Occupy Wall Street protest in New-York

[WhoWee]

Isn't the ability to make money on Wall street part of those wonderful freedoms we enjoy?

I don't think most people realize the level of education and licensing required to work (at the level being scrutinized) on Wall Street.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...00615456.html?mod=WSJ_Careers_CareerJournal_4


A quick look at licenses:
http://gyl.com/license-stockbroker.html

 

[WhoWee]

An incident that occurred during the tuesday night protests in Oakland (occupiers who had been cleared out by police were protesting) is getting some viral attention. Regardless of how you feel about the protests, it's certainly a dramatic and emotionally charged incident.


(clearest video)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...l?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl8|sec3_lnk2|107736
(article)

http://www.businessinsider.com/marine-to-police-you-did-this-to-my-brother-2011-10

From your Huffington link - regarding why the Iraq Vet was protesting:

""He doesn't agree with the way the banks aren't regulated, the way they drove the economy in the ground. He wants there to be regulation of the banks," Shannon said."

Newsflash - banks ARE regulated. Also, how exactly did the banks drive the economy into the ground? Last, what specific regulations do the protesters want ?

 

[Evo]

This is what these protests/demonstrations are about.

I can't tell what people are supposedly protesting, it seems they are all over the place. Perhaps the largest group wants rich people to give them money. I don't get it. What do they mean by this? Do they mean higher taxes on the rich? Because listening to the rants of some of these protesters, you'd think that they actually intend for the rich to write them checks or something similar. The protestors also don't understand that the first ammendment part that gives them a right to peacefully assembly doesn't mean anywhere, anytime. Duh. Perhaps this woman should check with the ACLU that would tell her, local and state laws must be followed.

Listen to this clueless woman.

http://news.yahoo.com/video/phoenixktvk3tv-15751070/occupy-phoenix-protesters-arrested-12-nights-ago-spend-day-in-court-27079167.html#crsl=%252Fvideo%252Fphoenixktvk3tv-15751070%252Foccupy-phoenix-protesters-arrested-12-nights-ago-spend-day-in-court-27079167.html

Occupy Boston protests could cost city $2 million in police overtime

Read more: http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/occupy-boston-protests-could-cost-city-2m-in-police-overtime-20111012#ixzz1c2XrW5Au

I've read the cost for NYC is already $3.5 million. This is so wrong.

 

[ThomasT]

I can't tell what people are supposedly protesting, it seems they are all over the place. Perhaps the largest group wants rich people to give them money. I don't get it. What do they mean by this? Do they mean higher taxes on the rich? Because listening to the rants of some of these protesters, you'd think that they actually intend for the rich to write them checks or something similar. The protestors also don't understand that the first ammendment part that gives them a right to peacefully assemble doesn't mean anywhere, anytime. Duh.

Listen to this clueless woman.

http://news.yahoo.com/video/phoenixktvk3tv-15751070/occupy-phoenix-protesters-arrested-12-nights-ago-spend-day-in-court-27079167.html#crsl=%252Fvideo%252Fphoenixktvk3tv-15751070%252Foccupy-phoenix-protesters-arrested-12-nights-ago-spend-day-in-court-27079167.html



Read more: http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/occupy-boston-protests-could-cost-city-2m-in-police-overtime-20111012#ixzz1c2XrW5Au

I've read the cost for NYC is already $3.5 million. This is so wrong.

Police are highly overpaid and underworked, imho. So these numbers are essentially meaningless.

Why would I want to listen to a 'clueless' woman?

As I said in a previous post, if you think there's no reason to protest, then fine. You're against the demonstrators, and for the status quo. Just keep in mind that the status quo is what created the financial crisis, the governmental debt, and the rising unemployment.

 

[Galteeth]

From your Huffington link - regarding why the Iraq Vet was protesting:

""He doesn't agree with the way the banks aren't regulated, the way they drove the economy in the ground. He wants there to be regulation of the banks," Shannon said."

