Horror Novelist Stephen King Tells The 1% To Stop Being Selfish Pricks
Preach it, Stevie. Tell it like it is, my main man.
You Can’t Leave Occupy Wall Street by Max Bean
My last post was called “ Why I came to Occupy Wall Street and Why I Left,” and I caught a lot of grief from my readers for not giving them what the title promised: I explained why I came to OWS — that’s the easy part — but I didn’t really say why I left. It’s going to take a whole series of posts to properly explain why I stopped working on the movement, but I think it’ll help ease the suspense if I write a few words about what it even means to “leave” Occupy Wall Street. That verb, I’ll be the first to admit, was an inappropriate one.
My first month at OWS was characterized by a wild optimism, a hope unleashed. I lived in a state of constant excitement, running on so much adrenaline I would forget to eat and dropped ten pounds in two weeks. I was surrounded by dozens of others in the same state of mind. I remember one day in late October, crossing Broadway at Exchange Place, wolfing down some street food and barely tasting it, and some girl I’d never met crossing in the other direction said to me, “That’s how you know an Occupy Wall Street protestor: He’s trying to eat lunch while running through the street.” And it was true: We were all running around like maniacs, working our hearts out, because finally we’d found something worth working our hearts out for.
Like many in my generation, it seems, I had waited my whole life for a social movement whose dimensions and ambitions were commensurate with the shortcomings I saw in the world around me. By now, I am convinced that OWS is not that movement. Maybe it will grow into that movement, or maybe that movement will grow out of it. Then again, maybe that movement will never come. But this rise and fall of hope has left me and so many others not less hopeful, but more. It has been suggested that the excitement generated by Obama’s election and dashed by his presidency was re-channeled into the Occupy movement; and so many of us who have stepped back from the movement in recent weeks have departed only to search for a better movement — or else to build one. The shroud of despair, it seems, once torn, is not quickly mended.
Source: The Huffington Post
One important lesson on economics from someone who’s picked up on a few things…
Put basically: If they’re offering it to plebes like you, the bubble is about to burst.
There are numerous economic bubbles in past and present. The stock bubble. The internet bubble. The housing bubble. The quantum chocolate bubble. Okay, I just wish there was a quantum chocolate bubble…
The point is, bubbles are just like pyramid schemes. Sooner or later, they’re going to run out of people to sell it to and the whole shebang is going to fall on top of whoever’s stuck on the bottom.
That usually means the “sucker” portion of the common throng. The people who believe they’re going to get rich by investing everything they own on a shanty-house in BF-nowhere that the bank says is worth tons and that said people can’t possibly repay inside of ten lifetimes.
The people who genuinely believe that sending a letter to five friends will result in a vast fortune arriving to them by mail.
The people who really think that some wealthy person in Nigeria [or wherever] is going to launder their millions through a plebe’s bank account.
And the people who think pyramid schemes really, really work.
Let me run through some math. Person A decides to start a little scheme selling otherwise worthless pieces of paper as part of a pyramid scheme. He sells to ten people and gives instructions to each to sell to ten more. They remove their names once they’re at the top of a list of ten people.
On the first iteration [the first sale] there are 11 people in the loop.
Second iteration, 111 have bought in
Third, 1111.
Fourth, 11111. Fifth 111111. By the sixth iteration, you’ve reached over a million people. By the ninth, one billion.
There are about sixty billion people on this earth, the last time I checked. At that rate, you’re going to run out of suckers. And the last people to buy in are always the first to cop the consequences of falling for it.
Same principle with [Mad-Lib here] bubbles. The richest people get hold of said maguffin first, and sell it at inflated prices to those lower in the economic scale as an investment opportunity. Increased demand equals increased value, and a few of the lower echelon sell it down, again at an increased price, to those slightly beneath them.
Lather, rinse and repeat for a few iterations and Joe Schlubb and his neighbours are all desperately trying to sign you on to Maguffin Inc.
