stupid NY Mayor..
Michael Bloomberg: Occupy Wall Street is trying to destroy jobs
Guardian-
The New York mayor says the protests are 'not productive' given the importance of financial services to the city's economy
The New York mayor, Michael Bloomberg, has accused the Occupy Wall Street protesters of trying to destroy jobs in the city.
In his weekly radio show, Bloomberg said the protests against the city's financial services were "not productive" given the importance of the sector to the local economy.
"What they're trying to do is take the jobs away from people working in this city," he said.
"If the jobs they are trying to get rid of in this city – the people that work in finance, which is a big part of our economy – go away, we're not going to have any money to pay our municipal employees or clean our parks or anything else."
But Bloomberg acknowledged he was sympathetic to some of the protesters' complaints.
"There are some people with legitimate complaints," he said.
The protesters are angry about the 2008 Wall Street bailout that they say allowed banks to reap huge profits while average Americans suffered high unemployment and job insecurity.
Wall Street is the backbone of the New York state economy, accounting for 13% of tax contributions.
The protesters have been camped out in Zuccotti Park in Manhattan since last month, staging mainly peaceful demonstrations and marches, although there have been some clashes with the police.
On Wednesday, about 5,000 people marched on New York's financial district, the biggest rally so far. Dozens of people were arrested and police used pepper spray on some protesters.
The demonstrators are also campaigning against other social and economic inqualities in American life, including the gap between rich and poor, as well as what they regard as a corrupt political system.
The protest movement has now spread to other US cities from Tampa to Seattle, leading senior politicians to cautiously express sympathy with some of their concerns.
On Thursday the president, Barack Obama, and the vice-president, Joe Biden, acknowledged the frustration and anger of the protesters.
The New York governor, Andrew Cuomo, has also said he understands the anger being felt by the protesters but had to balance that with the economic importance of Wall Street to the state.
Michael Bloomberg: Occupy Wall Street is trying to destroy jobs
Guardian-
The New York mayor says the protests are 'not productive' given the importance of financial services to the city's economy
The New York mayor, Michael Bloomberg, has accused the Occupy Wall Street protesters of trying to destroy jobs in the city.
In his weekly radio show, Bloomberg said the protests against the city's financial services were "not productive" given the importance of the sector to the local economy.
"What they're trying to do is take the jobs away from people working in this city," he said.
"If the jobs they are trying to get rid of in this city – the people that work in finance, which is a big part of our economy – go away, we're not going to have any money to pay our municipal employees or clean our parks or anything else."
But Bloomberg acknowledged he was sympathetic to some of the protesters' complaints.
"There are some people with legitimate complaints," he said.
The protesters are angry about the 2008 Wall Street bailout that they say allowed banks to reap huge profits while average Americans suffered high unemployment and job insecurity.
Wall Street is the backbone of the New York state economy, accounting for 13% of tax contributions.
The protesters have been camped out in Zuccotti Park in Manhattan since last month, staging mainly peaceful demonstrations and marches, although there have been some clashes with the police.
On Wednesday, about 5,000 people marched on New York's financial district, the biggest rally so far. Dozens of people were arrested and police used pepper spray on some protesters.
The demonstrators are also campaigning against other social and economic inqualities in American life, including the gap between rich and poor, as well as what they regard as a corrupt political system.
The protest movement has now spread to other US cities from Tampa to Seattle, leading senior politicians to cautiously express sympathy with some of their concerns.
On Thursday the president, Barack Obama, and the vice-president, Joe Biden, acknowledged the frustration and anger of the protesters.
The New York governor, Andrew Cuomo, has also said he understands the anger being felt by the protesters but had to balance that with the economic importance of Wall Street to the state.
I am absolutely amazed...
Really, sometimes i just sit here absolutely stoned about the level of simplicity of some of the most influential people over there in US! I have never heard something that stupid, tabloid, simple and senseless out of the mouth of an average politician in middle, north or western part of europe let alone out of the mouth of the major of probably the most important city in the world! How do they allow this to happen? How can someone like this become the major of a city like NY in the first place? Not that we dont have enough fucked up politicians in europe, but i feel like the public awareness is much higher than in US, the average US citizen is easier and with much less effort to fool than the average middle, north or west european. No wonder that they call Obama a communist. I mean how would they call a harmless average european socialdemocrat when they call Obama (who would be nothing less than a clear cut capitalist in the eyes of europeans) a commuinst or socialist? Stalin in person? lol
Damn...what a sorry state this world is in..
