confirmation2 :)

yep, they are there since 15 Oct, and they grow. :)

Haha  bit of a useless place to be.  They seem to be doing really well, no one knows they're there!!

...not that any of these "occupy.... " things are anything other than useless.

@Reka: hehe, well, I just came back from Amsterdam. The camp of Amsterdam is not bigger...

I think, in a well situated country it is quite hard to find cheap tents (but I guess that is not the point, I mean the price of the tents). Joining Occupy Wall Street even in Geneva, that is a nice thing.

As I know, the Geneva camp is not agaist the money, also the Wall Street attenders do not stand up for deleting the money. They are out there for changing the current economic system, for sharing money on a correct way, and for placing human being in front of the profit.

I think being quiet and persistent is a virtue.

But, all above is an opinion.

For me, one of the points of the Occupy Wall Street is, the make people start thinking worldwide if it is good how the world function at the moment. Is human being true to its own main essence: to LOVE. Do we have time to take care of each other deeply from heart and to be kind with others? Or we are too busy and look everything through the window of having more and more money...

but not any more useless than this utterly silly comment.

Here you go the facebook page of the Geneva occupiers: http://www.facebook.com/occupygeneva?sk=info :)

" Greed is good" - Gordon Geko, from the film Wall Steet

maybe they should make a film called "Wall Street, - Occupied/Available-

like you can read on the public toiliets!

Live stream - worldwide: http://www.occupystream.com/

Hey Royle, have you heard that Oakland port, one of the U.S.'s busiest, was shut down yesterday by Occupy protesters?  There is also strong popular support for a general strike in the same area of California, called for by the protesters.  In the U.K., the movement is growing on a daily basis with new camps having sprung up in Bristol, Bath, Birmingham, Bradford and Edinburgh as well and the original ones in London. 

This is a valid, peaceful, popular and powerful movement which expresses the feelings of probably most of us that we are disgusted with the greed and selfishness of bankers and politicians and the situation they have ked us all to.

It is not useless.  You don't work in banking do you?

I need to address this...

The Occupy movement is NOT small anymore. Occupy Wall Street (OWS) has had hundreds (and at moments thousands) of protestors for over a month now. As I write this, there is a huge march at Occupy Oakland, after last week a protestor (who also turned out to be a US Marine) was hit with a police projectile, and they may organize the first general strike there on US soil in over 20 years. Within a month smaller movements have sprang up around the US and in other countries.Online the movement is huge; if you don't believe me go to www.reddit.com/r/politics and see how much response post on OWS get on a daily basis.

How is this changing things? A Poll has shown 1-2 weeks ago that for the first time since the 2nd world war Americans are in favor of wealth distribution (i.e. to let the rich share a greater tax burden). People may not be marching, but Occupy Wall Street is changing perceptions.

What does the Occupy movement want? They want to rid American politics from the influence of corporations, and they want the banks to be held accountable for the crisis they caused 4 years ago. For details, check their website.Those demands are clear enough to me; it is not up to the protestors to come up with a detailed plan.

If you watch CNN and other media funded by corporations, you may get the impression that (1) the movements are small and irrelevant, (2) they're hippies, (3) they don't have a clear list of demands, (4) they are violent, (5) they are socialists or anarchists, or whatever.

I wish I can remember who said this (Gandhi or Martin Luther King perhaps), or that I can remember the exact quote, and I'm too lazy to look it up. But with every protest movement, the establishment first ignores them, then ridicules them, then try to suppress them, and only then start listening. OWS can no longer be ignored and public opinion is turning in their favor which makes ridicule harder and harder. So now we're seeing police crack-downs all over the US, as expected.

Now, I do have a different opinion when it comes to these protests in countries like The Netherlands and Switzerland. In Western Europe the democratic process works much better than in the US, so if we don't like something that politicians are doing we can decide not to reelect them. But even so Occupy Geneva can play an important role there; they can change public opinion, and that's the only way to influence the electoral process. They are also there, I suspect, to support the movement in the US.

Why are they protesting in Barc de Bastion? Because these protestors are not out to disturb the public or get arrested. They may have agreed on this place with the City of Geneva.

Found it:

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Gandhi

(there seems to be some debate about the authenticity of the quote though)

Dear Reka,

I hope you did not get my comment on yourself and did not get it as an attack, cause the reason of sharing opinion is something really else. ;)

Let me answer your question:

At the end of 2009 we set up a "business" in Serbia (as I am originally from there), an underground art café with my boyfriend. We opened the café on 2 main reasons: 1. we wished to have alternative sort of entertainment in our city; 2. we needed something as a living for as there are not too much job possibilities (as in Hungary)..