Only the skeptics can survive bubbles with their fundings intact. Them, or the people who started it in the first place.
If you’re at a sales pitch and they mention the wealthy’s secrets to getting rich, leave. That’s a sure sign you’re about to be bubbled.
RE: I give up
Not a sentiment I am proud of, but one that is my reality. I’ve been struggling for some time with the idea of seeking change in a world where I often feel so powerless and helpless. I’m surrounded by maddening and disheartening injustice that I am helpless to change. I am…
“And I can tell you this much - that isn’t a problem of Occupy. That is a problem of humanity.”
I actually stopped reading there.
OWS failed and has been failing SINCE DAY 1 not because humanity is imperfect but because the movement claimed to be something it NEVER was. It claimed to be David taking on Goliath, it claimed to fight injustice and stand for the oppressed, which it never did. Despite claims that the movement is headless, it was and still is unofficially led by cis white middle-class men, these are the people who started the first protests. All the attempts to GENUINELY take into consideration the plight of PoC, women, and queers were either ignored or abruptly shut down. We told you time and time again, yet you refuse to listen, you were only interested in unity in YOUR terms. Without unity, OWS is doomed to failure
Let me rephrase. That isn’t a problem specific to Occupy. I would ask you what the social movement groups you do support have done for the oppressed in China, India, tribes in Central and South America? I ask that not to question your integrity or willingness to help those who are oppressed, but to illustrate that there will always be a group that goes ignored (which is NOT to say that is okay). The reason for this goes beyond Occupy. I feel this is a problem with humanity. It is our myopic, self-serving nature as a species. We serve and stand by the issues we identify with.
Would you really have wanted Occupy to speak for PoC? For the most part I have found that it has been an unwelcome intrusion. Black people specifically make up a small % of the US American 99%, so by definition, if Occupy was to represent the 99%, black people would be out numbered and buried in the voices. Hence the problem of living as a minority here in the states and in many countries. Those in the minority feel they continually go unheard, largely due to prejudice and also largely due to statistical reality of being a minority (fewer voices are harder to hear). So how do you get heard? By asking other PoC and whites to stand beside you. On issues specific to black people, white people should take a back seat. Those in the majority have no right to champion the causes of those in the minority. Granted, many who do are not doing so to control poC or overpower PoC - their motives are often well-meaning, but unwelcomed or misplaced.
But what of economic inequality and other issues that affect and oppress all colors of people (which is what Occupy was all about)? What would you have Occupy do? What is the proper way for white activists to approach social and economic issues that affect them as well as PoC? This is a genuine question and I am genuinely listening.
”We told you time and time again, yet you refuse to listen, you were only interested in unity in YOUR terms.”
Because I write under the name Occupy, you presume I am all of those things. In fact, I am a mixed-race, queer, disabled, lower class female.
Occupy was an idea. An idea “co-opted” by people who make a life out of activism. Many of whom being more concerned with arguing over proper terminologies and going by the book of Marxist ideology than about truly understanding what it means to be oppressed and helping those who are. The real 99% are your average citizens (yes some of them white who are poor, dumb, scared and/or oppressed), all people who feel trapped and scared and tired. The thousands of people who went to the street in NYC and Oakland, those are your Occupiers, that is what this was really about, who it was about. It was Occupy the Hood, it was Occupy Homes, it was Occupy Banks, it is not and will never be (unless we redefine it to be) just a bunch of cis white male pretentious elitist racists arguing over proper use of the term “liberal”. I am not Occupy, no one person or one group is Occupy. Therefore the actions of some are not the actions of all. I have never once disregarded the opinions of PoC or other minorities, nor do I accept anyone who does and claims to speak for Occupy.
