I'm rather pleased to see the OWS protests as disorganized and not in one voice. Its a sign that its not astroturfed with talking points handed out to everyone; while their message(s) may or may not resonate with everyone, it is more reflective of this countries general lack of consensus on what needs to be done to get on the right path.

lol. I didn't say you had to pay for it.. I didn't. That's what the local Chapters is for:P

hehe, think we left the right path by becoming too industrialized. even though i like all these blinking lights.

you know, someone actually wrote a book arguing that industrialization was actually bad for human society.

There is some irony there mind you.

Even before industrialization, there were forms of democracy and socialism in a sense. The more modern forms of governing (Socialism/Communism/Capitalism/Fascism) are somewhat redefined due to industrialization and Feudalism lost it's effectiveness in terms of running a country. Feudalism simply survives in the running of large corps and organizations. Very effective it is.

with the literacy rate the way it is, i'm pretty sure a book has been written on just about everything. not that i can read that fast.

the main problem is with the people who require payment for using their ideas. what you mean i have to pay them because their grand-daddy thought of an idea before i was born?

usually copyright expires:P

from what i read on gutenberg, it would seem that copyrights can be renewed.

I'm not an expert on that. I think there are limits and it only applies to certain things? No idea...

I think what they are accomplishing, indirectly, is forcing the conversation and exploration of those problems. The people in the streets are not in a position to solve them. The people in a position to change the roots of those problems have connections, jobs in offices, and likely money/stability. More than likely the people able to change the problems are mostly unaware of the problems because their comfortable circumstances don't require them to notice what is going on, and who wants to care about a problem without being compelled?


They are splattered across papers and newscasts. The conversation turns towards the topics they bring up. That conversation forces journalistic discovery of the problems because people become interested. The prostestors have made the story. The media didn't make this story, the media is responding to what is interesting to the people.


Because the financial system causing all these problems is not transparent it takes time for mass media outlets to piece together a story people can understand in order to explain the banking problem. The more exposure people have, the more familiar the topic. Information takes time to spread itself among a population. The attention on the protests helps information proliferate, whether the protestors have a specific goal or not.

When the story begins to be understood by all whose lives are comfortable, those people will become incensed. Information spreads and affects everyone. It's a virus and with the connectivity of our society there is no stopping it. It will force change as the problem clarifies in the minds of individuals.


So this time, now that the public is caught up to the shinanigans of the bankers, there should be pressure for justice against the crooks at MF Global. No more petty fines. Everyone now knows they are criminals. They didn't hurt anyone or steal from anybody's pockets by lying, but they still broke the law/regulations and essentially stole hundreds of millions from customers.

See, before not so many people would have understood enough to know that Jon Corzine committed a crime enough to go to jail. Now the public knows and understands - not just the comfortable people in finance. A good deal thanks to the exposure the protests have produced.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j3xm_tJu-o
that is all.

Oats: I disagree that it is even raising awareness of the issues, since nobody seems to know what exactly the issues are!

Alls we know is that they have problems with "the man", outside of that the message has been very unfocused. Thus I would argue that they aren't actually bringing much attention to new issues at all. Being against "the man" in a general sense has been a cause for ages.

Also, it isn't as though all the issues it COULD be about are exactly being ignored. There is a lot of discussion around them in the academic world, and issues that big in acadamia rarely stop there.

Wait, what? You're telling me the increasing threads about banks/politics (including this one) have somehow evaded your radar?

You're telling me the growing frequency of blogs, editorials, forum discussions, reddit posts, water cooler talk etc. about 'the issues' are not raising the awareness of the general public?

Do I live in some parallel universe where all this is happening or am I totally out to lunch with a skewed view of reality?

My mother is the least political savvy person I've ever met and she had a conversation about 'the issues' with me the other night. To me, if there exists a canary in the coal mine to judge raised awareness, that is it.

I think honestly the biggest thing it's doing is letting "the man" know that "the people" are pissed off at the current state of affairs. Western history does not tend to bode well for "the man" when "the people" get pissed off enough.

OWS has transformed public opinion - Robert Reich

http://www.salon.com/...public_opinion/singleton/

martian, do you have a link where you dont need a subscription?

