Occupy Wall Street. Police vs people in NY.

Pages

A protest of some kind is/was being held in NY. Things seem to have gone wrong. I don't know all of the circumstances, but this isn't cool:

https://occupywallst.org/

Wow.. just.. wow. For those of you who have never been in the general vicinity of mace exposure I assure you the reaction of these women is not being over-dramatized.

It's hard to tell from that video what exactly happened so I am not going to be so eager to rush to judgement. I do find it ironic that hipsters from NYC using their iPhones are out there marching for social justice.

People from NYC aren't generally into social justice?

The protest of occupying Wall Street has been going on for a week and is getting larger.

The media has provided little coverage of the protest, which are focused on the flourishing of Wall Street while Main Street suffers.

What coverage has been provided ends up with junk like this:

One day, a trader on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, Adam Sarzen, a decade or so older than many of the protesters, came to Zuccotti Park seemingly just to shake his head. “Look at these kids, sitting here with their Apple computers,” he said. “Apple, one of the biggest monopolies in the world. It trades at $400 a share. Do they even know that?”

Ah, yes. The platitudes of the Wall Street insiders who gave us such wonderful things as credit default swaps.

I don't see the irony. Demanding responsibility and change is not the same as wanting to abolish corporations.

It's easy enough to see that an office pepper-sprayed a crowd of women who were already held behind a police fence. I did not see the women doing anything besides shouting.

Phoenix Rev wrote:

The protest of occupying Wall Street has been going on for a week and is getting larger.

The media has provided little coverage of the protest, which are focused on the flourishing of Wall Street while Main Street suffers.

What coverage has been provided ends up with junk like this:

One day, a trader on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, Adam Sarzen, a decade or so older than many of the protesters, came to Zuccotti Park seemingly just to shake his head. “Look at these kids, sitting here with their Apple computers,” he said. “Apple, one of the biggest monopolies in the world. It trades at $400 a share. Do they even know that?”

Ah, yes. The platitudes of the Wall Street insiders who gave us such wonderful things as credit default swaps.

Hang on.. what the hell does Apple have a monopoly in?

Tanglebones wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:

The protest of occupying Wall Street has been going on for a week and is getting larger.

The media has provided little coverage of the protest, which are focused on the flourishing of Wall Street while Main Street suffers.

What coverage has been provided ends up with junk like this:

One day, a trader on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, Adam Sarzen, a decade or so older than many of the protesters, came to Zuccotti Park seemingly just to shake his head. “Look at these kids, sitting here with their Apple computers,” he said. “Apple, one of the biggest monopolies in the world. It trades at $400 a share. Do they even know that?”

Ah, yes. The platitudes of the Wall Street insiders who gave us such wonderful things as credit default swaps.

Hang on.. what the hell does Apple have a monopoly in?

Apple products.

These don't seem to be small protests.

IMAGE(http://s1.proxy05.twitpic.com/photos/large/407565740.jpg)
IMAGE(http://s1.proxy03.twitpic.com/photos/large/404658157.jpg)

The protests are being broadcasted live here: http://t.co/6o2qFM3L

Those who are interested in more information can check out these links.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/articl...
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber...
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukp...
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/20...

At the risk of sounding like a complete jackass, pictures of people on Wall Street don't really immediately make me think the protest is large or small. As someone who is literally never been to New York, I can't tell if that's all human traffic from regular activity or not. I'm not trying to dismiss it, I'm just asking if it's a fair assumption that all of those folks are in the protest. I honestly don't know.

Tanglebones wrote:

Hang on.. what the hell does Apple have a monopoly in?

That was my question too. I am no fan of Apple whatsoever but monopoly? Definitely not.

Parallax Abstraction wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:

Hang on.. what the hell does Apple have a monopoly in?

That was my question too. I am no fan of Apple whatsoever but monopoly? Definitely not.

Not to make this thread about Apple, but it can be argued that their vertical integration strategies allow them to abuse their market share where they dominate and engage in anti-competitive practices. Much like Microsoft has done.

