#OccupyWallStreet

[RedFury]

@VinylTurnip

Tends to muck up the chant, doesn’t it?

“WHAT DO WE WANT?”
*
<crickets>*

Do crickets in your part of the world chirp like this?

First OFFICIAL Release from OCCUPY WALL STREET

**Declaration of the Occupation of New York City

As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.

As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known.

They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.

They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give Executives exorbitant bonuses.

They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.

They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.

They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless nonhuman animals, and actively hide these practices.

They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.

They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right.

They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay.

They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.

They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health insurance.

They have sold our privacy as a commodity.

They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press.

They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit.

They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.

They have donated large sums of money to politicians supposed to be regulating them.

They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.

They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantive profit.

They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit.

They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.

They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt.

They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad.

They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas.

They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts.**

– much more at source.

Extraordinary crickets if I say so myself.

[RedFury]

@Scylla

That’s a pretty scary thought.

Indeed. Yet hardly surprising if you consider our collective loss of privacy. Heck I’d be surprised if any number of the more vocal Internet users here and elsewhere didn’t already have some sort of profile.

All is well. Thanks for asking?

Glad to hear.

[RedFury]

Occupy Wall Street is a tea party with brains

**The revolution just might be televised after all.

More than two weeks after a band of young people began camping out under the shadow of the New York Stock Exchange, the movement to remake America’s inequitable financial system is growing

It’s been called the Woodstock of Wall Street, but that’s hardly an apt comparison. The gathering at Max Yasgur’s farm 42 years ago was built on a generation looking for peace, love, some drugs and acid rock. The kids today are looking for real, tangible change of the capitalist sort. They’re organized, lucid and motivated.

Actually, they have more in common with the tea party movement than the hippie dream, with one key difference. They’re smart enough to recognize the nation’s problems aren’t simply about taxes and the deficit.

They want jobs. They want the generation in power to acknowledge them. They want political change. They want responsibility in a culture that abdicates it. They want a decent future of opportunity.

If that isn’t American, then what is?

Another key difference between today’s kids and their hippie forefathers: they’re willing to gut it out.

Not only is Occupy Wall Street showing no signs of dying out, it’s getting stronger. On Sunday, a night of rain dampened the crowd at Zuccotti Park, but then the sun broke through and they were back at it: challenging police, marching and drawing attention to their cause.

They’re wired and ready. They’re using YouTube and blogs. A newspaper, the Occupied Wall Street Journal, began publishing last week. They meet in the evenings in a “general assembly” to discuss tactics.

Moreover there are signs the Left Coast wants to get into the action. On Sunday a group called Refund California announced a series of protests throughout Los Angeles. On Monday, a teach-in took place aimed at bringing awareness to how Wall Street has worsened California’s budget problems.**

– again, much more at source.

Posted with the intent of giving Bricker a chuckle or two.

Or mebbe not. :dubious:

[Gyrate]

@RedFury

Do crickets in your part of the world chirp like this?

First OFFICIAL Release from OCCUPY WALL STREET

– much more at source.

Extraordinary crickets if I say so myself.

That’s not what they want, that’s what they don’t like. Even if you read it as “We don’t like this and want you to stop doing all this stuff” it’s not terribly constructive.

They do have a list of demands but appear to still be working on it, not helped by the idiot asking for

The immediate and total dismantling of the existing State, the dissolution of the existing Constitution and the drafting of a new one.
The smashing of the old bureaucratic and institutional appendages attached to the old order.
The establishment of international ties with similar organizations and movements in the other advanced industrial nations of the world – the European states, Russia, Turkey, Japan. The total smashing of the state apparatus in each of these countries and the formation of a globalized social movement.
The systematic extirpation of capital as the basic category of social reproduction, and the self-conscious organization of all society.

Yeah, that’s gonna happen.

[RTFirefly]

@Scylla

Seeing as Fannie and Freddie collectively held 50% of all outstanding mortgages extant in the U.S. at the height of the bubble and that more than half of those were subprime, and seeing as they created the market demand for them out of almost nothing in 1995 and dominated the market for the intervening period…

The graph shows that the increase in demand during the bubble years wasn’t coming from the GSEs, but rather from the private market.

If they hold half of everything, but aren’t adding much to it, that’s not going to create a bubble, bubblebrain.

Gawd, you’re stupid.

I think you would have to be an absolute moron to continue to insist that they were “late to the party.”

And you can’t read a simple graph, which speaks for itself.

Do you mean “late to the party” in the sense that they started the party, were the first persons there because the party was at their house, and ended up drinking more than anybody else?

OK then, they created that party back in 1995. Delayed-reaction bubble? Please.

I was there. I am in the industry. I worked professionally as a trader of CMOs, asset-backeds, and corporates for a major wirehouse.

And you still don’t know shit, do you?

None of this matters because the data is wide open to anybody who cares to look at it.

It sure is. And you refuse to acknowledge it.

None of this, none of it, gets off the ground or happens without the GSEs mandated appetite for subprime mortgages over nearly a decade, which exceeded 50% of the entire market.

