Occupy Wall Street Movement Is a Year Old: Did it Change Anything?
Chris D
2012/09/17 19:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
175 votes
|
|
16% | |||
|
726 votes
|
|
67% | |||
|
175 votes
|
|
16% | |||
It must get tiring camping out in front of the Stock Exchange and complaining that there are no work opportunities, because the crowds have gone home -- hopefully to a place to live and a job. The campers did have a point though.
The banks caused a huge crisis by repackaging crappy defaulting loans and selling them back to us as mortgage-backed securities and "derivative" investment products. That's a nice magic trick...then once it all blew up, the the politicians used tax payer money (otherwise known as TARP funds) and bailed the bankers out, so they could still get their bonuses. Maybe the bankers who were paying big money to the election campaigns (on both sides) were cashing in their influence? Either way, the whole thing sinks. So maybe we should be able to regulate the financial services industry a bit better so that banks can't defraud America. Isn't that the government's job?
How did the industry ever get deregulated in the first place? Well, the whole cause of this mess can be traced back to when Bill Clinton signed the The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act into law in 1999, repealing part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company. Voila, the fox was now guarding the hen house, and guess what happened?
So the government causes the problem by letting banks self-regulate their businesses. The Occupy Wall Streeters started with a good high level complaint, but then the cause spiraled into a sloppy self, indulgent mess that became an attraction for petty criminals and anyone looking to cause trouble. Did the movement change anything or was it all just noise?
CNN.COM reports:
The banks caused a huge crisis by repackaging crappy defaulting loans and selling them back to us as mortgage-backed securities and "derivative" investment products. That's a nice magic trick...then once it all blew up, the the politicians used tax payer money (otherwise known as TARP funds) and bailed the bankers out, so they could still get their bonuses. Maybe the bankers who were paying big money to the election campaigns (on both sides) were cashing in their influence? Either way, the whole thing sinks. So maybe we should be able to regulate the financial services industry a bit better so that banks can't defraud America. Isn't that the government's job?
How did the industry ever get deregulated in the first place? Well, the whole cause of this mess can be traced back to when Bill Clinton signed the The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act into law in 1999, repealing part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company. Voila, the fox was now guarding the hen house, and guess what happened?
So the government causes the problem by letting banks self-regulate their businesses. The Occupy Wall Streeters started with a good high level complaint, but then the cause spiraled into a sloppy self, indulgent mess that became an attraction for petty criminals and anyone looking to cause trouble. Did the movement change anything or was it all just noise?
CNN.COM reports:
Police encircled Lower Manhattan's Zuccotti Park on Sunday as protesters geared up to observe the one-year anniversary of Occupy Wall Street.
Read More: http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/16/us/ny-occupy-anniver...
This poll demonstrates as much, where half of those responding say it DID change something.
As for the posts of the other half, it should be obvious from their content whose talking-points memos they are reading before they lift up their heads, shout 'Ditto!' and dash off a SodaHead post.
"I'm a commentator of life!" he says lol ... He definitely the poster child for your point lol
but we do know the following .. about those participating ..
-- too many were never properly 'potty-trained' ...
-- there's no ability to clean up after themselves
-- too many can't even fix their own meals, pay their own bills, provide for their own needs
-- there's a reason WHY they are unemployed .. well demonstrated by the antics ..
-- some shouldn't even be parents .. (abandoned infants in squalid tents .. and deliberately endangering their children .. )
-- Rapes, Murder, Crime is high in these encampments ..
-- when the weather turns .. my goodness .. back to the basements they go!
Pls no blame Obama remarks cuz the issue has persisted well before as the article clearly states.
I DID answer the question ..
go back and read what was written ..
There's too many 'fingers of blame' flung about ...
and not enough thought about what lack of ... common sense ..
is the circus called 'Occupy' ..
I may not agree with everything the Occupy Wall Street movement had to say, but it saddens me that almost no one fought for their right to say it.
If you dont listen to the people now...they will listen when the people get to the point of frustation and resort to violent demonstration and revolution in the streets! Our learders need to listen to what the people of occupy are saying!
Luckily the rest of America does not have to put up with firing of AK-47's that seem to be the hallmark of protest movements in other countries.
Wall street is the Freemason's banks street, who plot to control the world, and make Jerusalem its capital
Which would also mean, however, that you are partly incorrect. Those who are able to glimpse that larger view do understand that everyone keeps a set of books, economies are fundamentally transactional, and that governments can hardly be trusted any more than corporations. Capitalism works just fine, so long as the government also does its job in checking its excesses ~ robber barons, monopolies, trampling rights of workers, etc. Before 'corporate personhood,' democratic governments demonstrated some success in performing that function as a brake and safety-belt.
Globalization has resulted in jobs being shipped to countries with no regard for workplace safety, working conditions, or worker rights and wages. Products are therefore being manufactured more cheaply than ever in the Third World, then shipped to the post-industrial West and sold at previously-unthinkable profits, where these profits are not passed on to citizens in the West as cost-of-living wage increases or improved healthcare, but are instead passed on to those at the top of the ladder who are runni...
Which would also mean, however, that you are partly incorrect. Those who are able to glimpse that larger view do understand that everyone keeps a set of books, economies are fundamentally transactional, and that governments can hardly be trusted any more than corporations. Capitalism works just fine, so long as the government also does its job in checking its excesses ~ robber barons, monopolies, trampling rights of workers, etc. Before 'corporate personhood,' democratic governments demonstrated some success in performing that function as a brake and safety-belt.
Globalization has resulted in jobs being shipped to countries with no regard for workplace safety, working conditions, or worker rights and wages. Products are therefore being manufactured more cheaply than ever in the Third World, then shipped to the post-industrial West and sold at previously-unthinkable profits, where these profits are not passed on to citizens in the West as cost-of-living wage increases or improved healthcare, but are instead passed on to those at the top of the ladder who are running the corporations.
It is this unprecedented transfer of wealth from the working class to the ruling class that has riled up Occupy protestors. Their activism is really a protest against the consequences of globalization and a call for better treatment of what they term 'the 99 %,' or working class.