I’m not defending Occupy. “Occupy” doesn’t matter. Call it whatever you want, I don’t care about brand name and frankly no one should. Prior to Occupy, I have never affiliated myself with any group or movement. For me, Occupy served as an umbrella that heretofore happened to encompass many social issues I supported and changes I wished to see happen. I still support those issues and those are still the changes I wish to see happen. Nothing has changed. All that has changed is the perception of what Occupy stands for or failed to accomplish or failed to represent.
Do we take Occupy back and define it by our terms, by the terms we all believed Occupy to originally stand for or do we toss it aside and go back to square one? What is the most productive way forward?
Source: enlighteningnews
Matt Taibi: Another Hidden Bailout: Helping Wall Street Collect Your Rent.
Here’s yet another form of hidden bailout the federal government doles out to our big banks, without the public having much of a clue.
This is from the WSJ this morning:
Some of the biggest names on Wall Street are lining up to become landlords to cash-strapped Americans by bidding on pools of foreclosed properties being sold by Fannie Mae…
While the current approach of selling homes one-by-one has its own high costs and is sometimes inefficient, selling properties in bulk to large investors could require Fannie Mae to sell at a big discount, leading to larger initial costs.
In con artistry parlance, they call this the “reload.” That’s when you hit the same mark twice – typically with a second scam designed to “fix” the damage caused by the first scam. Someone robs your house, then comes by the next day and sells you a fancy alarm system, that’s the reload.
In this case, banks pumped up the real estate market by creating huge volumes of subprime loans, then dumped a lot of them on, among others, Fannie and Freddie, the ever-ready enthusiastic state customer. Now the loans have crashed in value, yet the GSEs (Government Sponsored Enterprises) are still out there feeding the banks money through two continuous bailouts.
Congratulations, America, your quasi-governmental housing entity is about to subcontract out mass-landlording/slumlording jobs to the likes of John Paulson and Warren Buffett…
OWS Marchers Demand Police Commissioner's Resignation
After police arrested dozens of Occupy Wall Street participants over the weekend, protestors marched to New York City Police Department headquarters today to demand the resignation of Police Commissioner Ray Kelly.
Members of the Occupy Wall Street movement marched from Foley Square to One Police Plaza, the Lower Manhattan headquarters of the NYPD.
Besides wanting Kelly to resign, the demonstrators also sounded off about the arrests of about 73 people who clashed with police at Zuccotti Park in Lower Manhattan last weekend.
Police say they cleared Zuccotti because protestors were breaking park rules, but some protestors say those arrested were mistreated and attacked by police.
“On Saturday night, as I simply sat in a park, I was violently arrested with my friends and watched as blood-thirsty cops stomped on their faces, knelt on their necks, pulled them by their hair and slammed them into windows,” said Occupy Wall Street protestor Jen Waller.
(via mochente)
Source: fuckyeahmarxismleninism
Occupy and “The American Spring”: Time for Occupy To Blossom?
National Occupation of Washington, DC Will Bring Occupiers Together to Share Experiences, Educate Each Other and Build an Independent Movement to Shift Power from Concentrated Wealth
Many in the corporate media like to think the Occupy is over, but those of us involved know better. We do not rely on the corporate media to validate the work of Occupy, we see it in our communities. And, we know to look to our own media for accurate information. The Occupied Wall Street Journal reports on the actions of the Occupy, it’s weekly “Reports from the Front Lines” is something many of us look forward to so we can see the movement taking action across the country.
Another visible presence of Occupy will be evident this spring in Washington, DC when the National Occupation of Washington, DC begins on March 30th. The event, which will continue through the month of April, is being organized by members of dozens of occupies from around the country. Twenty-five General Assemblies have passed statements of solidarity for this national occupy event.
NOW DC begins with a lot of activity. On the first day, Occupy the EPA, will bring people together to protect the planet for a sustainable future. It will feature Helen Caldicott, a pediatrician nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, known for her anti-nuclear activism, Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo an EPA whistleblower and Margaret Flowers, also a pediatrician, noted for her advocacy for single payer health care among others. The march will include a pack of alpaca’s, a giant Earth and a giant polar bear puppet.