We took credit and started. After one year we had to close it as the economic system (especially high taxes) ate it. If you do not pay the tax you go to the jail in Serbia.

So...the reason I came to Geneva is, yep, to earn money to be able to pay the dept what taxes made on the café we had, and to be able to pay back the credit too, as I do not really wish to be arrested on a reason we tried to stay alive by a small business. In case U are lucky, U can get a job in Serbia, but saving is absolutely impossible over there, so there were no too many choises. The fact I ended up in Geneva was an accident (random I mean). :)

As I wrote before: the main point of the protest (according to my opinion) is not to delete money but to change an economic system what eats your soul. But in case there is a better solution instead of money I support that! :) ;)

On the other hand I have been working (volunteering actually) as a dance teacher for more than 10 years, and yes, I love "working" with kids. They have pure soul and they can teach you how to love in case you forgot it. :)

Have a nice day U all! Cheers!

@reka

...absolutely!   I was in a rush when I responded to Royle's mail this morning but I think you could add quite a few to our list.

I'm still waiting for a Youtube video showing an OWS protester with a firm grasp on the fundamental principles of Macroeconomics.  I hear that Ron Paul supporters are out there but I do wonder why they're not occupying D.C. instead.

That's really, really funny.

As if the leading bankers, ratings agencies officials or economists have "a firm grasp on the fundamental principles of Macroeconomics..."

Many don't, but some of these OWS nitwits in the driver's seat would be like the blind leading the blind.

as i recall, no one in OWS is 'in control.' They make a point of saying there is no leader.

I fully support the ideas, the 'goals' (for lack of a better word) and the movement, but I'm still searching for what they expect to happen. What tangible event or events will cause them to say "Yes, we won. We got what we want"?

Although a bit simplistic as an analogy, I'm reminded of the daily protest about the Chernobyl accident near the WHO. I've been here only 3 years, but they have their signs and one lonely person there every day of the week. But I'm always wondering.... what do they want? Does anyone know they are there?

If you are alone in the forest and fall, do you make a sound?

As I see it the main perpertrators to the current financial depression are not the banks or hedge funds,  but the politicians who authorise over extended borrowing and cannot find a way to bring their government spending into line.

Europe (and the US)  has an inequality at Government level, and a debt that is way out of control.

The only way to solve this is to either print money... or get the "people who can" to make money.

Printing money only will devalue your own currency... and hindering banks/hedge funds and traders from making money is effectively capping one of the only sources of possible rescue.

If everyone was made equal now, it wouldnt solve the debt, and it wouldnt build hospitals, nor would it build roads...

I agree there have been some disasterous financial instruments made in the past by banks that have not helped the crisis... but to tag every banker with the same "idiot/ass/robber/capitalist" tag that seems in vogue now is very short sighted and very naive.

Not every protester is a swampy tramp.... not every politician is a "out for himself maniac" and not every banker is a wanker...

Just my ten cents worth....

What about the ratings agencies, Charlie?They played a really villanous role in all this, much more so than the politicians. 

Anyone out there relying on banks or hedge funds as any possible source of rescue let alone building infrastructure or taking care of the general welfare will be waiting forever...

Charlie nails it.

The rhetoric coming from OWS has a clear message of wealth redistribution and almost nothing regarding wealth creation.  In fact, the anti-capitalist protesters appear to be actively against the creation of new wealth.  What I want to know is if we liquidate the 1% and spread the spoils amongst the 99%, what then?  Does OWS have any thoughts on how the 99% can deploy this capital in an effective manner?  Do they think there will be an endless supply of 1%, ready to put their necks on the chopping block for the continued benefit of the 99%?

Wealth redistribution has been taking place for eons -- only from workers to parasitic, non-productive capitalist leeches.  

Examples:

"Ordinary people have been crushed by the deepening housing crisis… 

2,203,295: Number of foreclosures reported in 2007. That’s a 75 percent increase over 2006 numbers.

12 months: Number of consecutive months of declining house prices, as of December 2007.

 …While CEOs of the companies that led us down this path have been let go with golden parachutes.

