Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
‘OCCUPY Wall Street’ protestors on Dame Street
Options
Comments
-
Suryavarman wrote: »Just out of interest do you have a link to the demands of OccupyDameStreet? Had a quick look through the thread and on Google and I couldn't see anything.
I saw them originally on The Journal here0 -
Suryavarman wrote: »Just out of interest do you have a link to the demands of OccupyDameStreet? Had a quick look through the thread and on Google and I couldn't see anything.
We have a leaflet which was agreed on in a general assembly a day or two ago. It could be that they haven't had a chance to update the website yet. There's a media committee which I'm not on (but I'm hoping to join it next week) but they've been more busy responding to the amount of press interest and trying to publicize the march today.
If I can find a copy I'll scan it in. The original leaflet had 4 key demands.
From memory, they include ending the bailout of the financial sector and making those responsible for the mess pay for it,
Ending the policy of placing the burden of private speculator debt on the general population as opposed to the individuals who chose to take it on,
Demanding a better deal for Ireland's oil and gas reserves which were, in the opinion of the movement, criminally given away by Ray Bourke, and
Implementing a real participatory democracy in which the people are more involved and "representatives" power to do whatever they want for 5 totally unaccountable years is diluted. In other words, where the people have more of a say and "representatives" actually have to represent what the people want.
These demands were agreed by consensus and anyone is free to suggest further ones. General Assembly meets twice a day, at 1PM and 6PM, idea there is that people can either come to it on their lunch breaks from work or college, or on their way home. Again, it's a leaderless movement and if anyone has better suggestions they're free to propose them at the aforementioned meetings.0 -
I saw them originally on The Journal here
Thanks a million.hatrickpatrick wrote: »We have a leaflet which was agreed on in a general assembly a day or two ago. It could be that they haven't had a chance to update the website yet. There's a media committee which I'm not on (but I'm hoping to join it next week) but they've been more busy responding to the amount of press interest and trying to publicize the march today.
If I can find a copy I'll scan it in. The original leaflet had 4 key demands.
From memory, they include ending the bailout of the financial sector and making those responsible for the mess pay for it,
Ending the policy of placing the burden of private speculator debt on the general population as opposed to the individuals who chose to take it on,
Demanding a better deal for Ireland's oil and gas reserves which were, in the opinion of the movement, criminally given away by Ray Bourke, and
Implementing a real participatory democracy in which the people are more involved and "representatives" power to do whatever they want for 5 totally unaccountable years is diluted. In other words, where the people have more of a say and "representatives" actually have to represent what the people want.
These demands were agreed by consensus and anyone is free to suggest further ones. General Assembly meets twice a day, at 1PM and 6PM, idea there is that people can either come to it on their lunch breaks from work or college, or on their way home. Again, it's a leaderless movement and if anyone has better suggestions they're free to propose them at the aforementioned meetings.
Thanks Hatrick!
I must say I do agree with the first 2 demands although they do seem to be the same thing really. Was the article meglome quoted correct in stating that one of the demands was to get the IMF & ECB out of our affairs?
Would a better deal for the oil and gas involve renegotiating the previous deal or the state nationalising the reserves?
Does the 4th demand go into any specifics about how diluted a politicians power would become?0 -
-
steve9859 wrote:There's not many at the march. They haven't even closed off dame street. 300 people maybe, maximum, just in the area in front of the bank.
Is that a reflection of the strength of feeling about this? Or that people still think the protesters are saying nothing more than "down with this kind of thing"?
Whichever way, it's hardly a 99%!!
It's representative protesting, presumably.
cordially,
Scofflaw0 -
Advertisement
-
Good turn out at Cork with a lot people joining the spontaneous march through the city centre. Great mix of people too. As I left, preparations were being made to set up camp by the Left-Footed solider at the Grand Parade end of the South Mall.
It was great to see there is still a bit of rebellious spirit alive and well in Cork.0 -
Suryavarman wrote: »Thanks a million.
Thanks Hatrick!
I must say I do agree with the first 2 demands although they do seem to be the same thing really. Was the article meglome quoted correct in stating that one of the demands was to get the IMF & ECB out of our affairs?
Yes actually that was the one I was forgetting. Although I think the wording of that has since been altered to more specifically refer to the bailout of the financial sector, that was certainly discussed at the meeting anyway.Would a better deal for the oil and gas involve renegotiating the previous deal or the state nationalising the reserves?
