Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
United States Politics

NYPD Dismantling Occupy Wall Street Encampment 933

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the ministry-of-truth-declares-america-not-a-police-state dept.
First time accepted submitter Red_Chaos1 was the first to write with news that, as of around 06:30 UTC, the NYPD appears to have begun removing the encampment of Occupy Wall Street. At 06:34 UTC the Mayor's office issued a tweet declaring: "Occupants of Zuccotti should temporarily leave and remove tents and tarps. Protesters can return after the park is cleared." Around 07:15 UTC the first of several large dumpsters were deposited and the police began throwing tents and other debris into it. Reports also indicate that a Long Range Acoustic Device is on the premises. The police are using helicopters and physical barriers to prevent news coverage, but the Occupiers are streaming the events (alternative stream; #occupywallstreet on irc.indymedia.org is also rather active for those who don't fancy flash or twitter.) As of 09:15 or so, the situation according to those near NYC is that the park has more or less been cleared.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NYPD Dismantling Occupy Wall Street Encampment

Comments Filter:
  • by mwvdlee (775178) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @03:58AM (#38056910) Homepage

    I haven't particularly warm-hearted feelings for the Occupy hipsters, but...

    The police are using helicopters and physical barriers to prevent news coverage

    Seems a bit excessive and somewhat dubious.

  • by GPLHost-Thomas (1330431) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:03AM (#38056926)
    You think it's "a bit excessive"? Hell, in what kind of country news coverage is forbidden? Next time I'll hear about critics to China, I'll talk about this event!!!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:07AM (#38056936)

    If this is right and legal and just, why wait until 1am to do it? Why? And why bar press? And why the hell didn't you just leave them alone in the first place, ppl would be like: "ppl in the park, protesting, want something" and then "next". But instead, it's sure to backfire. People want to believe the stuff they were taught in elementary school about freedom, etc. *shrugs*

  • not too surprising (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:09AM (#38056946)

    It has been going on for a couple of months now.

    At this point there is no real goal other than 'dismantel the man'.

    If you guys are *serious* about staying there and doing something then get a GOAL. Something you can actually achieve. Other than camping out. Winter is coming and it gets cold there.

    If your goal is nothing more than being pissed off at the 'man'. Well that has been going on for many generations.

    You guys have the will to do something. You just have no idea what exactly you want. Also keep in mind you will need to convince the other 98% of us to think it is a good idea too. Some will join you because they like a 'good cause'. Others will oppose you just because you want to change things. But if all you can come up with is 'i hate the man'. Well, we all do whats your point?

    If you do not come up with a concrete goal soon the 'man' will get tired of your BS and toss you on your ear.

  • by Sipper (462582) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:13AM (#38056962)

    By removing protesters, rather than having talks with them, the government is showing the occupy movement that they don't care. People should be allowed to practice peaceful protest, but it seems like the Occupy movement is being repeatedly shown that the government doesn't have a heart. First they were fenced in on the street. Then they were pepper sprayed. Then when it got cold, the fire department came and took away the generators providing heat. Now they're being forcibly removed from where they were camped.

    This is really sad, and I don't think any of these things were the correct response.

  • Re:good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by billcopc (196330) <vrillco@yahoo.com> on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:13AM (#38056968) Homepage

    It's true that a bunch of pseudo-hippies are crashing the protests, for douche points or whatever scorekeeping is used in the rapacious subculture, but that does not invalidate the handful of actual protestors that started the movement and continue to stand vigil, nor the effect the moment has had in sensitizing the public to some of the more serious issues plaguing North America.

    What's particularly ironic is that the NYPD is imposing censorship and using arguably anti-terrorist techniques and tools to squelch a peaceful protest. As if the NYPD needed any more bad press... The power of the Occupy movement is not so much in its stated message, but in the way the corporations and authorities respond to it. It is bringing much needed attention to these crooked organisations and reminding the everyman that the government and its corporate masters are conspiring against him.

  • by Hazel Bergeron (2015538) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:14AM (#38056976) Journal

    The USSR was up front about the limits it put on freedom. The US understood that most people are ignored so it's OK to let them mouth off until they're actually listened to, at which point you abuse and restrict them.