If you want to start another thread about that, I'd love to join. I'm taking an IT Policy and Ethics course where this is frequently brought up as a topic of conversation. Could stand to increase my knowledge and test my preconceptions on the matter.

Olberman talks about the media blackout.

I'll start this post by absolutely supporting people's right to protest things - I certainly support the right of the protesters to gather, they shouldn't be maced or beat up by cops, etc.

However, as someone who happens to actually work on Wall St, I have to say the reasoning behind the protests seem... misguided, at best. From what I can tell, this is to draw attention to the (overly simplistic) "wall street soars while main street crashes" theme, with the subprime fiasco as the smoking gun. Or just generally, the idea that "the people who got us here" should still be getting paid while lots of people are out of work.

First, if the goal is to seriously disrupt market or financial operations, that's a fool's errand. Even if the NYSE gets nuked off the planet, there's enough DR infrastructure that the markets would continue to run. To be honest, besides going through a security checkpoint, the main affect on my day-to-day so far is that my favorite Korean taco truck can't make it through. If the goal is to make the subprime financial guys feels shame, well, of the top 40 financial companies, only like 2-3 are still headquartered physically close to Wall St. Go up to midtown, you'll catch more bankers.

But okay, let's assume Wall St. is a symbolic target. You're *still* barking up the wrong tree. If your beef is that corporations pay too little in taxes, go to Washington. If your beef is that the mortgage market was/is too lightly regulated, go to Washington. If you think CEOs should only be paid ten times the amount of their lowest paid employee... go to Washington. Virtually every solution to the problem these people are pointing out is in the grasp of the federal government - expecting corporations to solve this is like Mothers Against Drunk Driving picketing local random bars. Good luck, but your energy is better spent elsewhere.

Now, as for *why* a group of liberals are marching on wall st instead of pennsylvania ave, I'll leave as an exercise for the reader

NormanTheIntern wrote:

But okay, let's assume Wall St. is a symbolic target. You're *still* barking up the wrong tree. If your beef is that corporations pay too little in taxes, go to Washington. If your beef is that the mortgage market was/is too lightly regulated, go to Washington. If you think CEOs should only be paid ten times the amount of their lowest paid employee... go to Washington. Virtually every solution to the problem these people are pointing out is in the grasp of the federal government - expecting corporations to solve this is like Mothers Against Drunk Driving picketing local random bars. Good luck, but your energy is better spent elsewhere.

Now, as for *why* a group of liberals are marching on wall st instead of pennsylvania ave, I'll leave as an exercise for the reader :)

Drat, I came here to say this.

Good news, Norman. They are!

If you look at a map of the White House compound, you'll see that Pennsylvania Ave is closed immediately in front, in the middle of the compound. This is prime protesting real estate, and someone is protesting something there basically every day. If you include the anti-nuclear war people, someone has been protesting there 24 hrs a day, seven days a week since 1981. (They throw them out every now and then for security reasons.) In general, there's someone protesting the White House for something all of the time, except for nights(this is a security issue, but the anti-nukes people have been there since before it went into play).

To get a protest permit you basically just need to pick a day that no one else has already signed up for. Again, security issue. And then you yell your slogans, wave your signs, and tell the world that whatever it is you're against is ruining the world. The only consistent times no one's there is when the pres. is away or when the weather is really bad. Because you may think {blank} is ruining the world, but you don't think it seriously enough to stand in freezing rain over it. And you know what? Nobody cares.

With a little Googling you can get a schedule of who's protesting when. So don't worry. The libs/hippies/whoever taking over Wall Street are probably on the rotation.

I'm not quite sure how you get from "those police just assaulted peaceful protesters" to "well actually the protest is a bit misguided".

I don't care if they were protesting the faked moonlanding. Haul those police off in chains.

"Because we don't like them and they're wrong" is no justification to harm someone, especially from a position of authority. I would've expected more from the US police in (what I can tell is) a peaceful demonstration.