Again I don't think the idea has developed into specifics just yet, although I could be wrong about that. The initial aims of most of these are to get people talking about them. What would you propose incidentally?Does the 4th demand go into any specifics about how diluted a politicians power would become?
It hasn't yet, but as I say the demands were agreed only days ago, I'm sure specifics will emerge once there has been further discussion.
I for one think the demands in themselves are fantastic in the sense of opening up a public debate on these subjects, to begin with. These things don't happen overnight. As I said in a comment at the meeting, I think society at large has become addicted to instant gratification, in the sense that the revolution in Tunisia took a week, but when Libya took months everyone started declaring that the Arab Spring had "failed".
A bit of patience is required in any revolution.0 -
hatrickpatrick wrote: »Yes actually that was the one I was forgetting. Although I think the wording of that has since been altered to more specifically refer to the bailout of the financial sector, that was certainly discussed at the meeting anyway.
Probably a better choice to keep it focused on just the financial sector.Again I don't think the idea has developed into specifics just yet, although I could be wrong about that. The initial aims of most of these are to get people talking about them. What would you propose incidentally?
I'm not a fan of Government control of any industry bar security and defense so I would like to see the resources exploited(for want of a better word) by a private company and taxed when it comes ashore. I don't know enough about the current deal to critique it so I won't.It hasn't yet, but as I say the demands were agreed only days ago, I'm sure specifics will emerge once there has been further discussion.
I'd be interested to see how that proposal works out. Personally I think giving the dail a 5 year term and the president 7 years is too long. At the same time I wouldn't like to see referendums on every issue as everything could just be voted down without an alternative proposed.I for one think the demands in themselves are fantastic in the sense of opening up a public debate on these subjects, to begin with. These things don't happen overnight. As I said in a comment at the meeting, I think society at large has become addicted to instant gratification, in the sense that the revolution in Tunisia took a week, but when Libya took months everyone started declaring that the Arab Spring had "failed".
A bit of patience is required in any revolution.
In fairness to the protesters the demands are a lot easier to stomach than the rubbish coming out of the Wall Street protesters. I'm surprised at the lack of a left wing bias in the demands also, on the face of it they seem like something people of any political persuasion can agree on.
Has the protest been growing or stagnant over the last few days?0 -
Again I don't think the idea has developed into specifics just yet, although I could be wrong about that. The initial aims of most of these are to get people talking about them. What would you propose incidentally?Would a better deal for the oil and gas involve renegotiating the previous deal or the state nationalising the reserves?
To be honest, I would drop this one entirely, because even if it were done, it would pretty much have to be reversed a few years later. The Irish offshore sector isn't a rich prospect, and to develop an indigenous industry would not only take years and a lot of money but - given the advanced state of the industry and the fact that Irish offshore prospects are on the technological frontier for the oil majors - piggybacking off the existing companies for expertise.
I suspect the demand is based on the belief that there is a lot more out there than has ever been demonstrated to be, and that tapping it is a matter of saying "make it so".
Despite the supposed giveaway deal offered by Burke (and since revised), the amount of oil brought onshore in Ireland to date is zero, and the amount of gas little larger. And no, the oil majors aren't sitting on what they've found - they've allowed their licenses to lapse, because they haven't found anything worth drilling. So the belief that there's billions and trillions of oil and gas just waiting to be found (or admitted to) is based on nothing more than a couple of very silly journalistic articles (by Tom Prendiville, in the first instance).
So, to be honest, I think this demand combines a very specifically socialist aim with sheer fantasy, and by extension makes the protesters look like they have a particular political bent as well as being detached from reality. In addition, it associates them with S2S, who don't really enjoy the level of public support they believe they're entitled to.
cordially,
Scofflaw0 -
This post had been deleted.
Nonsense, short-sellers are not motivated by exposing anyone. They are motivated by profit. People forget that financial markets are not a true science with fundamental laws like physics. What they are is entirely a human construct that collects and aggregates human behaviours and opinions. Such systems are vulnerable to attack from rumour and crowd behaviour. With an increase in the ease of communication these days, all it would take these days is one tweet to send the markets into a tailspin.
The financial industry will consume itself with its insatiable greed. Maybe usury should be illegal/immoral again?0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Unless the aforementioned 18-year-olds are all ophans, I would have thought that their parents have paid for their education with their taxes. Either the kids should get free education, or the parent should get a tax return - one or the other.