The weekend of March 31st and April 1st includes a two day “Bail Out America” direct action training organized by the Backbone Campaign which will provide information on strategies and tactics and developing creative actions that advance the causes of Occupy. Also that weekend will be the Occupation of the Department of Education, which will include teach-ins about how to end high stakes testing which is destroying schools and being used as a tool to privatize education. Finally, that weekend will include trainings for peace keepers who will help to ensure NOW DC remains non-violent in its challenges to the Washington, DC power structure.
Source: globalresearch.ca
Re: Teacher Salaries
taqwcorekid replied to your photo: Let’s be honest, teachers are glorified…
are you fucking serious! this country is one of the stupidest ever and you really want to take money out of education!? are you fucking serious? why do you think theres so many kids doing drugs and killing each other? if youwanted to REFORM teaching so that teachers got paid MORE when they produce good results and put better teachers in bad schools we would not have nearly as much problems. but cutting how teachers trully meager salaries are only going to drive otherwise willing and good dedicated teachers away fromthe profession alltogether. my mother is a teacher and you have no idea how many UNPAID hours of work she puts in making entire lesson plans, grading hundreds of papers, and going to meetings, and not to mention tutoringstudents. her day may TECHNICALLY end at 2:30 but she still has to go home and do work somtimes only getting four hours of proper sleep not to mention cooking and raise me and my family. not counting the housework all this is STILL almost equal to the amount of paid work hours she puts in. SO THE LAST THING WE NEED TO DO IS CUT TEACHERS SALARIES IF ANY THING THEY SHOULD BE RAISED!!. WHY NOT BASEBALL PLAYERS. OR OUR FUCKING MILITARY BUDGET! PLEASE DON’T BE STUPID BY TREATING POORLY ONE OF THE FEW GROUPS OF PEOPLE THAT CAN ACTUALLY HELP US!
I urge you to re-read the graphic. It is a satire playing on the absurdity of paying teachers so little. It approaches the topic from the logic of someone who does not value the work and efforts of teachers the way that you or I do. From that perspective, the logic goes to show that, even if we paid teachers at the rates we pay babysitters (each parent paying $19.50/day/child, for a classroom of 30, teachers would make over $100,000/year, twice what they currently make). The conclusion drawn is that teachers are paid half as well as we pay our babysitters or nannies for daycare service; and teachers are not only watching your children, but responsible for educating them. I’m Occupy Online…cutting teacher pay is in the same goal bucket as paying CEO’s bigger bonuses for schmoozing, pushing paper, and making callous, exploitative decisions.
The graphic is playing on absurdities ;)
![The 2nd Circuit Slams Occupy Wall Street ‘Hero’ Judge Rakoff
By MASSIMO CALABRESI
Remember how last fall that “heroic” Manhattan-based U.S. district court judge Jed Rakoff “ripped the SEC a new one” by blocking a massive settlement the agency had proposed with Citigroup for the bank’s allegedly knowing and fraudulent acts in the run-up to the great recession? At the time of Rakoff’s decision last November, I wrote:
When U.S. district judge Jed Rakoff rejected a $285 million settlement between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Citigroup on Nov. 28, he effectively marched out of the federal courthouse on Foley Square and took his place as the most powerful protester in Zuccotti Park. In a blunt court order, Rakoff broke with decades of judicial deference to the feds and suggested that regulators were enabling Wall Street’s efforts to hide allegedly “knowing and fraudulent” acts from the public. While the decision’s long-term effects depend on the case’s future in the courts, it could immediately impose new standards of accountability and disclosure on an often too cozy system of financial oversight.