Newsflash - banks ARE regulated. Also, how exactly did the banks drive the economy into the ground? Last, what specific regulations do the protesters want ?

As you know, there are diverse groups being represented here. Marxists, libertarians, frustrated democrats, frustrated average people, anarchists. I can't speak for Scott Olsen, and i certainly don't agree with everything people at OWS say.

 

[Evo]

Police are highly overpaid and underworked, imho. So these numbers are essentially meaningless.

These are real costs, not imaginary.

 

[Galteeth]

These are real costs, not imaginary.

But it is not correct to say that these costs are being created by the protestors. There's little to suggest the extra police presence is warranted.

 

[Evo]

But it is not correct to say that these costs are being created by the protestors. There's little to suggest the extra police presence is warranted.

The costs are directly caused by the protestors as there would be no need without their presence. Police are needed 24/7 in areas where they otherwise would not be needed. If these people went home, no extra costs.

I'm sure we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.

I know if I were inclined to camp out in an inner city area, I would LOVE to have police protection.

IMO, a directed letter writing campaign to one's representaitives would be so much more effective. Politicians care about being re-elected, the protests don't impact them, therefor, they don't care, they don't feel threatened, so there is no need to do anything.

 

[jambaugh]

Police are highly overpaid and underworked, imho.

My stepfather's grandson got all patriotic after 9-11 and joined the NYPD. He's written a semi-fictional book about his experience which you ought to read if this is really your opinion... it's a funny and enlightening read: https://www.amazon.com/dp/159691159X/?tag=pfamazon01-20.

 

[Galteeth]

The costs are directly caused by the protestors as there would be no need without their presence. Police are needed 24/7 in areas where they otherwise would not be needed. If these people went home, no extra costs.

I'm sure we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.

Yes, I agree with that. I will say that if you watch the videos, in oakland at least, the police were being far more disruptive then the protestors.

 

[WhoWee]

But it is not correct to say that these costs are being created by the protestors. There's little to suggest the extra police presence is warranted.

Police are needed to protect property from damages - and local residents from bad behavior.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/19/local/la-me-occupy-lawn-web-20111020
"The cost of repairing the increasing damage to the City Hall lawn where hundreds of Occupy L.A. protesters are camped out is becoming an issue for Los Angeles officials even as the protesters make plans to expand their demonstration to other downtown city property."

http://www.kgw.com/news/Portland-commissioner-Occupy-camps-cause-19K-in-damage-132013693.html
"Damage caused by the “Occupy Portland” encampments at Lownsdale Square and Chapman Park will cost the city at least $19,000 and several months to repair, according to Commissioner Nick Fish.
The city leader sent a letter to “Occupy Portland” Monday, urging them to make changes that will minimize the strain on the parks’ fragile urban ecosystems.
“Parks belong to everyone,” Fish said in the letter. “The cost to restore the damage to our parks will not be borne by Wall Street bankers but by Portland taxpayers.”"


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-20123807/nyers-to-occupy-protesters-lay-off-the-drums/
""Our neighbors do not urinate and defecate in the street," said resident Linda Fairstein, WCBS-TV reports. "These occupiers need to vacate our neighborhood.""

 

[OmCheeto]

Police are needed to protect property from damages - and local residents from bad behavior.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/19/local/la-me-occupy-lawn-web-20111020
"The cost of repairing the increasing damage to the City Hall lawn where hundreds of Occupy L.A. protesters are camped out is becoming an issue for Los Angeles officials even as the protesters make plans to expand their demonstration to other downtown city property."

http://www.kgw.com/news/Portland-commissioner-Occupy-camps-cause-19K-in-damage-132013693.html
"Damage caused by the “Occupy Portland” encampments at Lownsdale Square and Chapman Park will cost the city at least $19,000 and several months to repair, according to Commissioner Nick Fish.
The city leader sent a letter to “Occupy Portland” Monday, urging them to make changes that will minimize the strain on the parks’ fragile urban ecosystems.
“Parks belong to everyone,” Fish said in the letter. “The cost to restore the damage to our parks will not be borne by Wall Street bankers but by Portland taxpayers.”"