Should their parents get a tax return if the taxes they pay only cover the costs of the healthcare they receive?0 -
Unless the aforementioned 18-year-olds are all ophans, I would have thought that their parents have paid for their education with their taxes. Either the kids should get free education, or the parent should get a tax return - one or the other.
So by this logic it is only 'fair' that the State is subsiding private schools to the tune of 100 million euro a year while at the same time increasing class sizes and cutting SNAs in national primary schools - after all, one would imagine the parents who can afford to pay thousands in school fees also pay more tax so their children are entitled to have more spent on their education....:rolleyes:0 -
I'm glad I went. I really liked the energy at Dame st afterward and I came away with a few things to think about. Biggest thing is probably "what sort of a society do I want and what steps am I willing to take to achieve it".0
-
I'm glad I went. I really liked the energy at Dame st afterward and I came away with a few things to think about. Biggest thing is probably "what sort of a society do I want and what steps am I willing to take to achieve it".
Do people not think about that kind of thing pretty regularly?
perturbed,
Scofflaw0 -
hatrickpatrick wrote: »We have a leaflet which was agreed on in a general assembly a day or two ago. It could be that they haven't had a chance to update the website yet. There's a media committee which I'm not on (but I'm hoping to join it next week) but they've been more busy responding to the amount of press interest and trying to publicize the march today.
If I can find a copy I'll scan it in. The original leaflet had 4 key demands.
From memory, they include ending the bailout of the financial sector and making those responsible for the mess pay for it,
Ending the policy of placing the burden of private speculator debt on the general population as opposed to the individuals who chose to take it on,
Demanding a better deal for Ireland's oil and gas reserves which were, in the opinion of the movement, criminally given away by Ray Bourke, and
Implementing a real participatory democracy in which the people are more involved and "representatives" power to do whatever they want for 5 totally unaccountable years is diluted. In other words, where the people have more of a say and "representatives" actually have to represent what the people want.
These demands were agreed by consensus and anyone is free to suggest further ones. General Assembly meets twice a day, at 1PM and 6PM, idea there is that people can either come to it on their lunch breaks from work or college, or on their way home. Again, it's a leaderless movement and if anyone has better suggestions they're free to propose them at the aforementioned meetings.
The bit in bold sums up the stupidity of this protest. Not only was it Ray Burke, but those licences have since expired and a new system put in place by the previous government.
It is a bit like something from a Monty Python sketch. It might go something like this: "Down with the king" shout the protesters. On being told that the king is dead and we now have a republic they shout "Down with the President".0 -
hatrickpatrick wrote: »1: social welfare recipients and average public servants didn't cause the mess through corruption. For me, this is about punishing those who actively encouraged corruption. IE, handing over €65bn to Anglo because the people in charge of it are personal friends, etc.
If a company in the public sector had been bailed out and had had a direct part in causing the mess, I would absolutely object to my money paying its wages. The reason that isn't a priority for my complaints (and I'm not saying it isn't for others) is because I'm primarily concerned with the blatant injustice of me paying the wages of the people who have ruined my prospects of living comfortably myself.
That might be overly dramatic but I don't understand the apathy here. Why should you pay for Drumm, FitzPatrick etc? We now own Anglo. It's OUR money paying for these assholes' pensions. It's THEIR mistakes which will damage OUR lives.
The injustice simply makes me absolutely sick. They should be penalized, not rewarded.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Drumm#The_.22Golden_Circle.22
David Drumm: €3m pension on resigning under scandal. €3m being paid for by you and me. €3m which could easily fund hospitals, schools, roadworks, things which benefit Ireland as a whole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seán_FitzPatrick#Career
Read this one yourself. It makes me rage too hard. €4m is the figure here.
Again, that's going to be paid by you and me. We own that bank, even though we never asked to own it. The guy and his cronies should be being savaged by the criminal assets bureau, not being bailed out by the taxpayer. They played a huge role in causing the general misery in this country.
An I honestly the only one who abhors this situation? Do you want me to name anymore names of people who are being funded by the taxpayer after they screwed up of their own free will and lost the ability to fund themselves?
Sure, social welfare and PS pay are too high. But there's a difference between that, and actively paying for people who are criminals and who caused unbelievable amounts of sh!t for the rest of us. They should be in prison.
We own that bank because FF stupidly chose to nationalise it after their stupid bank guarantee. The time to protest was 30 September 2008. If you buy something with a one-day guarantee and it breaks down on the second day, tough, you don't get a refund. That is where we are. What is done is done and the job is to find the cheapest and easiest way out of the mess. Given that FF caused the mess, and that SF and the ULA are operating on another planet thinking that we can reverse what was done, the only people capable of getting us out of the mess are the current government.