It turns out that whole “breaking with decades of judicial deference” thing is a problem, legally speaking. On Thursday, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees district courts in New York, Connecticut and Vermont, ripped Rakoff a new one, staying his ruling and suggesting that his decision misunderstood their previous rulings, overstepped his authority to challenge regulators and made unwarranted assumptions about what had actually happened in the case. The stay can be found here (pdf). Reports the New York Law Journal:
The Second Circuit said Judge Rakoff (See Profile) failed to show proper deference to the SEC’s judgment that the settlement of fraud claims stemming from the sale of mortgage-backed securities was not against the public interest… [and] stayed Judge Rakoff’s ruling ordering a trial in the case while the circuit considers appeals by both the SEC and Citigroup. The panel said both parties showed they would probably prevail in their challenges to Judge Rakoff’s decision… [and said Rakoff] “prejudges the fact that Citigroup had in fact misled investors.”… “[Further Rakoff] does not appear to have given deference to the SEC’s judgment on wholly discretionary matters of policy,” the circuit said [and]… “misinterpreted” certain rulings in holding it was against the public interest to approve a settlement in which Citigroup made no admission of liability, when in fact, those rulings “stand for the proposition that when a court orders injunctive relief, it should insure that injunction does not cause harm to the public interest.”… Finally, the court said it had “no reason to doubt” the SEC claim that the settlement was in the public interest…
Robert Khuzami, director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement, said in a statement, “We are pleased that the appeals court found ‘no reason to doubt’ the SEC’s view that the settlement ordering Citigroup to return $285 million to harmed investors and adopt business reforms is in the public interest. As we have said consistently, we agree to settlements when the terms reflect what we reasonably believe we could obtain if we prevailed at trial, without the risk of delay and uncertainty that comes with litigation. Equally important, this settlement approach preserves resources that we can use to stop other frauds and protect other victims.
So will Rakoff’s decision still compel higher standards of disclosure by banks making settlements with the SEC? Maybe. This win by the SEC will receive a lot less attention than the initial Rakoff ruling, even though the latter is clearly going to be reversed. So perhaps Rakoff’s goal of attracting attention to the SEC’s deal making will turn out to have been an end in itself.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0zssg5xti1r4gdqgo1_1280.jpg)
The 2nd Circuit Slams Occupy Wall Street ‘Hero’ Judge Rakoff
Remember how last fall that “heroic” Manhattan-based U.S. district court judge Jed Rakoff “ripped the SEC a new one” by blocking a massive settlement the agency had proposed with Citigroup for the bank’s allegedly knowing and fraudulent acts in the run-up to the great recession? At the time of Rakoff’s decision last November, I wrote:
When U.S. district judge Jed Rakoff rejected a $285 million settlement between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Citigroup on Nov. 28, he effectively marched out of the federal courthouse on Foley Square and took his place as the most powerful protester in Zuccotti Park. In a blunt court order, Rakoff broke with decades of judicial deference to the feds and suggested that regulators were enabling Wall Street’s efforts to hide allegedly “knowing and fraudulent” acts from the public. While the decision’s long-term effects depend on the case’s future in the courts, it could immediately impose new standards of accountability and disclosure on an often too cozy system of financial oversight.
It turns out that whole “breaking with decades of judicial deference” thing is a problem, legally speaking. On Thursday, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees district courts in New York, Connecticut and Vermont, ripped Rakoff a new one, staying his ruling and suggesting that his decision misunderstood their previous rulings, overstepped his authority to challenge regulators and made unwarranted assumptions about what had actually happened in the case. The stay can be found here (pdf). Reports the New York Law Journal:
The Second Circuit said Judge Rakoff (See Profile) failed to show proper deference to the SEC’s judgment that the settlement of fraud claims stemming from the sale of mortgage-backed securities was not against the public interest… [and] stayed Judge Rakoff’s ruling ordering a trial in the case while the circuit considers appeals by both the SEC and Citigroup. The panel said both parties showed they would probably prevail in their challenges to Judge Rakoff’s decision… [and said Rakoff] “prejudges the fact that Citigroup had in fact misled investors.”… “[Further Rakoff] does not appear to have given deference to the SEC’s judgment on wholly discretionary matters of policy,” the circuit said [and]… “misinterpreted” certain rulings in holding it was against the public interest to approve a settlement in which Citigroup made no admission of liability, when in fact, those rulings “stand for the proposition that when a court orders injunctive relief, it should insure that injunction does not cause harm to the public interest.”… Finally, the court said it had “no reason to doubt” the SEC claim that the settlement was in the public interest…
Robert Khuzami, director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement, said in a statement, “We are pleased that the appeals court found ‘no reason to doubt’ the SEC’s view that the settlement ordering Citigroup to return $285 million to harmed investors and adopt business reforms is in the public interest. As we have said consistently, we agree to settlements when the terms reflect what we reasonably believe we could obtain if we prevailed at trial, without the risk of delay and uncertainty that comes with litigation. Equally important, this settlement approach preserves resources that we can use to stop other frauds and protect other victims.