Spraying tear gas or pepper spray at a peaceful protest is criminal. I'm pretty sure they got the right to protest but the protest in the video looks kinda small and weak.

If they want something done they need to organize something a little bigger. We had a huge protest movement in Israel and at one point about 8% of the adult population were demonstrating in the same time. The government had to find a way to get it off their back so they formed the Trajtenberg Committee to promote social and economic reforms.

Many macro economists point out that our economy suffers from lack of competition and the power large corporation has to affect government in both legal and illegal means. Yaron Zelicha calls it "wealth,government,newspaper" ( it rhymes in Hebrew). His point of view is that the big businesses are taking over the markets , they cut production raise prices, then cut jobs in the process and then lower wages to raise profits(if you are willing to work for less you stay) and all of this lower consumer spending which stagnate the local economy and lower tax income.

The US market has other issues but he generally said that small businesses are the fastest job creators . In Israel there is also a problem that big business avoid taxes by signing deals with the government. This means that more weight of the taxes fall on the workers.

Our major problem is the fact we are not protesting. Government and big business rob us blind and we think that if government help us take care of our children we can work harder and bring more bread home. The protestors managed to promote the influence of the smarter people to overcome their fear of talking against big business .

There is currently a lot of trouble stirring up due to the economic conditions in the country. On the outside we look like a prosperous country but the middle class and lower class are not enjoying any of the fruits. The protestors found a way to enable people to protest by things than can do in every day life . The Cottage cheese boycott(separate movement) turned into the Tnuva boycott( you can see its effect when buying groceries) . Tnuva got so much heat now that yesterday the Israel Anti trust commission raided their offices and investigated its managers claiming it was hiding information . The press is also revealing a lot of information about the economic exploits like pyramid holding companies which exert a lot of influence with very little capital investment.

If that protest movement wants results it should engage in a more effective methods to rallying the public. That protest looks really sad especially when you consider the population of NYC.

jlaakso wrote:

"Because we don't like them and they're wrong" is no justification to harm someone, especially from a position of authority.

Obviously I agree because that's literally the first sentence of my post.

Norman - you call this misguided at best? Not Wall Street deregulation? It was Wall Street influenced deregulation that caused the recession and now is causing the inept recovery/double dip. Why don't you use your influence to fix things? Don't you see them as broken?

Maq wrote:

I'm not quite sure how you get from "those police just assaulted peaceful protesters" to "well actually the protest is a bit misguided".

I don't care if they were protesting the faked moonlanding. Haul those police off in chains.

Bingo!

NormanTheIntern wrote:

But okay, let's assume Wall St. is a symbolic target. You're *still* barking up the wrong tree. If your beef is that corporations pay too little in taxes, go to Washington. If your beef is that the mortgage market was/is too lightly regulated, go to Washington. If you think CEOs should only be paid ten times the amount of their lowest paid employee... go to Washington. Virtually every solution to the problem these people are pointing out is in the grasp of the federal government - expecting corporations to solve this is like Mothers Against Drunk Driving picketing local random bars. Good luck, but your energy is better spent elsewhere.

Now, as for *why* a group of liberals are marching on wall st instead of pennsylvania ave, I'll leave as an exercise for the reader :)

I think you can put enough pressure on Wall Street that you can guilt them into accepting Buffet's plan. They need to feel public scorn, and that is what these protests will do, if the media ever gets around to covering them.

These protests won't do anything to promote that. A bunch of liberal white kids that have no problem with "evil corporations" as long as they make products they like aren't going to convince anyone of anything. Apple uses unorganized labour in China, pays them very poorly, uses suppliers with spotty trackrecords AT BEST when it comes to workers rights, squeezers both suppliers and distributors to get beneficial agreements that do not benefit the supplier, distributor or consumer but only Apple. So, when I see them using their iPhone 4 to record this video which we have no context for why it happened just this one video, forgive me if I'm not so willing to jump on a policemans back. Also, has anyone else noticed how white these protests are? Hipsters on parade.