Again, steady demand doesn’t create a bubble.

How can you be in the industry and not have a clue about that basic reality?

Besides, in terms of overall demand, it seems the GSEs basically replaced the S&Ls in the market.

At least until about a decade ago, when their market share started shrinking.

Weird time for that, if they caused things to go haywire in the past decade.

Do you even understand what you’re reading? Krugman is the worst, most partisan hack on the planet,

OK, go and refute something he says.

Besides, I’m not citing Krugman. I’m citing the damned graph.

Are you saying it’s wrong, because it’s on his blog?

and all he is really trying to argue is that there was a pause in buying by the GSEs when the market really heated up.

Exactly. A pretty damned big pause. You’re saying that the floor in demand created by the GSEs caused the bubble, even though that demand had been declining for years before people like Greenspan even acknowledged the possibility of a bubble.

You see this, right?

Nope.

None so blind, and all that.

[Muffin]

The immediate and total dismantling of the existing State, the dissolution of the existing Constitution and the drafting of a new one.
The smashing of the old bureaucratic and institutional appendages attached to the old order.
The establishment of international ties with similar organizations and movements in the other advanced industrial nations of the world – the European states, Russia, Turkey, Japan. The total smashing of the state apparatus in each of these countries and the formation of a globalized social movement.
The systematic extirpation of capital as the basic category of social reproduction, and the self-conscious organization of all society. Same old anarchist/communist shit.

1. Identify socio-economic problem
2. Identify socio-economic problem
3. SMASH THE STATE!

Same old anarchist/communist shite. Some folks just like to protest.

[msmith537]

Fortunately, in a couple of weeks it will get too cold out for these impotent NYU dirtbags to hang around Zuccotti Park banging their stupid drums. Half these idiots probably have parents who work at the companies they are protesting.

[RTFirefly]

Three more things, Scylla:

1. The bubble wasn’t just in subprime, and it wasn’t just domestic. Like it or not, Fannie, Freddie, Barney Frank, and the CRA can’t explain real estate bubbles in other countries, nor can they explain the bubble in commercial real estate here at home. (I suppose there might be Fannie etc. explanation for the bubble in homes priced for the affluent, but you haven’t offered one yet.)

2. The whole “Krugman is the worst, most partisan hack on the planet” meme may play with people who don’t actually read Krugman, which is why I’m sure it plays well on Fox. In his writing, he’s a pretty sober, wonkish guy, and while nobody in this world’s got a great record at predicting the future, his is better than most. Like predicting that the bond vigilantes weren’t going to show up and drive up interest rates.

You want to paint him as a partisan hack, prove it. Be my guest. Want me to start a separate thread and invite you over? I’d consider it my pleasure.

3. So far, all you’ve got is a theory. You haven’t backed it up with one iota of data. You’ve said that law X had consequence Y, but you haven’t produced data that would even suggest law X did jack shit. We can argue about the coupla graphs I’ve brought to the table, but there’s still nothing there that’s consistent with your story.

All you’ve got is words. No evidence. Zip. Nada.

[Bricker]

There is a difference – a difference which seemingly escapes many people here, I might add – between something you disagree with and something that’s utterly without reasonable support.

In that vein, I wish to offer up a retraction and apology of sorts. This thread was intended to paint the protest effort as utterly without reasonable support. And that was my prediction for it. But its longevity and the fact that it has sparked at least some serious discussion of progressive goals has showed me I was wrong about that.

Mind you: I still disagree with the bulk of these goals and think they are foolish or ill-thought-out. But that’s a far cry from the utterly useless. So: I was wrong aout this effort and the premise of this thread. Mea culpa.

[RTFirefly]

@Bricker

There is a difference – a difference which seemingly escapes many people here, I might add – between something you disagree with and something that’s utterly without reasonable support.

In that vein, I wish to offer up a retraction and apology of sorts. This thread was intended to paint the protest effort as utterly without reasonable support. And that was my prediction for it. But its longevity and the fact that it has sparked at least some serious discussion of progressive goals has showed me I was wrong about that.

Mind you: I still disagree with the bulk of these goals and think they are foolish or ill-thought-out. But that’s a far cry from the utterly useless. So: I was wrong aout this effort and the premise of this thread. Mea culpa.

That’s very gentlemanly of you to stop in and say that, Bricker. You’re a mensch for doing so. My hat’s off to you.

[Scylla]

Rtf:

1. I also haven’t explained the weak atomic force.

2. I recently started a thread on Krugman for his very unsober comments and partisan behavior. I would sincerely invite you not to debate me. It is painful talking to you. Most people either stick to things they know about, or defer to superior knowledge. You just make shit up and throw it against the walls, and claim I’m cowardly if I don’t wish to clean it off.

For example, this whole steady demand doesn’t cause bubbles thing. First, I actually addressed it an earlier post before you even brought it up when I said words to effect that the steady market started making the mortgage market behave like corn and created additional markets which would not otherwise likely exist.

But, it is Just a basically dumb statement to say “steady demand doesn’t create bubbles.”. Anybody that’s ever traded a commodity or even heard of the concept knows differently. Bubbles erupt all the time in states with steady demand. I could argue that it’s a prerequisite.

