland. This was a stupid move on the city's part."

No, the stupid part was the protestors not letting the police into the area to inspect and make sure things were OK, thus forcing the police to shut the thing down. Shutting down what amounted to an unlicensed medical, housing, and eating facility makes perfect sense, especially when the fucktards running it won't let anyone inspect it.

10/26/2011 6:44:56 PM

Quote :

"If you go to Iraq and defend corporate interests, you're an American hero. If you come back to the US and fight for the American middle class, you're a goddamn dirty hippie."

lololol

10/26/2011 6:46:01 PM

^^its a protest. the police were trying to use this clause to violate the privacy of the protesters in an attempt to send them home. such bullshit.

10/26/2011 6:48:23 PM

Quote :

"No, the stupid part was the protestors not letting the police into the area to inspect and make sure things were OK, thus forcing the police to shut the thing down. Shutting down what amounted to an unlicensed medical, housing, and eating facility makes perfect sense, especially when the fucktards running it won't let anyone inspect it."

Look, I know you're a vapid idiot with high cholesterol and all, but you completely missed the point of what I was trying to say. It's Oakland. Any excessive show of force is only going to intensify the protests. They just sparked a fire that they're not gonna be able to contain, because it's fucking Oakland.

10/26/2011 6:50:44 PM

^^ i know. how dare the police uphold the law. you know, laws like "places that serve food have to be inspected." Or "medical facilities have to be inspected." Or "housing facilities have to be inspected." The people were free to protest against the evil capitalists all they wanted. but when they set up services that are regulated, those services changed the game.

10/26/2011 6:53:02 PM

aaranburo fighting for the govt to come in and regulate church barbecues.

10/26/2011 7:00:09 PM

aaronburro, champion of big government and intense regulation

10/26/2011 7:43:54 PM

set em up

[Edited on October 26, 2011 at 8:02 PM. Reason : .]

10/26/2011 7:59:04 PM