    The USSR also had job and housing security and good urban worker treatment. The developing system of internal identity checks and consequent restrictions on movement made it hard for all but the system faithful to gain the best positions in these cities, however. As in the USSR.

  • by SuricouRaven (1897204) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:19AM (#38057012)
    Do what? Politics isn't working very well - there are two parties and both serve the rich. There aren't the numbers or popular support for a revolution, and historically those things tend to turn out rather poorly anyway. The protestors want to do something, but there just isn't much they can.
  • I've noticed that NYC has had the subtle guise of supporting them but selectively enforcing the law. Taking away the generators when it was *really* cold outside because they were a "fire hazard" was one of the standout things that comes to mind. I don't think anyone in the NYC government thought it would last as long as it already has and that these simple actions would break them.

    Now that they're dismantling the camps, we'll have to wait and see whether or not the city will actually "let them back in" as they've said they will. Personally I doubt it, but the people who are organizing this thing seem to have their heads on straight.

    Honestly, we haven't seen protests on this scale or for this duration since the Vietnam War. The difference is that we're in the age of social media - a time when any citizen can capture National Guard soldiers shooting at unarmed protestors, or police pepper spraying peaceful (but civilly disobedient) people. The city knows that it's walking a very fine line and if they take a misstep they're going to make things far, far worse for them.

    I knew this would happen eventually at NYC - this didn't surprise me at all. What *did* surprise me was closing the airspace to news helicopters and shutting down all but 1 subway line as well as a major bridge. *That* honestly frightens me very much. The amazing thing - and one of the reasons I'm so very appreciative to be in my mid-20s during the digital age - is that despite all traditional news media being cut out there's citizen journalists on the ground now recording video and streaming it live to the Internet.

    I feel a paradoxically equal amount of pride and revulsion at being an American tonight.

  • by X.25 (255792) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:41AM (#38057116)

    I haven't particularly warm-hearted feelings for the Occupy hipsters, but...

    The police are using helicopters and physical barriers to prevent news coverage

    Seems a bit excessive and somewhat dubious.

    Seems like that's happening in China. Or Soviet Russia.

    Where is this happening, again?

  • Campers (Score:5, Insightful)

    by soundguy (415780) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:42AM (#38057124) Homepage
    No one has ever accomplished a goddamn thing by "camping out". You protest during business hours when you can get people's attention and when media bureaus are active and fully staffed, then you go home, take a shower, and sleep in a warm bed. In the morning, you go back and do it again. Rinse, repeat.

    The only attention these knoblickers are attracting by sleeping in a New York park is from the rats and the homeless.
  • Re:good (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Billly Gates (198444) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:46AM (#38057150) Journal

    While I do agree that the world is not fair and people have a right to be upset and fearful of a 2nd crash with this dangerous flash trading and debt created by the rich, I do feel these protestors are morons.

    Not all of course as I would want to protest for a few hours. However, occupying a public space, supporting socialism, and refusing to get jobs or at least look and just whine out in the cold in a tent is not very smart at all. What do they expect? A trader walking past says, oh poor fellows. Let me tell the CEO of Goldman Sachs to disaband and give all our money back to the people and hire these people to watch other peole do jobs. Shame on us ... YEAH RIGHT!

    Start a political party, organize voters house to house, go get a mcJob to start paying down the student loan debts you agreed to pay for (I don't care if it is a 40k a year job starting out), and so on. Doing these things might not get you as successful as the those over 34 or your parents, but it is better than whinning and you can start to do something about it. The Tea Party was smart and taken over the republican party. That is why there was no compromise on the debt ceiling a .001% tax increase will give a (R) a one way ticket out of office from the Tea Party. OWS needs to do the same.

    Defacing property with no message is wrong. If anything many support the tentants of communism and socialism that I find a problem rather than a solution.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:48AM (#38057160)

    so, you don't know what Wall Street is, or how to spell crony.

    You need to learn what finance is about. See http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2011/10/a-note-prolegomenon-to-any-useful-discussion-of-modern-american-finance.html [typepad.com]

  • Re:good (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:48AM (#38057162)
    Unless you live in bumblefuck nowhere, there are thousands of jobs available around where you live.

    The problem is, you want a specific job for a specific amount of money, and won't settle for what's available.