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-20123807/nyers-to-occupy-protesters-lay-off-the-drums/
""Our neighbors do not urinate and defecate in the street," said resident Linda Fairstein, WCBS-TV reports. "These occupiers need to vacate our neighborhood.""

bolding mine

oooooo...

$19k/2M metro residents = oooooo! 1 cent per person.

We should discuss the governmental "and several months to repair" comment this weekend.

I would say more, but Mr. Fish's comments read like an Onion headline, and I'm having trouble breathing, after all my laughter.

ps. sorry for all my oooooo's. I'm preping for Halloween.

 

[Evo]

bolding mine

oooooo...

$19k/2M metro residents = oooooo! 1 cent per person.

We should discuss the governmental "and several months to repair" comment this weekend.

I would say more, but Mr. Fish's comments read like an Onion headline, and I'm having trouble breathing, after all my laughter.

ps. sorry for all my oooooo's. I'm preping for Halloween.

OM, it's $19,000 that shouldn't have to be used. How many taxpayers are there, you can't use total population.

The fact is, no small group of people has the right to destroy public property, heck, no one has that right.

 

[ParticleGrl]

I can't tell what people are supposedly protesting, it seems they are all over the place. Perhaps the largest group wants rich people to give them money. I don't get it.

For the first time in my news-watching lifetime, the subject of growing inequality is making headlines- personally I think that is a huge success. Protests aren't always about demands- sometimes getting an idea out there has its uses.

I think the largest group is just angry- in our lifetimes America went from a country of relatively high social mobility and moderate inequality to a country with relatively low social mobility and income inequality rivaling banana republics. As it became harder and harder to get ahead, the cost of a college education grew rapidly. My generation was forced to take out massive debt to go to our local in-state colleges and we graduated into the worst job market since the great depression. I read news stories about how my generation just "hasn't grown up"- how do you grow up if you can't find a decent paying job?

By the time my parents were my age, my father was making enough that my mother could quit to focus on raising the children. They had bought their first house, they owned reliable cars, and they had just had their second child. My father had a real career, with room for advancement if you were willing to work hard.

I'm more educated than my parents, I work longer hours than my parents ever worked at any time in their careers, and yet I haven't met the basics of adulthood. My job is not a career. I can't afford a house, I drive a car older than I am. Having a child would almost certainly make paying my undergrad loans impossible. Many of my friends are in the same situation. Its hard not to have some anger- the generation ahead of mine had things so much easier, and sits around telling my generation we just aren't working hard enough to advance.

Surely, you can understand some of the anger? I think the protestors have recognized that the game is rigged, but perhaps they don't all agree on how.

 

[ParticleGrl]

Newsflash - banks ARE regulated. Also, how exactly did the banks drive the economy into the ground? Last, what specific regulations do the protesters want ?

Personally, I'd be happy with something like Dodd-Frank's provision for orderly unwinding of illiquid banks. Its the surest way to avoid "too big to fail".

The subprime crises wouldn't have spread to every area of the economy if mortgage-backed derivatives hadn't permeated everything. The large damages were essentially caused by runs on the shadow-banking sector.

Further, these investment banks sold derivatives they knew to be crap just to get them off their own books to "sucker" clients, mostly pension funds,state/local government, etc.

And this is before mentioning the big players in the mortgage market. We are so quick to blame the people who took these loans, but I ask you- when a banker and a client sit down to negotiate a mortgage, which one is claiming to be the mortgage expert?

Basically, everyone relied on banks to provide good advice, instead of providing terrible advice to enrich themselves. Jokes on all of us, huh?

 

[DoggerDan]

The costs are directly caused by the protestors as there would be no need without their presence. Police are needed 24/7 in areas where they otherwise would not be needed. If these people went home, no extra costs.

I heard on the radio this evening the additional costs above and beyond routine top $1.1 Million for police alone. Most of this is due to the overtime required to cover the event.