Really, sometimes i just sit here absolutely stoned about the level of simplicity of some of the most influential people over there in US! I have never heard something that stupid, tabloid, simple and senseless out of the mouth of an average politician in middle, north or western part of europe let alone out of the mouth of the major of probably the most important city in the world! How do they allow this to happen? How can someone like this become the major of a city like NY in the first place? Not that we dont have enough fucked up politicians in europe, but i feel like the public awareness is much higher than in US, the average US citizen is easier and with much less effort to fool than the average middle, north or west european. No wonder that they call Obama a communist. I mean how would they call a harmless average european socialdemocrat when they call Obama (who would be nothing less than a clear cut capitalist in the eyes of europeans) a commuinst or socialist? Stalin in person? lol
Damn...what a sorry state this world is in..
Chinaski jan, Bloomberg sure knows what to say..its plain non-sense I know, but there we have a complete lack of sympathy by a $18B businessman/mayor for thousands of his frustrated unemployed countrymen on Wallstreet. not to expect any wiser and empathic comment by some1 whose wealth actually increased by $4Billion during 2008 recession.
Its a sad and sorry state as you said..Americans are becoming each other's enemies bc of their selfishness and self-interest..
Its a sad and sorry state as you said..Americans are becoming each other's enemies bc of their selfishness and self-interest..
I am sure our easily amused member Natural will not find this report very amusing.......
http://af.reuters.com/article/world...13?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true
Now this part of the report I find quiet amusing:
...............Soros and the protesters deny any connection. But Reuters did find indirect financial links between Soros and Adbusters, an anti-capitalist group in Canada which started the protests with an inventive marketing campaign aimed at sparking an Arab Spring type uprising against Wall Street. Moreover, Soros and the protesters share some ideological ground....................
http://af.reuters.com/article/world...13?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true
Now this part of the report I find quiet amusing:
...............Soros and the protesters deny any connection. But Reuters did find indirect financial links between Soros and Adbusters, an anti-capitalist group in Canada which started the protests with an inventive marketing campaign aimed at sparking an Arab Spring type uprising against Wall Street. Moreover, Soros and the protesters share some ideological ground....................
your easily amused countrymen seem to like OWS more than tea baggers 
* Americans favor Occupy Wall Street far more than Tea Party:
Time released a new poll this morning finding that 54 percent view the Wall Street protests favorably, versus only 23 percent who think the opposite. Interestingly, only 23 percent say they don’t have an opinion, suggesting the protests have succeeded in punching through to the mainstream. Also: The most populist positions espoused by Occupy Wall Street — that the gap between rich and poor has grown too large; that taxes should be raised on the rich; that execs responsible for the meltdown should be prosecuted — all have strong support.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-morning-plum/2011/10/13/gIQAULRHhL_blog.html
* Americans favor Occupy Wall Street far more than Tea Party:
Time released a new poll this morning finding that 54 percent view the Wall Street protests favorably, versus only 23 percent who think the opposite. Interestingly, only 23 percent say they don’t have an opinion, suggesting the protests have succeeded in punching through to the mainstream. Also: The most populist positions espoused by Occupy Wall Street — that the gap between rich and poor has grown too large; that taxes should be raised on the rich; that execs responsible for the meltdown should be prosecuted — all have strong support.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-morning-plum/2011/10/13/gIQAULRHhL_blog.html
lol Natural
I post a Reuters link suggesting Soros is tied to the Occupy WS movement - and you post a poll suggesting OWC is more popular than the Tea Party!! Even if true (which is not) - so what? What is your point...Soros has been very successful in fooling Americans? is that the point? Most of us who live in America know full well what these polls are and what they are used for!!