    Which is sad, if you haven't taken anything in 2 years. You're unemployed by choice, and that makes your opinion on OWS even funnier.
  • by Billly Gates (198444) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:54AM (#38057188) Journal

    No issue. They do not own the land. I spoke with a lady this weekend from the movement and it turned into an argument. Yes, it is public, but there is a reason we have houses. We own them and have no rights under the 4th amendment for property.

    It is publically owned, but the public has to vote to let someone use it. they are not 100% of the public as homeless people can not sleep legally at any public place in Las Vegas or Los Angeles. Same principle.

    You can be searched because you are breaking the law and you do not own the land. I can bet the mayor did get a judges permit anyway to be clean. A tent is not a home or a dwelling so they can do this.

  • by Billly Gates (198444) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:56AM (#38057206) Journal

    Occupying is not a peaceful protest. They are living in an illegal space and not protesting. I think they forgot this part.

    They are protected to protest as long as they want but not sleep, deface, or occupy public property. That is not a right.

  • by pecosdave (536896) * on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:56AM (#38057208) Homepage Journal

    The way I've always seen it is once you start calling people names or nitpicking spelling and grammar you've already lost your argument.

  • by Gravis Zero (934156) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @04:59AM (#38057226)

    is gone.

  • by YesIAmAScript (886271) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @05:07AM (#38057270)

    The USSR was up front about the limits it put on freedom.

    No they weren't, the restrictions were enforced by fear and knocks on the door followed by disappearances. The USSR, much like China today claimed they were open and free. But woe to those who tried to test the limits of that.

  • by Nursie (632944) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @05:08AM (#38057272)

    I dunno, protesting wall street works for me in a couple of ways (I mean as an idea, I'm not even american so I'm not actually going to go and protest).

    What's legal is not necessarily moral. Companies do have a duty to profit but they don't have a duty to -

    • Play number games that massively, massively enrich themselves without a shred of productive work being done.
    • Buy laws that help them profit at others expense.
    • Encourage other companies to drop ethics/morals, outsource everything and exploit the third world mercilessly while they're at it.
      • Secondly, protesting Wall Street rather than the seat of government also makes it damn clear that they're protesting the financial system and situation, not just being generic angry people.

        OTOH, if they had gone to protest in DC, one wonders if they would have had a lot more sympathy from the right-wing end of the press....

  • Re:Campers (Score:5, Insightful)

    by shutdown -p now (807394) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @05:09AM (#38057282) Journal

    More importantly, you protest the authority by defying it, not by obediently going where they tell you to go, and ranting there. They lost the moment they were restricted from, you know, actually occupying Wall Street - and headed over to the park, instead of saying "fuck you, we're gonna stay here".

    Of course, this means being tear gassed, beaten up, arrested, and possibly paying a fine or even serving time. That's what civil disobedience is about. And that can actually change things, especially when people around become concerned about why their fellow countrymen are willing to go through such hardship. That's how it worked in Egypt and Tunisia.

  • by Attack DAWWG (997171) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @05:21AM (#38057330)

    and I get the feeling they're pushing for a fascist communist/socialist

    Fascist communist/socialist?

    You don't have the slightest fucking clue what any of these terms mean, do you? You're just stringing together a bunch of terms that Fox News tells you vaguely to hate.

  • by bkmoore (1910118) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @05:22AM (#38057338)
    I think the reason the government and mainstream media are uneasy with the Occupy Wall Street movement is it is basically saying the government in its current form no longer represents the will of most American people. Governments do not like having their legitimacy called into question. No other american protest movement in my life time has done this.
  • by artor3 (1344997) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @05:25AM (#38057362)

    So in other words, you're fine with protests so long as they're out of sight, out of mind, and have no hope of actually affecting anything. Got it.

  • by SmallFurryCreature (593017) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @05:30AM (#38057388) Journal

    He is the 1%. The king and his court are hardly going to be advocating for the foundation of a republic are they?

    Remember this next time you watch TV or any other media. How many of the people you see in media are making minimum wage or even an average wage.

    For that matter, how many here on slashdot do a real days work? Hint, it is 10:30 in holland as I post this. Do you think a factory worker has the same luxury?

    I am not the 1%, I am somewhere in the middle but I came from the bottom and know just how much you can expect from the 1% in caring even the tiniest bit about anyone else. Bloomberg can paint himself with a donkey or an elephant, in reality he is filthy rich and cares only for himself.