 

[Oltz]

For the first time in my news-watching lifetime, the subject of growing inequality is making headlines- personally I think that is a huge success. Protests aren't always about demands- sometimes getting an idea out there has its uses.

I think the largest group is just angry- in our lifetimes America went from a country of relatively high social mobility and moderate inequality to a country with relatively low social mobility and income inequality rivaling banana republics. As it became harder and harder to get ahead, the cost of a college education grew rapidly. My generation was forced to take out massive debt to go to our local in-state colleges and we graduated into the worst job market since the great depression. I read news stories about how my generation just "hasn't grown up"- how do you grow up if you can't find a decent paying job?

By the time my parents were my age, my father was making enough that my mother could quit to focus on raising the children. They had bought their first house, they owned reliable cars, and they had just had their second child. My father had a real career, with room for advancement if you were willing to work hard.

I'm more educated than my parents, I work longer hours than my parents ever worked at any time in their careers, and yet I haven't met the basics of adulthood. My job is not a career. I can't afford a house, I drive a car older than I am. Having a child would almost certainly make paying my undergrad loans impossible. Many of my friends are in the same situation. Its hard not to have some anger- the generation ahead of mine had things so much easier, and sits around telling my generation we just aren't working hard enough to advance.

Surely, you can understand some of the anger? I think the protestors have recognized that the game is rigged, but perhaps they don't all agree on how.

Lets break this down.

I interpret that you think things were better when your parents were your age.

What has changed since then?

Do not blame the "rich" for the high cost of your eductation blame easily attainable government backed student loans.

The same thing that caused the housing bubble. The Education Bubble will be the next to burst.

Univiersities see how easy and willing students are to take on debt so they are comfortable raising prices consistently 10% a year.

Minimum wage increases and printing money are big drivers of inflation. Mini,u, wage has increased far faster then the average wage essentially raising the bottom and making every doller you make worth less.

Making Money is not zero sum the rich can be 4 billion times richer then you are and you can still have a great life income inequality is a joke and has no real meaning. It does not effect the price of food ro gas or housing doesn't drive your income.Al of these are more effected by poorly planned governement intervention with side effects they did not anticipate.

The Majority drive pricing if average person could not afford a TV then TVs would get less expensive or not be sold.

 

[WhoWee]

Personally, I'd be happy with something like Dodd-Frank's provision for orderly unwinding of illiquid banks. Its the surest way to avoid "too big to fail".

The subprime crises wouldn't have spread to every area of the economy if mortgage-backed derivatives hadn't permeated everything. The large damages were essentially caused by runs on the shadow-banking sector.

Further, these investment banks sold derivatives they knew to be crap just to get them off their own books to "sucker" clients, mostly pension funds,state/local government, etc.

And this is before mentioning the big players in the mortgage market. We are so quick to blame the people who took these loans, but I ask you- when a banker and a client sit down to negotiate a mortgage, which one is claiming to be the mortgage expert?

Basically, everyone relied on banks to provide good advice, instead of providing terrible advice to enrich themselves. Jokes on all of us, huh?

I noticed there is no mention of Government involvement in the problem - an oversight?

 

[WhoWee]

Someone should pass this story on to the protesters:

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/09/18/acorns-illegal-alien-home-loan-racket/

"In 2005, Citibank and ACORN Housing Corporation – which has received tens of millions of tax dollars under the Bush administration alone — began recruiting Mexican illegal aliens for a lucrative program offering loans with below-market interest rates, down-payment assistance and no mortgage insurance requirements. Instead of Social Security numbers required of law-abiding citizens, the program allows illegal alien applicants to supply loosely-monitored tax identification numbers issued by the IRS.
The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that “undocumented residents” comprise a vast market representing a potential sum of “$44 billion in mortgages.” Citibank enlarged its portfolio of subprime and other risky loans. ACORN enlarged its membership rolls. The program now operates in Miami; New York City; Jersey City, N.J.; Baltimore; Washington, D.C.; Chicago; Bridgeport, Conn., and at all of ACORN Housing’s 12 California offices. San Diego ACORN officials advised illegal alien recruits that their bank partners would take applicants who had little or no credit, or even “nontraditional records of credit, such as utility payments and documentation of private loan payments.”
The risk the banks bear is the price they pay to keep ACORN protesters and Hispanic lobbyists from the National Council of La Raza screaming about “predatory lending” off their backs. These professional grievance-mongers have turned the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act – which forced lenders to sacrifice underwriting standards for “diversity” – into lucrative “business” opportunities. Or rather, politically correct blackmail. As the Consumer Rights League noted in a 2008 report on the group’s successful shakedowns of financial institutions, “an agreement with Citibank, a significant ACORN donor and partner, showed that some activists become less active when deals are in place.”"