3. This is simply a lie. I presented data and cites in my previous post supporting my assertions concerning the Gses share and role in the mortgage market, as well as the Jud mandates. How do you sY I haven’t presented an iota of evidence?

Again, it’s why it’s so difficult to talk to you. What you say bears no resemblance to reality. You make things up.

[MOIDALIZE]

Wall Street - Incredibly Productive, Highly Beneficial, Totally Blameless!

[RTFirefly]

@Scylla

Rtf:

1. I also haven’t explained the weak atomic force.

Well, providing some evidence for the theory you’re proposing isn’t exactly rocket surgery.

If you’re not up to it, then say so. It’s OK. IMHO is thataway.

2. I recently started a thread on Krugman for his very unsober comments and partisan behavior.

I’ll have to stop by.

I would sincerely invite you not to debate me. It is painful talking to you.

I’ll bet it is, just not for the bullshit reasons you propose. You’ve spent far more time explaining why you shouldn’t have to be expected to rebut me than actually trying to rebut me.

If I’m such an idiot, mightn’t it be easier just to demolish my arguments?

3. This is simply a lie. I presented data and cites in my previous post supporting my assertions concerning the Gses share and role in the mortgage market, as well as the Jud mandates. How do you sY I haven’t presented an iota of evidence?

I’ve gone back as far as post 379 and all I can find is one link to the WSJ that backs up that the law was what you said it was.

Let’s see: 380, no links, 382, no links, ditto 386, 389, 397, 398, 399, no nothing.

I’ve been pointing out that:

[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
You’ve said that law X had consequence Y, but you haven’t produced data that would even suggest law X did jack shit.
[/QUOTE]
Which is still true.

[John_Mace]

@Gyrate

That’s not what they want, that’s what they don’t like. Even if you read it as “We don’t like this and want you to stop doing all this stuff” it’s not terribly constructive.

They do have a list of demands but appear to still be working on it, not helped by the idiot asking for Yeah, that’s gonna happen.

To be fair, that came from the comments section and was not part of the actual text. Still, they don’t seem to understand how our government works if they think Congress can pass legislation to overturn a SCOTUS decision.

The first list that Red Fury posted, above, looks like a hodgepodge of every leftist cause, down to a bone thrown to PETA (pun intended). They call themselves 99-percenters, but those look like the complaints of, maybe, 10-percenters if we’re talking Americans.

[Lightray]

Apparently, they’re franchising: Occupy St. Louis is planning to protest President Obama’s visit to St. Louis today, or… something.

Dozens turn out to harness the power of “mass occupation to restore democracy”. Heh.

[RTFirefly]

@Scylla

But, it is Just a basically dumb statement to say “steady demand doesn’t create bubbles.”. Anybody that’s ever traded a commodity or even heard of the concept knows differently. Bubbles erupt all the time in states with steady demand. I could argue that it’s a prerequisite.

Then, dear sir, I’m sure you can come up with some for-instances.

[Scylla]

@RTFirefly

Then, dear sir, I’m sure you can come up with some for-instances.

Gold and oil over this summer, the short to intermediate treasury market now. I can’t believe I’m answering this question.

Can you name a bubble where there had not been a steady demand for the underlying commodity in question?

Even for you this is a really stupid question.

[elucidator]

What foolishness late from the Colonies, by such persons who style themselves “Americans”! Have you seen the inane drivel put forth? For instance, this fellow Paine, now there is an aptly yclept, if ever I’ve heard such! Common Sense? Uncommon foolishness, even my footman agrees. I hear there is another such gathering of rabble and yeomen scheduled for Lexington! Nothing of any import will come from that, you may be sure…

[RTFirefly]

@Scylla

Gold and oil over this summer, the short to intermediate treasury market now. I can’t believe I’m answering this question.

You lost me at ‘gold.’ You only had the same number of consumers or investors seeking the same quantities of gold, over the past coupla years? No increase in gold bugs jumping into the market? Just steady demand?

Yeh, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. :rolleyes:

In Treasuries, the flight to safety, that is to say, the flight to Treasuries from other investments, has been well documented. That’s not steady demand either.

Good Lord, you’re dumb. Either that, or ‘steady’ means something far different in your universe than it does in everyone else’s.

Seems like those two are the examples you’re asking me to produce. Well, there they are.

As far as oil is concerned, you’d have to make the case that there was a bubble in oil this summer. Not every short-term fluctuation is a bubble.

[Zeriel]

@Scylla

Gold and oil over this summer, the short to intermediate treasury market now. I can’t believe I’m answering this question.

I don’t know about the other two, but it’s been my impression (having my toe barely in the commodities market as a hedge) that gold demand has been accelerating, not steady, for a few years now at least. The same is true of oil over a longer timeline (at least since 2002 or so), is it not?

Frankly I think you two are talking past each other–my own financial adviser will sometimes say “steady demand” to mean “steady increase in demand” when discussing commodities, whereas I’d interpret “steady demand” to mean “no change in demand”.