On a side-point, the owners of Anglo, the shareholders got nothing and will get nothing.0 -
Do people not think about that kind of thing pretty regularly?
perturbed,
Scofflaw
In Gandhi's case, probably. In my own case, no. I'm not a poster boy for focused concentrated thought. I don't know what other people think about. Mostly the people I know talk about getting by, the ins and outs of everyday life, the general uselessness of politicians, the unfairness of the system as it impacts on them, the way that money influences most decisions, their little joys, hobbies and opinions, paying their bills, their kids.
I do see your point however, even if I don't know what "perturbed" means.0 -
AJAI CHOPRA, the IMF’s European deputy director, has told a conference in Kerry that the most damaging factor leading to the eurozone debt crisis has been the “deep intertwining between sovereigns and domestic banks’ balance sheets”.
Chopra was delivering a speech entitled ‘Strengthening the Financial Stability Framework of the EU’ at the 2011 Economic Workshop in Kenmare.
He said that the “vicious feedback loops” as a result of links between states and banks “that can lead to a crippling downward spiral are painfully evident here in Ireland”.
Chopra has also called for an EU-wide deposit insurance scheme, and more coordinated regulation of the banks. He recommended the appointment of a European Resolution Authority in order to break the link between the balance sheet of the banks and the balance sheet of the state, and that when a bank fails, the cost should be borne by an EU-wide resolution fund.
Chopra said that losses should be borne first by “shareholders and holders of equity-like instruments, and second by uninsured creditors, including senior creditors”.
Referring to Ireland’s unemployment rate Chopra said that the country would not be able to “pop the campagne” until the rate starts to come down, even if Ireland has started to get a handle on its banking problems.
http://businessetc.thejournal.ie/imfs-chopra-says-link-between-state-and-banks-led-to-irelands-crippling-downward-spiral-255186-Oct2011/
Well, well, well...Mr Chopra appears to agree with many of the protesters...The link between the State and the Financial sector needs to be severed and the bondholders should bare the bulk of the burden.0 -
Bannasidhe wrote: »http://businessetc.thejournal.ie/imfs-chopra-says-link-between-state-and-banks-led-to-irelands-crippling-downward-spiral-255186-Oct2011/
Well, well, well...Mr Chopra appears to agree with many of the protesters...The link between the State and the Financial sector needs to be severed and the bondholders should bare the bulk of the burden.
That's not new. Maybe the first time that it has been so clearly and forcefully stated, but the IMF from a very early stage was always at odds with the ECB about imposing losses on bondholders. I'm not sure there is anyone other than the ECB who does not agree that a managed haircut on the bank part of the bailout, and imposing losses on bondholders, is not the way to go.
But what the IMF will not support is the idea espoused by the "IMF OUT" protesters who suggest that Ireland should walk away from ALL its debts, including those incurred through the expenditure for running of the country for the last 10 years0 -
Advertisement
-
That's not new. Maybe the first time that it has been so clearly and forcefully stated, but the IMF from a very early stage was always at odds with the ECB about imposing losses on bondholders. I'm not sure there is anyone other than the ECB who does not agree that a managed haircut on the bank part of the bailout, and imposing losses on bondholders, is not the way to go.
But what the IMF will not support is the idea espoused by the "IMF OUT" protesters who suggest that Ireland should walk away from ALL its debts, including those incurred through the expenditure for running of the country for the last 10 years
The ECB weren't entirely alone - standing next to them were the US (in the form of Geithner) and, rather more importantly and before the ECB ever got a say, our government.
cordially,
Scofflaw0 -
The bit in bold sums up the stupidity of this protest. Not only was it Ray Burke, but those licences have since expired and a new system put in place by the previous government.
It is a bit like something from a Monty Python sketch. It might go something like this: "Down with the king" shout the protesters. On being told that the king is dead and we now have a republic they shout "Down with the President".
Then why are we getting basically nothing for them exactly? Or has that changed too?We own that bank because FF stupidly chose to nationalise it after their stupid bank guarantee. The time to protest was 30 September 2008. If you buy something with a one-day guarantee and it breaks down on the second day, tough, you don't get a refund. That is where we are. What is done is done and the job is to find the cheapest and easiest way out of the mess. Given that FF caused the mess, and that SF and the ULA are operating on another planet thinking that we can reverse what was done, the only people capable of getting us out of the mess are the current government.