So will Rakoff’s decision still compel higher standards of disclosure by banks making settlements with the SEC? Maybe. This win by the SEC will receive a lot less attention than the initial Rakoff ruling, even though the latter is clearly going to be reversed. So perhaps Rakoff’s goal of attracting attention to the SEC’s deal making will turn out to have been an end in itself.
Source: TIME
Inquiries on Violence at Occupy Protests Moving Slowly
More than four months after an Occupy demonstration shut down the Port of Oakland and devolved into violence, at least nine separate investigations into the ways police officers dealt with the protests in Oakland and on University of California campuses in Davis and Berkeley remain unresolved.
Many of the investigations have been delayed for reasons that range from a court challenge to the difficulty of scheduling meetings with college students. And while people on both sides of the Occupy issue applaud the efforts, experts said the sheer number of investigations could be counterproductive.
There is a danger that excessive investigation “can actually lead to greater obfuscation, because no one understands what each investigation is doing,” said Linda Lye, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, which is representing protesters in lawsuits against Oakland and U.C. Davis. “Delay is always a concern, because it can lead to diminished public interest and distraction.”
At U.C. Davis, where a campus policeman pepper-sprayed a group of seated students and others on Nov. 18, a task force report was expected last week. However, a judge granted a temporary restraining order at the request of the police union. A hearing is scheduled for Friday in Alameda County Superior Court.
At U.C. Berkeley, several groups are reviewing the events of Nov. 9, when campus police jabbed demonstrators with batons and dragged two protesters, including a professor, to the ground by their hair. The professor, Celeste Langan, was one of five people charged by the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office last week with misdemeanor resisting arrest in connection with the protest.
Lt. Eric Tejada of the U.C. Berkeley police said the results of one investigation were expected “any day now.”
Meanwhile, a report by U.C. Berkeley’s Police Review Board, initially expected in January, may now be finished in April. “We had a subcommittee of five people,” said Jesse Choper, a professor at the university’s law school and chairman of the review board. “Two of them are students. It’s very hard to get meetings together.”
In Oakland, investigators are working through hundreds of complaints of police misconduct, many of them related to Scott Olsen, the Iraq war veteran who sustained a fractured skull during a protest on Oct. 25. Mr. Olsen’s lawyer, Mark Martel, told The Bay Citizen this week that Oakland police had acknowledged that a bean bag round hit Mr. Olsen in the head. It is still not clear who fired the shot.
“I think that it’s been plenty of time by now,” Mr. Martel said. “It doesn’t take five months to find out who shot him.”
Sgt. Chris Bolton, the Oakland Police Department’s chief of staff, said his department was reviewing hundreds of videos, documents and other evidence related to Occupy protests on Oct. 25 and Nov. 2.
“I don’t want anyone to think that it’s ever our hope or intention to let things die down and never address it,” Sgt. Bolton said. “We have never backed down from telling people that where appropriate we will investigate, and we will hold ourselves and each other accountable. So at some point those investigations will conclude.”
Source: The New York Times