Google economist richard wolff he has some videos too check this one out http://fora.tv/...rch_video?q=Richard+wolff
And then google boots riley or check you tube

The current economic situation is at least in part the result of:

1. The natural state of business (greed)

2. Government regulating where they shouldn't. (Forcing loans to people who can't afford them.)

3. Government not regulating where they should. (Allowing adjustable rate mortgages.)

4. Consumer's not thinking loans through. (Think interest rates are going to go down on adjustable rate mortgages? Come on, think a little.)


I could add that some industries were already stressed by unsustainable union deals

http://www.pepysdiary.com/p/313.php

hmm, i actually remembered that today might be the 5th. guess i should get some booze, watch "V for Vendetta" and find something to blowup in celebration. hmm, haven't tried making a fart balloon yet. wonder how complicated it can be... hope it doesn't need any fancy attatchments...

Did you just suggest that Canada has fewer regulations?

H4 - My opinions are pretty similar to yours. I had a nice conversation with some buddies last night over a few bottles of Crown so I'll try to remember as best I can...

My arguments were that yes, the system is not perfect, and yes, there are problems that need to be addressed, but any grassroots movement that has ever been successful has had a very specific focus and a very specific goal. I don't know much about Occupy Wall St. but whenever I see interviews with these Occupy TO folks on CBC or CTV not one has been able to clearly articulate exactly what it is that they would like to see changed. They say that the system is broken, but when asked what a better system looks like they're unable to answer.

One buddy of mine then said something that makes sense. These people don't have an answer. They don't know what do to do fix it. They're not politicians, they're not businessmen, they don't have the knowledge or experience. All they're saying is that there is a problem, and they're trying to do whatever it is that they know how to fix it - which in many cases is getting high and dancing around the streets. All they want is for people to consider the possibility of change and they're trying to get that message across the best way they know how.

His argument kind of resonated with me. At first I thought they were a bunch of uneducated and ignorant hipsters getting high and playing tacky sack in St. James Park. They had no focus. They couldn't clearly articulate the problem. They couldn't even begin to think about a solution. They should just shut up and go home. But really how can we expect such a diverse group to have one focus or present one solution? We can't. They're doing all they can to try to get the people who are in a position to brainstorm solutions to recognize the need for having the discussion. We're too comfortable with the current system, and we need to think about ways to fix it. The type of change they're probably looking for will take decades to develop, but at the very least the fact that all these people are protesting in solidarity with this whole occupy movement is a small indication that change is necessary.

TD CEO's opinions are interesting, and make sense:

"My main advice is stick to your guns. When people say, 'You don't have a solution,' say, 'Of course we don't. If there was a solution, don't you think people would be doing it?' To ask the people who occupy Wall Street or Bay Street to have a full answer is absurd. They're doing their job which is to say, 'If you think this [system] is working for everyone, it's not.' Now they have to figure out how not to get captured by special interest and keep the pressure on. We need people to talk about these problems and how we're going to solve them."

http://www.blogto.com/...advice_to_occupy_toronto/

well, i was going to post in this thread but I stepped in a huge pile of stupid before I even read the 5th post, so fluff it

Dibs on the copyright issue, it is the owners life + 70 years here in the United States and I assume it is basically the same everywhere else with pertaining to a limited time period

You only get Country wide protection on any Intellectual Property for a certain period. This makes sure that the owner doesn't monopolize their product (copyright or patent) but at the same time allows them to benefit from their product. You would have to look at one of the International Organizations and Intellectual Property Treaties that were formed.

So in a sense Copyright cannot be renewed. Here in the United States it is automatic Pertaining to the Lanham Act. Patents are good for 20 years (14 years for Plant Patents) and trademarks can be renewed every 10 years indefinitely as long as you meet all the guidelines :)

hmm, i should probably delete the ebooks that i acquired from Project Gutenberg then. but i was under the impression that they researched whether or not it was legal for them to publish it.

and i think an ATM just tried to hold me up. it asked me if i wanted to pay $3 to get my own money. i said No, and ran the heck out of there before it could pull a gun out.