  • Re:good (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @05:33AM (#38057416)

    ...watch the news. they actually ARE a bunch of lazy hippies. dirty too...

    I'm watching it live now and I don't see a bunch of hippies. I see people so fed up with a corrupt government that they are risking a lot to try to make it right. They are risking their jobs, their health, heck they'll probably get a police record if not worse. Why? They see no future. Their government only listens to corporate lobbyists. Their government gives money out to CEOs but won't help the people. Corporations are ruining their country and nobody else is doing anything. I respect them and hope nobody gets hurt.

  • by cheekyjohnson (1873388) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @05:37AM (#38057440)

    "I thenk that 2 + 2 = 5!"
    "You're an idiot. 2 + 2 = 4. Also, learn how to spell!"
    "You just lost the argument by calling me names and nitpicking my spelling and grammar! Therefore, 2 + 2 = 5."

    Unless I just don't know what it means to "lose" an argument.

  • by L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @05:57AM (#38057552)
    Soap, ballot, jury, ammo.

    The soap box has been rendered impotent by constant erosion of civil liberties. Time to organise a concerted effort into non-bipartisan voting.

    It's especially insulting that this action should be taken so soon after that one day per year when we collectively give thanks to those who gave their lives to protect those very freedoms we are losing.
  • by tehcyder (746570) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @06:04AM (#38057594) Journal

    Checkmate.

    OWS will have as much impact to government as the 2003 anti-war protests did when invading Iraq, and that is absolutely none.

    How about the anti Vietnam war or black civl rights protests in the 1960s? They certainly had an effect, it's a question of numbers and momentum more than anything else. That's how democracy works, not just ticking a box on a piece of paper every few years.

    The majority will be heard eventually, however much the corrupt power system in place tries to ignore or silence them.

  • by khallow (566160) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @06:14AM (#38057626)

    In the USA, you can't just protest everywhere.

    Recall that your rights should end when they trample on someone else's. I notice that the analogous movement, the Tea Party hasn't had a problem playing within the rules.

  • Re:Campers (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tehcyder (746570) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @06:30AM (#38057706) Journal

    More importantly, you protest the authority by defying it, not by obediently going where they tell you to go, and ranting there. They lost the moment they were restricted from, you know, actually occupying Wall Street - and headed over to the park, instead of saying "fuck you, we're gonna stay here".

    Of course, this means being tear gassed, beaten up, arrested, and possibly paying a fine or even serving time. That's what civil disobedience is about. And that can actually change things, especially when people around become concerned about why their fellow countrymen are willing to go through such hardship. That's how it worked in Egypt and Tunisia.

    Yeah, to really have an effect, some of these fucking hippies should set fire to themselves, that's what worked in Tunisia. Or maybe they should ask for help from NATO to bomb the police, like in Libya.

    Curiously, peaceful protest isn't supposed to be so difficult or so illegal in the so-called democratic West.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @07:04AM (#38057880)

    next time someone in China is jailed for years for using twitter, vs a group that has suppressed rape reports, assaulted reporters and police, caused thousands of dollars in property damage and under the cover of political protests has essentially been a crime wave that has been tolerated for weeks, you mean, all the while creating some twisted twenty-first century hybrid of Animal Farm and Lord of the Flies... Moral equivalence is the devil's plaything.

  • by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @07:15AM (#38057942) Homepage Journal

    Funny, the last time I looked. That park was private property and they were squatting after they were told to leave.

    Funny, the last time I looked, the park was public property, privately owned, which is the entire reason you were in the park. Oddly enough, the first time I ever noticed you making a comment, you were being ignorant. And it's your parent comment that I'm replying to now.

  • by silentcoder (1241496) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @07:21AM (#38057984) Homepage

    The park is indeed private property - the owners have given their permission and support to Occupy all along. In their frontpage demand that the park be cleared the New York Post even tries to talk around "respecting the rights of the owners to allow the protests" and then declares that the right should be trampled ANYWAY.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @07:26AM (#38058012)

    You think it's "a bit excessive"? Hell, in what kind of country news coverage is forbidden?

    Or maybe you could try turning on the TV, and observe that there is no interruption to the news coverage, and that particular sentence was supplied without any source or citation because it's complete and utter bullshit.