You know - the major difference between you and I here on ISP is: I try to shed light on some potentially unseen angles.....and you - almost everytime - show up trying to turn off the light!!! lol never fails.....Just remeber, what we write and do here is forever......Just look at GP... We used to have a member here with the handle "Simply Ken" who was constantly praised by many members who still post here.......took a while before ISP realized what he was up to.
BTW - do you know this guy Matt Taibi with Adbusters? He apparantly lives in Vancouver
I post a Reuters link suggesting Soros is tied to the Occupy WS movement - and you post a poll suggesting OWC is more popular than the Tea Party!! Even if true (which is not) - so what? What is your point...Soros has been very successful in fooling Americans? is that the point? Most of us who live in America know full well what these polls are and what they are used for!!
You know - the major difference between you and I here on ISP is: I try to shed light on some potentially unseen angles.....and you - almost everytime - show up trying to turn off the light!!! lol never fails.....Just remeber, what we write and do here is forever......Just look at GP... We used to have a member here with the handle "Simply Ken" who was constantly praised by many members who still post here.......took a while before ISP realized what he was up to.
BTW - do you know this guy Matt Taibi with Adbusters? He apparantly lives in Vancouver
I see it the other way around regarding who turns on the lamp and who's trying to turn it off (unintentionally out of ignorance, because I think you are a well meaning guy, but you are awfully misguided, too much Fox News and Rush Limbaugh has done you crazies )
Matt Taibbi writes for Rolling Stones (not adbusters) and is filling the same spot as the legendary Thompson S Hunter (ever seen fear and loathing in las vegas) and he lives in new york dude, not Vancovuer.
baba bikhial shoma halla lol
P.S why didn't you comment on the thread about KOCH brother doing business with Iran? feshaar oomad behet?
)Matt Taibbi writes for Rolling Stones (not adbusters) and is filling the same spot as the legendary Thompson S Hunter (ever seen fear and loathing in las vegas) and he lives in new york dude, not Vancovuer.
baba bikhial shoma halla lol
P.S why didn't you comment on the thread about KOCH brother doing business with Iran? feshaar oomad behet?
Matt Taibbi is listed as a major contributor to Vancouver based Adbusters.
As for Washington Post claim on Koch - As a member of the Tea Party, I can tell you, they have nothing to do with the Tea Party - at least not here in Florida. I don't know much about them - but I do know all I need to know about Washington Post !!! & Soros.
As for Washington Post claim on Koch - As a member of the Tea Party, I can tell you, they have nothing to do with the Tea Party - at least not here in Florida. I don't know much about them - but I do know all I need to know about Washington Post !!! & Soros.
his main role is rolling stones columnist. and I have been reading Adbusters since 10 years ago. I thorough love it and look forward to a new issue every month. I dont agree with all their points, but I just love how they question everything about north american consumerist culture. it's full of amazing art and photography, and thought provocative essays.
now what is your point?
btw, the fact that you think Koch brothers dont have anythign to do with Tea baggers tells me you live in your own little fantasy ignorant bubble. facts are stubborn things I hope one day you start liking facts more and stop relying on your gut as your source of news
now what is your point?
btw, the fact that you think Koch brothers dont have anythign to do with Tea baggers tells me you live in your own little fantasy ignorant bubble. facts are stubborn things I hope one day you start liking facts more and stop relying on your gut as your source of news
Matt Taibbi's Advice for #OWS
by Kevin Drum, m.motherjones.com
October 12th 2011 11:25 PM
Matt Taibbi, the man who memorably dubbed Goldman Sachs "a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity," is unsurprisingly sympathetic to the Occupy Wall Street protesters. "But the time is rapidly approaching when the movement is going to have to offer concrete solutions to the problems posed by Wall Street," he says. "To do that, it will need a short but powerful list of demands." Here's an abridged version of this five suggestions:
1. Break up the monopolies....There are about 20 such firms in America, and they need to be dismantled.
2. Pay for your own bailouts. A tax of 0.1 percent on all trades of stocks and bonds and a 0.01 percent tax on all trades of derivatives would generate enough revenue to pay us back for the bailouts, and still have plenty left over to fight the deficits the banks claim to be so worried about.
3. No public money for private lobbying. A company that receives a public bailout should not be allowed to use the taxpayer's own money to lobby against him.