I just want to say I was in a Credit Union before it was cool.

"I disagree that it is even raising awareness of the issues, since nobody seems to know what exactly the issues are!"


You need to watch more Dylan Ratigan. It's complex - and that's the point. OWS can't be reduced to soundbites and dismissed, which is what freaks out the people who run the media. Incidentally, think about it - the corporations that own every media outlet are part of the 1%. You don't think it's a coincidence that the message is not "heard" .. given that every person who has a job at those places is paid to obfuscate?


The system is perpetuated with money in politics, which was solidified by the citizens united decision.
The problems in the system are described by Bill Black's various speeches and essays - the tools for financial regulation exist, but the lack of performance of those regulatory measures allows for the balance sheet lies to continue. Alan Greenspan is the single most complicit person in the world in this regard. Dylan Ratigan is the best media personality to lay all the issues out.

The best two blogs for these issues are MarketTicker and Naked Capitalism. If you want to learn why the mortgage crisis was entirely predictable, read Tanta's posts at Calculated Risk - she used to lead underwriting at a corporate level.

If you want a basic synopsis:

The current system is based on the assumption that all risk can be hedged, and the difference between the initial position's yield/gain (i.e. placement of capital at risk for a gain) and the cost of hedging the risk of the wager to zero can be skimmed from the system risk-free. In modern finance, high-risk "investments" (wagers) with high returns can be taken on without worry because any and all risk can be hedged to zero, even in super high-risk wagers. Since even high-risk positions can be seamlessly hedged to zero, then there is no reason not to borrow to increase the size of your wagers: since you can't lose, then why not? Wagering in risk-free skimming with borrowed or leveraged money is simply rational.
Put these together and we see how a system based on risk-free skimming eventually leverages itself to the point that the slightest disruption can bring down the entire over-leveraged, over-extended system. Why is this so? Every hedge has a counterparty who is supposed to pay off if the initial wager blows up. A system based on risk-free hedging is ultimately a self-organizing system which maximizes return by increasing bet sizes, leveraging/borrowing to near infinity and hedging every hedge as well as every wager.
So what happens when one counterparty (issuer of a hedge) somewhere in the chain runs into trouble? The entire chain collapses. With razor-thin capital to cover any losses, then each link in the chain dissolves into insolvency if their counterparty fails to pay off. This is how we get hundreds of trillions of dollars in "notational" derivatives: every hedged is hedged with another "instrument," "products" are bundled and insured, and so on. The system is based on the principle that risk can be reduced to zero, and so there is no need for capital.


What does this promise of using leveraged capital to skim risk-free fortunes do to the "real economy" of production and investment in plant and technology? It guts it. The risk of industrial Capitalism is real and cannot be hedged away; high-risk investments may blow up or they may return high yields. It literally makes no sense to risk real capital in productive Capitalism when a zero-risk skimming operation can be developed that essentially needs near-zero capital.

What happens when the whole chain blows up and the foundation of debt is impaired? Since the whole system is based on the debt and the income streams devoted to servicing it, the entire edifice collapses when the debt is impaired--debtors default and the system clogs with bad debt, i.e. uncollectable debt. In a transparent Capitalist system, the debt would be written down and all the insolvent borrowers, lenders and counterparties would be wiped out. But the political corruption that enabled modern finance to poison the American economy and culture has stopped that cleansing from occurring.

too many people were allowed to take on debt that they weren't able to pay back?

Not that I disagree on sticking it to the man, but wasn't the whole point of that V thing, some lunatic trying to overthrow the govt. in order to install a regime?

a monster who was created from a man via biological experimentation decided to seek revenge on the people who were in charge of the laboratory.

kinda goofy come to think of it. follows the same age old messiah theme. the people are too stupid to think for themselves without somebody strong to lead

Great read unsympathetic. Ty, for mentioning that the mainstream media is owned by the 1% (rupert murdoch was caught in some voicemail hacking ish and bribery recently) . have you heard of this richard wolff, marxist economist?

It's amusing as most of the people doing these protests have no idea what it's about. I'm not saying I do, but it seemed like a bunch of bandwagon people going "banks are evil take your money out."