Of course this must be labeled as opinion.

 

[WhoWee]

Here's another opinion piece on the subject - anyone think the protesters would want to hear these details?

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/225898/planting-seeds-disaster/stanley-kurtz

"Using provisions of a 1977 law called the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), Chicago ACORN was able to delay and halt the efforts of banks to merge or expand until they had agreed to lower their credit standards — and to fill ACORN’s coffers to finance “counseling” operations like the one touted in that Sun-Times article. This much we’ve known. Yet these local, CRA-based pressure-campaigns fit into a broader, more disturbing, and still under-appreciated national picture. Far more than we’ve recognized, ACORN’s local, CRA-enabled pressure tactics served to entangle the financial system as a whole in the subprime mess. ACORN was no side-show. On the contrary, using CRA and ties to sympathetic congressional Democrats, ACORN succeeded in drawing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into the very policies that led to the current disaster."

 

[OmCheeto]

OM, it's $19,000 that shouldn't have to be used. How many taxpayers are there, you can't use total population.

It was one of those "off the top of my head" comments.

I was looking at the NYPD overtime numbers vs the NYPD annual budget the other day.
It stuck me as the same kind of argument over a seemingly big number, until you take a look at the huge number behind the curtain.

http://www.newsday.com/news/new-york/occupy-wall-street-nypd-overtime-hits-3-4m-1.3272630": $3.4E6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Police_Department" : $3.9E9
So that's ~1/10 of 1% difference.

Graphically speaking:

Barely a blip on the radar.

The fact is, no small group of people has the right to destroy public property, heck, no one has that right.

I'm fairly certain that the only damage is to the lawn.
But we're kind of weird out here. We exercise our right to destroy public property every year.
It's called the http://www.oregonlive.com/rosefest/index.ssf/2010/06/rain_sets_record_in_portland_s.html" .

 

[WhoWee]

It was one of those "off the top of my head" comments.

I was looking at the NYPD overtime numbers vs the NYPD annual budget the other day.
It stuck me as the same kind of argument over a seemingly big number, until you take a look at the huge number behind the curtain.

http://www.newsday.com/news/new-york/occupy-wall-street-nypd-overtime-hits-3-4m-1.3272630": $3.4E6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Police_Department" : $3.9E9
So that's ~1/10 of 1% difference.

Graphically speaking:

Barely a blip on the radar.



I'm fairly certain that the only damage is to the lawn.
But we're kind of weird out here. We exercise our right to destroy public property every year.
It's called the http://www.oregonlive.com/rosefest/index.ssf/2010/06/rain_sets_record_in_portland_s.html" .

The $19,000 post was related to Occupy Portland - not NY.
from my post 701

"http://www.kgw.com/news/Portland-com...132013693.html
"Damage caused by the “Occupy Portland” encampments at Lownsdale Square and Chapman Park will cost the city at least $19,000 and several months to repair, according to Commissioner Nick Fish.
The city leader sent a letter to “Occupy Portland” Monday, urging them to make changes that will minimize the strain on the parks’ fragile urban ecosystems.
“Parks belong to everyone,” Fish said in the letter. “The cost to restore the damage to our parks will not be borne by Wall Street bankers but by Portland taxpayers.”"
"

 

[WhoWee]

This is a very interesting development:

http://www.wtvr.com/news/wtvr-richmond-tea-party-wants-refund-after-seeing-occupy-richmond-protesters-camp-out-for-free-20111026,0,7880023.story

"Richmond Tea Party wants refund after seeing Occupy Richmond protesters camp out for free
Tea Party was charged nearly $10,000 to host their demonstration"

""And they’re not having to pay for the park, they’re not getting permits, they’re not paying for police, they’re not paying for port-o-potties, they’re not paying for emergency personnel," Owens says.

