Occupy

[alloy_]

The Occupy movement are apparently angry. I’m not entirely sure why. After all they’re living rent free in a public space near you.

That’s your public space, paid for with your tax/rate Dollars/Euros/Pounds etc. In most cases they’re using the public facilities again provided by your hard earned dosh, or in the ultimate irony they’re abusing their

Comments

[miss_diverse]

I support them. I think the big banks/corpoorations need to see how many people are disgusted by the squandering of their mortgage payments / tax dollars / retirement funds.

Most Occupiers I know of have jobs and homes etc, and are keeping up their responsibilities while Occupying.

Their rights are granted by the institutions they protest against? What??? If banks and treasury departments are the ones granting rights, we are truly stuffed.

They don't WANT to abandon the system, they want to CHANGE the system. To a system where hard work is rewarded, not the ability to gamble with other people's money.

Sometimes teenagers have good reasons to be angry, too. Just because they're teenagers doesn't make them wrong.

[alloy_]

The people who borrowed against inflated equity values to support unsustainable lifestyles are just as culpable as the "Evil corporations inc."

Evil corporations didn't manufacture the GFC in a vacuum, it was a long time coming and well forewarned.

Ultimately the rights one enjoys are defined by the wealth of the economy in which one lives.

Occupy clearly doesn't understand the system they want to change including the natural consequences of behavior which has led to this situation.

Teenagers are not right in the head. This is a biological fact called hormones.

[elvisvf101]

The people who borrowed against inflated equity values to support unsustainable lifestyles are just as culpable as the "Evil corporations inc."

I don't dispute that irresponsible borrowers screwed up here, but to say that their level of culpability is anywhere NEAR that of the financial system seems ludicrous. A consumer can make the dumb decision to take out an ARM on their house under the hope that they can sell their home within 2-5 years at a profit, with every intention of walking away if no one buys.

To say they are anywhere NEAR as culpable as the banks who decided they could buy and sell these mortgages in convenient packages AND take out insurance against their risky bets and NOT think it could all blow up in their face strikes me as absurd.

I'm all for people taking the blame they deserve, but the level of blame to be laid at the feet of consumers here relative to that of the banks is so small, it's basically negligible.

Ultimately the rights one enjoys are defined by the wealth of the economy in which one lives.I

[alloy_]

I'm all for people taking the blame they deserve, but the level of blame to be laid at the feet of consumers here relative to that of the banks is so small, it's basically negligible.

I disagree, the GFC came on the back of a decade long orgy of consumer spending. The banks didn't service this demand in a vacuum. They did in some parts of the world service this demand recklessly, especially in countries with lax bank regulation.

Supply and demand two sides to the equation.

But if we're just to accept this as fact, we basically surrender to everything Occupy is attempting to protest.

Frankly I don't think Occupy understands what they're protesting against. (when they even produce a coherent message). Most of these people are protesting simply for the sake of protesting.

Occupy encompasses virtually every relevant demographicI wasn't referring to specific demographic, I was referring to the selfish attitude, disregard for the rights of others and abdication of responsibility

[oncelikeshari]

It's the people camping at St pauls that baffle me.

Because a CATHEDRAL is pretty much anti wealth too! They could have camped in front of a bank or better still, right here in Canary Wharf there are massive sky scrapers that belong to big banks, all surrounding a green area where they hold concerts and screen films and you could put your tents there and be seen and heard by the people you claim to be protesting about.

But no...you're protesting in a church yard.

Later today I'm thinking of protesting about the lack of wheelchair access at the Olympic site...by camping outside Body Shop in a warm and cosy wheelchair accesable shopping centre!

[alloy_]

That's because the Cathedral is a soft target for squatters.

[elvisvf101]

The St. Paul's situation seems unique. My own understanding is, the movement attempted to reach the center of the Square Mile, but London Metro prevented them. They then proceeded to St. Paul's because they needed a place to organize.

Because of social media, the movement grew faster than anyone could effectively organize anything, and it naturally grew out of hand.

On the one hand, Occupy harkens very much to the image of Jesus overturning the moneylender's tables, which is a powerful image. But the reality of having a huge mass of people camping outside the church is a logistical nightmare, and no one has handled it particularly well, including the protesters.

While I support the movement, it's clear they lack leadership, or else they could have used a vigil at St. Paul's to truly further their cause.

[oncelikeshari]

I have a lot of respect for the people at St Pauls who resigned because of threats to evict them as that goes against everything they, as a church, stand for.

But the cathedral makes money from tourists and they had to close and have lost a lot of money because of this. Costing a church money makes that protest invalid IMO.

There have been tents with protesters outside Parliment for years. They could easily join them there. I know that one is anti war but I'm sure both camps share the same views on both subjects. Parliment or the offices of the banks are the places to protest, not St Pauls.

[leviathan0999]

Marc, honestly, you're so far off-base, you've left the stadium entirely. You're in the middle of another sport. Curling, possibly

[alloy_]

This is a particularly pernicious lie. Were there people who borrowed as you described? Sure. And they could all be taken out in one bus crash.

That's one big bus crash across most of the United states. Unless you're suggesting that the laws of supply and demand were suspended in the worlds largest free economy for the last two decades.

In a dark continent on the other side of the Atlantic I knew that a crash was inevitable five years ago.

I'm not suggesting that Banks in your part of the world weren't irresponsible, they were, and they were allowed to be so by lax legislation.

HOWEVER people need to accept their proportion of the blame.

Root of Greece problems lie in the opposite of rampant capitalism, it lies in the lack of productivity in the welfare state.

[leviathan0999]

I said: Were there people who borrowed as you described? Sure. And they could all be taken out in one bus crash.

You reply: That's one big bus crash across most of the United states. Unless you're suggesting that the laws of supply and demand were suspended in the worlds largest free economy for the last two decades.No, you're missing my point. I'm being facetious with the single bus crash, but the vast majority of what are being classified as "toxic assets" were not irresponsibly "borrowed against inflated equity values to support unsustainable lifestyles." They were borrowed in good faith based on deliberate, predatory lies by corrupt loan officers of corrupt corporations that were deliberately making bad loans so they could bet against them

[ozma_katiebell]

Not only that, their President was telling them that they should all be homeowners

[ozma_katiebell]

They are exercising the 'right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,'which is a civil right given by our constitution

[ozma_katiebell]

Most of the people are out there, (myself included) ARE employed, they come out when they can. Many of the marches are scheduled when people get off work. There is also education going on, teaching people about how the government an economy works, something which is sadly lacking in our education system

[alloy_]

None of which justifies a protest in Dunedin or even Auckland in a welfare state which costs ratepayers money damages public property and deprives the rest of society of their rights.

[ozma_katiebell]

I appreciate that, but not knowing what the economy is like in New Zealand and what issues they are protesting in particular, I can't comment on that situation. I do think that every society needs to regularly take a look at the extent that corporate influence has affected their dialogue, their political process and their economy, especially when you look back on history and see the damage the pursuit of 'profit at all cost' has caused humanity.

[redheadsarehot]

I hope you have email notifications, because I edited this to avoid lectures from people. :D

[alloy_]

Sadly being a centralist I get lambasted from the right for advocating moderate regulation and from the left for advocating moderate regulation.

[grownupron]

Yep I get that too.

I agreed with the very first small nucleus of the Occupy movement. That banks who had to survive on the government could not just go back to business as usual when the crisis past.

Everything that has happen since the first few days is sound and fury signifiying nothing.

[alloy_]

Frankly the bailout should have been at the expense of shareholders equity. Protect people's houses by all means but the shareholders assumed risk when they bought in.