That doesn't mean we have to pay exorbitant amounts of money to the people working in it, nor does it mean we shouldn't chase down the criminals responsible for destroying it, NOR does it mean that private speculators who took out investments in it should be paid back.On a side-point, the owners of Anglo, the shareholders got nothing and will get nothing.
And what about the directors who committed fraud?0 -
That's not new. Maybe the first time that it has been so clearly and forcefully stated, but the IMF from a very early stage was always at odds with the ECB about imposing losses on bondholders. I'm not sure there is anyone other than the ECB who does not agree that a managed haircut on the bank part of the bailout, and imposing losses on bondholders, is not the way to go.
But what the IMF will not support is the idea espoused by the "IMF OUT" protesters who suggest that Ireland should walk away from ALL its debts, including those incurred through the expenditure for running of the country for the last 10 years
The ECB weren't entirely alone - standing next to them were the US (in the form of Geithner) and, rather more importantly and before the ECB ever got a say, our government.
cordially,
Scofflaw
Big piece in the Sunday times about exactly that today - an extract from Matt Coopers new book (like we need another book!!!) About how the IMF was playing 2nd fiddle while the ECB and Geithner had the gun to our heads0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
This post had been deleted.
You've dealt with one side of things, why not mention the other; right wingers and liberals?
It often seems to be the case on this forum that anything conservative and/or left wing is automatically a bad thing but let's consider a few point. Right wing policy has seen unpaid work becoming ubiquitous to the point that graduate jobs that pay are actually becoming something special. Left wing policy wouldn't have come up with something like this because one of the positive aspects to socialism is that it proposes a fair wage for a fair day's work.
With regards to liberals, let's take a look at the presidential election. Right now, most hard line liberals seem to favour David Norris as their man because he's radically different from the "normal" irish president. However, whilst he certainly is that, he is also a man with an extremely questionable background that seems to support the idea of pederasty in some shape or form. I'm not trying to spark off a debate about him here but the point is that liberal ideology here is sacrificing morals for the sake of being different.
Thus, we can deduce a rather poignant lesson from this; anything taken to extreme is a bad thing. Far right, far left, ultra conservative a outspoken liberal, each school has its own unique set of problems. However, each also has many positive ideals to offer so the key is find the middle road and try not to fall too far to one side.0 -
This post had been deleted.
To be fair, while the right-winger and the liberal both believe that by espousing choice (economically and socially respectively) they aren't forcing anything on anyone, the conservative and the left-winger would point out that the outcome is to undermine the social and economic structures they prefer, and that that is the intention.
Right-wingers and liberals disclaim responsibility for this by saying that it must be the result of inherently bad structures - which is rather like claiming that you can remove any concept of discipline, responsibility or team play from a rugby squad without any ill effects.
cordially,
Scofflaw0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
Permabear, I wasn't actually aiming that post at you, I just wanted to establish a general overview on the "isms".0
-
I pass this sudden outbreak of homelessness every morning on my way to work. Whatever about their aims, I am bemused at their exit strategy. What do they think is going to happen?
That everyone in Ireland will suddenly arise and march to Dame Street to something-something-something?
Hasnt happened, wont happen.
That the IMF and ECB will fly in to surrender to the protestors, and promise to provide any amount of money without conditions or any plan to repay it?
Hasnt happened, wont happen.
That the Dail will march down to Dame Street to sit down with them, take their vague, meandering, contradictory and uninformed views and establish them as national policies?
Hasnt happened, wont happen.
At the end of the day, once the buzz of sticking it to the man has worn off, they'll eventually start getting smaller and smaller until the remnants defiantly declare victory and go home - all the while ignored by people like myself going to work.0 -
Advertisement
-
Ben Brenanke, Obama and now Angela Merke;l are taking the protesters seriously and have said they don't blame them. Looks like it is getting somewhere.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/10/17/eurozone-germany-protests-idUSB4E7LA00C20111017
Oct 17 (Reuters) - German Chancellor Angela Merkel is taking very seriously anti-capitalism protests this weekend, her spokesman said on Monday.
"The government is ... taking the protests very seriously. They express a concern for more justice of the people," Merkel's spokesman Steffen Seibert told a regular news conference.
"It hasn't yet been achieved but it must be achieved to give the financial markets the rules that we find socially acceptable in Germany," he added.
A finance ministry spokesman also said there should be an international discussion about splitting banks into their business arms.0
Advertisement