"Everything that we were required to do," she adds.

Owens says the Tea Party hopes to get an invoice into the Mayor's office this week and ask for a refund.

“It’s not fair, the City of Richmond’s picking and choosing whose First Amendment rights trump someone else’s First Amendment rights and we thought--well that’s fine--then they can refund our money," she says.

"If that’s how they’re going to run the city then they owe us our fees back.”"

It was reported earlier that the Occupy Movement had received $450,000 in donations - why aren't they subject to the same rules?

 

[mheslep]

The policing cost credited to just the OWS people, alone, is not the issue. If they are allowed to displace others from public spaces, destroy property, impede local business and disturb residents, then the issue becomes why can't everybody?

 

[OmCheeto]

The $19,000 post was related to Occupy Portland - not NY.
from my post 701

"http://www.kgw.com/news/Portland-com...132013693.html
"Damage caused by the “Occupy Portland” encampments at Lownsdale Square and Chapman Park will cost the city at least $19,000 and several months to repair, according to Commissioner Nick Fish.
The city leader sent a letter to “Occupy Portland” Monday, urging them to make changes that will minimize the strain on the parks’ fragile urban ecosystems.
“Parks belong to everyone,” Fish said in the letter. “The cost to restore the damage to our parks will not be borne by Wall Street bankers but by Portland taxpayers.”"
"

Yes. I know/knew that. I live in Portland.

I find Nick Fish's political wording humorous.

"make changes that will minimize the strain on the parks’ fragile urban ecosystems."

translates to

"keep off the grass." in OmSpeak.

 

[Oltz]

If i went to the local park and went to the bathroom I am willing to bet I would be arrested.

Yet somehow it is over looked for this "movement"

 

[WhoWee]

If i went to the local park and went to the bathroom I am willing to bet I would be arrested.

Yet somehow it is over looked for this "movement"

Might we conclude that "movements" are more acceptable?

 

[edward]

Newsflash - banks ARE regulated. Also, how exactly did the banks drive the economy into the ground? Last, what specific regulations do the protesters want ?

The financial derivatives market was and still is totally unregulated. Nice try at obfuscation but no cigar.

As for regulations, stopping banks from betting against a financial product they have sold, ala Goldman Sachs, would be a good start.

 

[WhoWee]

The financial derivatives market was and still is totally unregulated. Nice try at obfuscation but no cigar.

As for regulations, stopping banks from betting against a financial product they have sold, ala Goldman Sachs, would be a good start.

First, I don't think banks should be allowed to risk deposits in derivatives markets. Second, the lack of derivatives regulation is a global problem. I don't see any method of imposing regulations on existing contracts - only contracts initiated after a specific future date.

Please keep this in context - nobody said anything about derivatives markets (thanks again to Bill Clinton)

"Statement from link:
""He doesn't agree with the way the banks aren't regulated, the way they drove the economy in the ground. He wants there to be regulation of the banks," Shannon said."

WhoWee's
Newsflash - banks ARE regulated. Also, how exactly did the banks drive the economy into the ground? Last, what specific regulations do the protesters want ?"

Again, banks are regulated.

 

[nsaspook]

I'm fairly certain that the only damage is to the lawn.
But we're kind of weird out here. We exercise our right to destroy public property every year.
It's called the http://www.oregonlive.com/rosefest/index.ssf/2010/06/rain_sets_record_in_portland_s.html" .

I think the 'Zombie Walk' event is better. http://www.yelp.com/events/portland-portland-zombie-walk-2011