Occupy Wall Street Opinion Thread. What is your perspective?

#1

So Occupy Wall Street has been going on for over 20 days today. (10/7/2011) On top of the protesters growing in numbers in York City itself, the message (Once a unified message is constructed) is spreading across the states to multiple cities like Sacramento, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Austin, Seattle, Washington D.C., Chicago, and it continues on to add up to a total of 872 gatherings nationwide.( https://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20117291-501465.html )

The bases from what I can see from my own personal perspective is a message that corporatism has corrupted our politics, has crashed our economy, and many feel that essentially the “top 1%” hog all of the money. (And have been able to continue doing so due in part of the big Bailouts provided by the Federal Government which everyone in the country is paying for out of their tax dollars.)

A war deemed by the media as “Class Warfare” and a war worth fighting by many Americans (and I hope the rest of the world) has begun.

The question is, will this be enough to straighten out those who are public servants to this country or will the message die out? Will Corporations collapse under their own corruption and NOT be bailed out by the Federal Government this time?

My hope…

 I would hope that after keeping up on the protests since day 1 and seeing so many people with different opinions in a movement that is leaderless. A unified message will emerge to re-paint the picture of a way this country is run. Without big money in the Public Servant department, and if a company is on the line of going bankrupt let Capitalism take it's course and the corporation sink to the deepest parts of the Atlantic.      

What is your perspective on the situation? How does this effect or not effect you?
#2

I live in Sacramento and have only heard this protest mentioned once in passing. I honestly have no idea what it’s about, when it started, what’s going on, etc.

So clearly they need to learn to protest more effectively.

#3

Some protests are not very big at all. And at first these protests were being dodged out right by mainstream media. And the mainstream media that hopped on the very slight coverage at first tried their hardest to downplay the protest.

 I agree though, the protesters do need to be more effective. To do that, there needs to be more people protesting outright. The more who are involved and the clearer the message will result in more people getting involved.
#4

It’s going on here in Austin with some groundswell, but it is very much without focus. You can’t protest something as abstract as greed. All of the signs I saw down there were very contradictory. It’s like everyone was protesting something different.

#5

Figures it spread to Austin. Anyway, as far as effectiveness, campaigning against greed is, as a previous poster said, fairly pointless. What do they hope to accomplish? Legislation banning people making lots of money? I understand that vagueness is required to get a ton of followers, but still, this is ridiculous.

#6

It is the belief of many OWSers not to “ban people [from] making lots of money” but to try to lessen the impact of the interests of the top 1% being catered to while the bottom 99% is being subjugated by ever-decreasing real wages, jobs heading overseas, and a general attack on the poor and the middle class by wealthy monied interests. Many see class warfare being perpetrated by the upper class against the lower classes and they’re winning so OWSers are now responding.

They aren’t necessarily attacking “greed” or campaigning against it (though some probably are). However, when that “greed” begins to necessarily harm those economically below them, then they are now responding.

No, the message is not clear, concise, or able to fit onto a bumper sticker. Because the problem does not fit onto a bumper sticker.

Reality is far more complex than that.

#7

You can thank endless government regulations and taxation for that, nobody wants to start a company if it costs them more than they could gain. They don’t want to hire more people when it costs them more than that new person would produce. Companies are not going to stay in the US if they could move to some other country with lower wages. Not to mention big government allows banks to privatize gains but socialize losses (bailing out banks). Big corporations got their hands deep in government and get fancy tax cuts and benefits. Don’t even mention the housing market and education.

Why those people protest against capitalism / greed is beyond me…

Also; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l95dIwOJOm0

#8

The brave protesters of the Occupy Austin movement dwindled to several tens of people today after a light drizzle.

#9

Baloney.

You’re just an endless stream of fictional talking points, aren’t you?

And, given your inability to read for comprehension…

#10

Oh god.

Anything political and everything goes to hell…

It’s like watching a brawl whenever there’s a serious argument.

#11

oh wow

#12

Honestly, Jeanno, your point makes a lot of sense to me and I’m not sure why Daniel’s lashing out about it. I definitely agree that corporate interests have the US government by the balls.

#13

Here’s why I’m “lashing out”. It’s hogwash. It’s sophistry.

Jean claims that government regulation and taxes are the reason for offshoring of jobs and rampant corporate greed that harms people. Except that government regulation has lessened dramatically in recent years and taxes are some of the lowest they’ve been in the history of this country.

Jean further claims that businesses would not hire in this country due to, what, higher wages?

There’s OVER THREE HUNDRED MILLION PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES! Surely Jean doesn’t think that businesses are complete dumbasses. There is a huge market here in the United States.

Jean’s entire argument is bullshit.

#14

I didn’t say that, I said that companies will move abroad if wages are lower in the country they’re moving to.

lol

No, I said they wouldn’t hire new people if those new people wouldn’t produce more then it costs to employ them. I thought this would have been pretty fucking obvious unless you actually want to go bankrupt. For example, why do you think I’m against minimum wage laws? Because it’s cheaper for restaurants to buy a dishwasher then to hire a guy who could wash the dishes. That means one job lost.

Oh you’re such a genius, is that why the US is currently enjoying their superb economy?

u mad

#15

And when the bottom is reached, what then?

Wanna explain that?

What makes you think that it costs more to employ them than they produce?

Minimum wage laws, as I said before, are not the reason that they’d buy a machine over a hiring a person. Even at $1/day wages, it’s still more cost effective to buy a machine that doesn’t need rest or food or anything else a human being requires. Me, when I go to the grocery store, I do not use the self-serve checkout. I go to a cashier because I like the personal service over a machine.

Because of 3 decades of conservative economic policy of destroying the middle class through class warfare. When food stamps are cut, the US suffers. When welfare is cut, the US suffers. When you harm the drivers of the economy and the creators of wealth (the consumers and employees), you harm the US. When you go after government, you harm the country.

What is the first thing that conservatives call for to cut, spending wise? So-called “entitlement” spending which actually helps the country rather than hurt it (like they claim).

Nah man. Just the facts, please.

#16

Not really, no.

#17

Oh no, college students pretending to be angry about people who worked their way up the food chain but refuse to share the powers they earn

#18

Inheritance.

#19

If you want to change you need to do it yourself.

Say that the top 1% percent is out to get these people, why is it that they are telling the top 1% to bring about this change? Nowumsayin’?

#20

I thought not.

Except, not really.

That’s kinda what the OWS is about.

Actually, not quite. There are people that can bring about theis change that aren’t in the 1%.

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.