    You might also be interested in looking up the definition of the word temporary . It might also help you not look like a complete fucking retard if you paid attention to the phrase : Protesters can return after the park is cleared.

    You might also want to pay particular attention to the fact that this is private property they are squatting on, not a public park.

  • . As much as I'm happy to defend the right for people to peacefully protest it seemed to turn into more of a tent slum in the middle of our nice city parks, a park which is for everyones use.

    It really stuns me that you don't think that so many people willing to live in a tent slum to make a point, no few of them because it's better than where they're otherwise living which is much the point they're making as letting things continue this way will put all of us in tent slums, points to a problem worse than the mild inconvenience of not being able to play frisbee in one of a town's several (I hope) parks.

    While I'm all for their protest, in face of cancelling a major event that is hosted in the park annually I'm glad that our council gave them a move on order.

    Fuck your event, and fuck everything else being disrupted by #OWS too. We have serious problems in our society which have made these people feel otherwise disenfranchised, something with which I agree very strongly and which is essentially provable if you examine typical election fraud, who writes legislation, who buys congress, et cetera. The only way to shake people out of their warm cocoons and remind them that there are other people in this country seems to be to inconvenience them. If it takes inconvenience to make you care, then not only are you a poor excuse for a human being, but it proves the validity of these protests.

  • by silentcoder (1241496) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @07:38AM (#38058072) Homepage

    You know, all their lives people told these kids "go to university, get a degree or the only job you'll get is flipping burgers."
    So they went to university, spent a fortune and got in debt, studied and passed. Then they finished and tried to find work.
    Now you call them "entitled" because they don't want to flip burgers.

  • by thryllkill (52874) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @08:00AM (#38058178) Homepage Journal

    "Really? Looks to me like they've made their point. Unfortunately, no one really knows what that point is. All I've gotten from them is 'Wah! Rich people have more than we do!' "

    Lots of people got the point. They must have paid attention to the news, or maybe to the signs the protesters are carrying. Just because "you" and the "media" you consume are saying "no one really knows what that point is" doesn't actually mean no ones knows what that point is.

    Maybe if you repeat it some more.

  • by argStyopa (232550) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @08:28AM (#38058310) Journal

    Because the goal of the police is to do their job with a minimum of risk to the public and property.

    The fact is that the easiest time to do this is the middle of the night. Not just easiest, but safest.

    People are more generally compliant if they're woken from a sound sleep. Further, even if they aren't asleep, they're tired, their thinking is muddled, and they are generally low on energy.

    Finally, all the 'day-trippers' have gone home. I have no idea of the proportion of hardcore overnighters vs. the ones just coming down each day, but obviously there are going to be far fewer bodies to deal with/object to whatever the police are doing.

    Of course, add to this that the street traffic is going to be lower at that time, and and the reduced number of 'innocent' bystanders - really there aren't many reasons NOT to do it at 1am or later.

    Barring the press? I don't really believe there's any way to see that except cynically, although perhaps it's justified again by public-safety concerns: if the press were widely covering the event, more likely more people are going to rush downtown to try to stop it.

    But to answer your earlier question: why don't they just leave them alone?
    As justified as their protests may be, they're simply NOT entitled to occupy private property forever, and do whatever they want there. Personally, if the owner of the property wants them gone, I'd have firehosed them away day one if they refused to move on.

  • by Riceballsan (816702) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @08:35AM (#38058352)
    OWS has made dozens of good points, if you actually read the signs, blogs, notes or anything of their movements they have quite a few things that are very specifically called for. End of corporates being considered persons, end to lobyism, allowing taxing on the wealthy, regulation of banks etc... If you look at the actual movement and the actual protestors, you see more or less a 50/50 of people carrying messages, and people trying to draw attention. The problem is the media likes to focus purely on the attention grabbers, and cut out the people with a message, and then make the statement "It seems like they don't have a message to give".
  • by DarkOx (621550) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @08:49AM (#38058454) Journal

    Fuck your event, and fuck everything else being disrupted by #OWS too. We have serious problems in our society which have made these people feel otherwise disenfranchised...

    So you are angry that so many people are disenfranchised and you turn around and say "Fuck your event" to someone who has just as much right to use that park as you and the OWS protestors do.