4. Tax hedge-fund gamblers. For starters, we need an immediate repeal of the preposterous and indefensible carried-interest tax break.
5. Change the way bankers get paid. We need new laws preventing Wall Street executives from getting bonuses upfront for deals that might blow up in all of our faces later.
I think Taibbi is probably right that the OWS protest can't stay chaotic and inchoate forever. The anarchist types in the crowd are apparently opposed to anything that suggests they merely want to reform the existing system instead of tearing it down completely, but let's face it: that's a path to irrelevancy before too much longer.
Taibbi's list is pretty good — and surprisingly measured — and makes a workable starting place. I think #3 probably isn't practical for a variety of reasons, and #5 would be a little tricky, but doable. The others all sound great. If it were up to me I'd slot in some kind of leverage requirement in place of the lobbying item, but I recognize that this wouldn't exactly be a populist crowd pleaser. So if that doesn't work, how about banning credit default swaps? Despite the best efforts of several people to convince me otherwise, I remain skeptical that they're a net positive for the financial system. I don't know how practical an outright ban would be unless we got the rest of the world to go along, but it's probably a little bit better as a rallying cry than "Hey hey, ho ho, risk-based capital has got to go, and it should be replaced by a simple leverage ratio of at least 10%." On the other hand, free silver at 16:1 caught on big a century ago, so who knows?
by Kevin Drum, m.motherjones.com
October 12th 2011 11:25 PM
Matt Taibbi, the man who memorably dubbed Goldman Sachs "a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity," is unsurprisingly sympathetic to the Occupy Wall Street protesters. "But the time is rapidly approaching when the movement is going to have to offer concrete solutions to the problems posed by Wall Street," he says. "To do that, it will need a short but powerful list of demands." Here's an abridged version of this five suggestions:
1. Break up the monopolies....There are about 20 such firms in America, and they need to be dismantled.
2. Pay for your own bailouts. A tax of 0.1 percent on all trades of stocks and bonds and a 0.01 percent tax on all trades of derivatives would generate enough revenue to pay us back for the bailouts, and still have plenty left over to fight the deficits the banks claim to be so worried about.
3. No public money for private lobbying. A company that receives a public bailout should not be allowed to use the taxpayer's own money to lobby against him.
4. Tax hedge-fund gamblers. For starters, we need an immediate repeal of the preposterous and indefensible carried-interest tax break.
5. Change the way bankers get paid. We need new laws preventing Wall Street executives from getting bonuses upfront for deals that might blow up in all of our faces later.
I think Taibbi is probably right that the OWS protest can't stay chaotic and inchoate forever. The anarchist types in the crowd are apparently opposed to anything that suggests they merely want to reform the existing system instead of tearing it down completely, but let's face it: that's a path to irrelevancy before too much longer.
Taibbi's list is pretty good — and surprisingly measured — and makes a workable starting place. I think #3 probably isn't practical for a variety of reasons, and #5 would be a little tricky, but doable. The others all sound great. If it were up to me I'd slot in some kind of leverage requirement in place of the lobbying item, but I recognize that this wouldn't exactly be a populist crowd pleaser. So if that doesn't work, how about banning credit default swaps? Despite the best efforts of several people to convince me otherwise, I remain skeptical that they're a net positive for the financial system. I don't know how practical an outright ban would be unless we got the rest of the world to go along, but it's probably a little bit better as a rallying cry than "Hey hey, ho ho, risk-based capital has got to go, and it should be replaced by a simple leverage ratio of at least 10%." On the other hand, free silver at 16:1 caught on big a century ago, so who knows?
How about you Natural - what do you want? From Canada!!!
and since your illustrated demand requires physical taking of wealth and handing it to others......why not do away with the whole top, middle, and bottom brackets and make everyone equal? The only problem I can think of is who would oversee all of this......and as long as we have you and Matt Taibbi, we should be OK - right?
loool what a Boz.
BTW - wasn't the 40 year old Matt Taibbi a sport journalist in Moscow?
and since your illustrated demand requires physical taking of wealth and handing it to others......why not do away with the whole top, middle, and bottom brackets and make everyone equal? The only problem I can think of is who would oversee all of this......and as long as we have you and Matt Taibbi, we should be OK - right?
loool what a Boz.