Ulairi wrote:

These protests won't do anything to promote that. A bunch of liberal white kids that have no problem with "evil corporations" as long as they make products they like aren't going to convince anyone of anything. Apple uses unorganized labour in China, pays them very poorly, uses suppliers with spotty trackrecords AT BEST when it comes to workers rights, squeezers both suppliers and distributors to get beneficial agreements that do not benefit the supplier, distributor or consumer but only Apple. So, when I see them using their iPhone 4 to record this video which we have no context for why it happened just this one video, forgive me if I'm not so willing to jump on a policemans back. Also, has anyone else noticed how white these protests are? Hipsters on parade.

And this explains why they should target Washington, how?

I didn't say they were right, or even making the impression they want. I just said that you can make a case that protesting Wall Street is a better strategy than protesting Washington.

Arguing red herrings is kind of foolish. You might even look as foolish as the trader calling apple a monopoly.

I'm very confused. The pepper-spraying is justified because it was captured by an iPhone? Wall Street only supports devices that are made with ethical practices? The chains of logic here seem tortuous at best.

SpacePPoliceman wrote:

I'm very confused. The pepper-spraying is justified because it was captured by an iPhone? Wall Street only supports devices that are made with ethical practices? The chains of logic here seem tortuous at best.

No. We do not know why she was pepper sprayed. All we know is that we got this video that shows no context. I'm not willing to jump on the back of a police officer and on the side of some neck bearded hipsters without an investigation.

Ulairi wrote:
SpacePPoliceman wrote:

I'm very confused. The pepper-spraying is justified because it was captured by an iPhone? Wall Street only supports devices that are made with ethical practices? The chains of logic here seem tortuous at best.

No. We do not know why she was pepper sprayed. All we know is that we got this video that shows no context. I'm not willing to jump on the back of a police officer and on the side of some neck bearded hipsters without an investigation.

Really? You think the hipster said something really mean?

Ulairi wrote:
SpacePPoliceman wrote:

I'm very confused. The pepper-spraying is justified because it was captured by an iPhone? Wall Street only supports devices that are made with ethical practices? The chains of logic here seem tortuous at best.

No. We do not know why she was pepper sprayed. All we know is that we got this video that shows no context. I'm not willing to jump on the back of a police officer and on the side of some neck bearded hipsters without an investigation.

Well that's awfully fair-minded of you, and, based on your attitude, you're clearly open to whatever the results may be.

Jayhawker wrote:
Ulairi wrote:
SpacePPoliceman wrote:

I'm very confused. The pepper-spraying is justified because it was captured by an iPhone? Wall Street only supports devices that are made with ethical practices? The chains of logic here seem tortuous at best.

No. We do not know why she was pepper sprayed. All we know is that we got this video that shows no context. I'm not willing to jump on the back of a police officer and on the side of some neck bearded hipsters without an investigation.

Really? You think the hipster said something really mean?

I don't know what happened. I am waiting for the investigation and if the police offer did something wrong he should be punished accordingly. I'm not so willing to jump on to his back from this video.

SpacePPoliceman wrote:

I'm very confused. The pepper-spraying is justified because it was captured by an iPhone? Wall Street only supports devices that are made with ethical practices? The chains of logic here seem tortuous at best.

At about 17-18 seconds in, on the left-hand-side of the video of the OP, you can see that a post or something is knocked over or thrown from from the crowd towards the line of police officers. It looks to me like the pepper spray is aimed towards people farther back than the view of the cameraphone, and these people happened to get caught in the spray.

(Note, not making judgement call on whether it was justified or not. We simply don't have enough info on what is being said, nor is the view provided by the cameraphone good enough to get an idea of the mood/actions of people outside of the film.)

Jayhawker wrote:

Really? You think the hipster said something really mean?

Off the top of my head (and I want to be clear that i have no idea what could have been said or not), someone in the crowd that was sprayed could have yelled "get them" or "push past the barricade!"

They should have brought more teabags and less Apple products if they wanted less police harassment.

Pages