    This is the real problem with the OWS movement. For every one person in it who is honestly concerned that something has perverted, "Truth, Justice, and the American Way" There are 10 people who really just feel cheated, entitled, and angry but have no problem turning around and abusing others the very same ways they think they have been abused.

  • Re:Waste of Time (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PopeRatzo (965947) * on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @08:58AM (#38058512) Homepage Journal

    Because most Americans are actually pretty OK with everything he did and don't actually consider it as wrong.

    I'm pretty sure that's not true.

  • Re:Waste of Time (Score:4, Insightful)

    by JoeMerchant (803320) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @09:30AM (#38058772)

    Because most Americans are actually pretty OK with everything he did and don't actually consider it as wrong.

    I'm pretty sure that's not true.

    50.1% of Americans voted against him coming back for a second term (and a first one, for that matter.)

  • Re:good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PaladinAlpha (645879) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @09:30AM (#38058774)

    Yeah, I can tell you're doing pretty bad; in your posting history you discuss your thousands of dollars worth of lenses [slashdot.org] and thousands of dollars worth of cameras [slashdot.org], your $600 superphone [slashdot.org], your recent relocation to Orange County [slashdot.org], and conveniently failed to mention that your "BS and MS science degrees" are in geology [slashdot.org], which was never a job field with any demand and therefore is irrelevant to the discussion of job availability.

    Look, you seem like a nice guy. But what you're doing here is misrepresentation. When you use dishonesty to support a group, it makes the whole group look bad. Think about it.

  • by CrimsonAvenger (580665) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @09:50AM (#38058920)

    End of corporates being considered persons, end to lobyism, allowing taxing on the wealthy, regulation of banks etc

    Oddly enough, the wealthy are already taxed, banks are already regulated, and they're lobbying for an end to lobbying....

  • Re:Waste of Time (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Hatta (162192) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @09:56AM (#38058970) Journal

    Is that really the tack you want to take? It's not that the American people are ignorant, it's that they are actually complicit in the war crimes of their leaders?

  • Re:Waste of Time (Score:2, Insightful)

    by gslavik (1015381) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @10:04AM (#38059058)

    How is ~55 million votes out of a ~280 million population, 50.1%? Does not compute. Population as of 4/1/2000 (http://www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html), Voting numbers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2004 [wikipedia.org]). Also, feel free to correct numbers on Wikipedia, aparently, they are wrong with 48.3% for Kerry.

  • by Hatta (162192) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @10:13AM (#38059156) Journal

    Inequality isn't going away just because you're tired of the protesters. If you want the protesters to go away, work with them to end inequality. If all you want is for them to shut up and go away, well that's what the 1% want too.

    If you actually have some suggestions on how to better address inequality, everyone would love to hear them.

  • by apcullen (2504324) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @10:16AM (#38059190)
    I just watched the news conference. I'm wondering what the anonymous coward is smoking? The mayor explicitly said that reporters were kept out of the park "for their own protection". Isn't that interruption of news coverage? How is preventing reporters from filming the various arrests that went on not interruption of news coverage? How is taking people's tents and destroying them in any way legal? And they mayor said that there "may be" some kind of court order from some judge somewhere-- no details at all were provided (maybe they're still shopping around for a judge who can be bought?) -- that might prevent people from returning to the park.
  • by Hatta (162192) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @10:31AM (#38059350) Journal

    Or maybe you could try turning on the TV, and observe that there is no interruption to the news coverage, and that particular sentence was supplied without any source or citation because it's complete and utter bullshit.

    Sure, turn on the TV. See any news helicopters?

    You might also be interested in looking up the definition of the word temporary . It might also help you not look like a complete fucking retard if you paid attention to the phrase : Protesters can return after the park is cleared.

    It might help you not look like a complete fucking retard if you understood that authorities lie all the time.

    You might also want to pay particular attention to the fact that this is private property they are squatting on, not a public park.

    Great, let's move it to public property then. How about... the sidewalk in front of the NYSE? I think we'd all be happier with that, right?

  • by silentcoder (1241496) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @10:51AM (#38059546) Homepage

    The definition of value you use is exactly the one that capitalism uses. But value is sometimes more complex than that. The most valuable paintings in the world was made by a guy who in his entire life managed to sell ONE of them, to his own brother, for about the price of a loaf of bread.
    In the case of the arts (and sciences like philosophy) they have little capitalist percieved value because their output isn't really monetary. How do you put a price on an idea ?