BTW - wasn't the 40 year old Matt Taibbi a sport journalist in Moscow?
Unlike what the Republicans are advertising and even what Democrats are saying, the fastest way to have the economy recover is not to have this government program or that, it is to tax the rich at a higher rate. The government is already spending enough. The structural problem with the US economy and in fact the world economy is that too much money is bottled up in too few hands. The case for the world is that too much of world's wealth is bottled up by Chinese government and oil producing countries. In the US, it is bottled up by too few people at the top. As a result, there is an imbalance in demand and supply. There is not enough demand by the masses because they do not have the money to buy. Those who have the money such as the oil producing countries or the Chinese just buy Gold and such, i.e. they are trying by every means possible to preserve their accumulated wealth (they will not be able too, and their thinking is short-sighted.) And when they employ their money such as the Chinese government or the rich in the US, they just invest in increasing production. But the problem is not enough demand.
The idea behind government stimulus, i.e. Keynesian solution, is to create demand by government programs. This will have some short-term benefit but will never address the structural program, and if in fact is continued for too long will make the problem worse because it then will signal to the market that the government will never be able to balance its spending and push the governments to bankruptcy, what we are witnessing now. Further it is a very, very bad way of creating demand because government will inevitably misplace the spending, perform exceptionally poorly, and cause social inequity.
The real and true solution is to remove the structural issues that have caused the wealth to accumulate in such an imbalanced way. In the US, the reason for such an imbalance is government laws and regulations that give usury, unfair, advantage to a few to have windfall profits. These laws must be reserved.
In absence of such correction, then the much, much worse solution, but the next best thing is to tax the rich. This is a very bad solution, but there is neither the intelligence nor the will to implement the real changes to address what has caused the problem in the first place.
Let me give you an example. Consider housing. Housing imbalance was the epicenter of the 2008 manifestation of the supply/demand imbalance caused by too much money in the hands of too few. What did the government do? It had tarp, $700B to the banks and $50B to the people to help them with their mortgages. The $50B to the people is the type of Keynesian government program that can help ease the sharp downturns. What has happened to the $50B program? Only $2B has actually been used. Can you believe that? That is, the banks have tried every trick in the book to avoid refinancing mortgages for the people per the program. Why hasn't there been follow up by Obama's government? This is how inept the government is. Why isn't anyone addressing the issue? Why aren't the 99% protests addressing this problem. It is a no-brainer. Instead Obama was running around about another $450B program! Just pathetic.
The idea behind government stimulus, i.e. Keynesian solution, is to create demand by government programs. This will have some short-term benefit but will never address the structural program, and if in fact is continued for too long will make the problem worse because it then will signal to the market that the government will never be able to balance its spending and push the governments to bankruptcy, what we are witnessing now. Further it is a very, very bad way of creating demand because government will inevitably misplace the spending, perform exceptionally poorly, and cause social inequity.
The real and true solution is to remove the structural issues that have caused the wealth to accumulate in such an imbalanced way. In the US, the reason for such an imbalance is government laws and regulations that give usury, unfair, advantage to a few to have windfall profits. These laws must be reserved.
In absence of such correction, then the much, much worse solution, but the next best thing is to tax the rich. This is a very bad solution, but there is neither the intelligence nor the will to implement the real changes to address what has caused the problem in the first place.
Let me give you an example. Consider housing. Housing imbalance was the epicenter of the 2008 manifestation of the supply/demand imbalance caused by too much money in the hands of too few. What did the government do? It had tarp, $700B to the banks and $50B to the people to help them with their mortgages. The $50B to the people is the type of Keynesian government program that can help ease the sharp downturns. What has happened to the $50B program? Only $2B has actually been used. Can you believe that? That is, the banks have tried every trick in the book to avoid refinancing mortgages for the people per the program. Why hasn't there been follow up by Obama's government? This is how inept the government is. Why isn't anyone addressing the issue? Why aren't the 99% protests addressing this problem. It is a no-brainer. Instead Obama was running around about another $450B program! Just pathetic.