    But philosophers are the reason we have CONCEPTS like capitalism or socialism at all. They are the creators of our very ABILITY to have social discourse. How do you reward that ?

    Poets (and their relatives like musicians - the vast majority who are not billionaires) are the expressions of our deepest desires, feelings, and "souls" (in a non-metaphysical sense).

    These things have value beyond measure, societies that treated them well were longer lived, more stable, more peaceful and wealthier. Societies that didn't have consistently declined.

    But how the hell do you work out what people will pay for that ? In fact the majority of people have no concept of the value of this (when last was a nobel-prize winning poet on the New York Times best-seller list ?)
    Capitalism defines "value" as "what people are willing to pay" and with that extremely narrow definition - supply and demand works great, but when you consider the value of things like arts, philosophy and social discourse the glaringly obvious truth is that the definition is woefully inadequate.
    They adjusted their definition to fit the limitations of their theory - they did not design their theory to fit the reality of a more plausible definition.

  • by dave420 (699308) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @11:00AM (#38059620)
    Their issue is the wealthy are not taxed enough, banks aren't regulated enough, and lobbying tends to keep the powerful powerful and the poor poor. Protesting is not lobbying, and it's either intellectually lazy or dishonest to say it is.
  • by SlippyToad (240532) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @11:01AM (#38059638)

    Also the owners of the park have received tens of millions of dollars of public funds. It is effectively a public park. Like most things the rich think they own, we actually bought it for them.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @11:45AM (#38060288)

    These are not ordinary people. Ordinary people are at work. These are liberal communist hipsters. The kind of people that if given power turn into Hugo Chavez and steal everything that isn't nailed down by decree.

  • OWS Comments (Score:3, Insightful)

    by daneubauer (2030090) on Tuesday November 15, 2011 @11:48AM (#38060346)
    I found a list of the OWS demands. Here they are:

    "Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending "Freetrade" by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr."

    Why do those foreign companies have wage and regulation advantages? Because of the minimum wage and because of the endless regulation of products here in the US. Do you really think that raising the minimum wage to $20/hr will help? No! It will have the opposite effect. Either the company, say a fast food joint, will raise their menu prices to cover the cost of expensive labor or they will lay off the majority of their workers. Either way, the company is doomed. "Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors." A single payer system is a pipe-dream. Many other countries have tried and they have failed to provide timely and quality care. Am I saying that our current system is perfect? No. Government regulation and the need for tort reform have driven healthcare prices through the roof. Also, banning patients from using private money to get healthcare? Would they also agree that people should be banned from attending private schools? How about private businesses?

    "Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment."

    I just have to shake my head. How would they accomplish this? Where does the money come from? You can't get it from taxes. It is impractical.
    "Demand four: Free college education."

    You would just continue the current system. Already you can get student loans and not pay them back. And you wouldn't improve anything. For example, say I am a hiring directory in a mid-sized company. I have to choose someone to interview. There are two applicants for the same position. One went to a private college with a good reputation and the other went to the state run college. Who am I going to be more likely to interview assuming their experience and grades are the same? Obviously, the one who went to the private school.

    "Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand."

    Let the market run its course. Oil will become harder to find. As the price of oil goes up, other technologies become cost effective. Subsidizing anything does not make it a viable alternative. You also have to look at the alternatives. Most likely it will be electricity. Where does that electricity come from? We could get it from coal, nuclear, oil, or hydro. All of those are unlikely due to environmental regulation. What does that leave us with? Solar and Wind. Both unreliable and non-cost effective sources. Personally, I would buy an electric car if it can have the same performance, range, and refuel time as my current car. I also believe that nuclear and hydro is the best source.

    "Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now."

    Where does the money come from and what are you going to do with it? Assuming we print it, that will devalue our currency. If we borrow it, that puts us closer to a Greece or Italy type situation. If we tax it, you stifle the economy. And what are you going to do? Replace metal water and sewar pipes with plastic ones? Make roads wider? Build more/replace bridges? Improve the electrical grid? I live in

Any circuit design must contain at least one part which is obsolete, two parts which are unobtainable, and three parts which are still under development.

Working...