 Countrywide’s founder and CEO Angelo R. Mozilo

$704 million: Countrywide Financial Corp. net loss in 2007.
11,000: Number of workers Countrywide laid off between July, 2007, and January 29, 2008.
$37.5 million: Approximate value of cash severance payments, consulting fees, and perquisites (including private airplane use) that Angelo Mozilo, founder and CEO of Countrywide, gave up after Countrywide’s merger with Bank of America.
$23.8 million: Estimated value of Mozilo’s company retirement plan in December 2006, the last year for which data are available. Mozilo did not forgo these benefits.

Merrill Lynch’s former Chairman and CEO E. Stanley O’Neal (ret. Oct. 30, 2007)

$161.5 million: Value of securities and retirement benefits that Stanley O’Neal walked away with from Merrill Lynch when he retired. O’Neal did not receive a traditional severance payment.
$7.8 billion: Merrill Lynch net loss for all of 2007.

Citigroup’s former Chairman and CEO Charles Prince (ret. Nov. 4, 2007)

$17.4 billion: Citigroup write-downs on subprime related direct exposures in 2007.
$9.83 billion: Citigroup’s 2007 fourth-quarter loss.
$40 billion: Approximate value of Prince’s retirement package, shares, and options in Citi stock upon his retirement in November, 2007."

I agree with the spirit of the protestors, if not always their rhetoric.

 Bankers hate socialism until they are the beneficiaries -- either directly through bailouts or through tax breaks.  

Val.. seems to me someone has to regulate the system properly, both the financial and the political.

Then someone has to bail out the governments...

Then when the Governments are on an equal footing the distribution of tax, and aid can be re addressed.

As to addressing the ratings agencies issue... if you think they dont get "lobbied" by governments then youre niave.... 

Truely independant ratings agencies should have put Greece and Italy at "junk status" ages ago... and the US should not be AAA or AA... 

The problem with "BLAME" is that it is easy to distribute, often in its entirity  onto the people who are only a "part" of the problem....

I have nothing against a fairer distribution of wealth... however should someone who worked really hard to create this share it unconditionally with some lazy assed free loader... because you can bet your house that this is exactly what will happen...

take the UK as an example.. a great "benfits system" , free health service ...etc... but loosing some 2 billion a year to fraudsters (aka freeloaders)...

For every generous hand held out there is often  more than three waiting to grab it, and only one of the grabbers is likley to be deserving....

Sorry, source for thst quote was this:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/02/mortgage_ceo_pay.html

.

Hey Val...

I'd like to buy a new car...can you lend me some money?

If I cant pay you back , please dont take the car...just let me drive it for free.

ok?

http://youtu.be/UGL-Ex1CD1c

and round 2...

http://youtu.be/-HdsXt5lPro  

Sure, Charlie, although as you know, if I were a responsible banker I would

a) perform a proper credit analysis to determine whether you can afford the car (as opposed to providing you the maximum credit to get my loan approval rates and amounts up in order to compete with my competition);

b) or advise you to save up if you can't afford i orbuy a used car...

Seems many of these bankers simply sold people loans the banks knew the  people couldn't afford. 

This did not happen in the past. Banks successfully lobbied politicians to relax regulations. 

@richardm i haven't heard anyone say "take the wealth away from the 1% and give it to *me* because i'm part of the 99%"

What I think they're saying is: tax everyone fairly. If you make a gazillion dollars, then pay an appropriate income tax. If *every*one pays taxes, then there will be money in the coffers for the gov't do things for the people: infrastructure, health care, social security, etc.

From a recent comic by Golliver, Big Bend Sentinel:

[symbolic Elphant in a suit (Republican) talking....]

Panel 1: The minimum wage is *bad for business*. We should kill it and kill unions, too, while we're at it.

Panel 2: Unemployment benefits are *bad for business* and we can't afford them. Let's kill them.

Panel 3: Social Security and Medicare are *socialism*. Citizens should be free to starve and die without government help.

Panel 4: Corporations are people except for paying taxes and for bearing an responsibility for the harm they cause.

Panel 5: Government regulation is tyranny. The free maket should decide if there are too many poisons in our food, air and waste.

Panel 6: (couple watching TV) "I forget. Why do we support this party?" "They say they're more christian than the other guys."

On Peter Schiff:

"Peter Schiff predicted a collapse of the U.S. financial system. The bust-up he didn't foresee was the one that made mincemeat of investors who took his advice in 2008."

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/01/peter-schiff-was-wrong.html

Good luck investing your money based upon Mr. 1%'s advice

Nevertheless these 'nitwits' are the sovereign people and they deserve to (and must) be listened by whomever is in charge, whether they understand the 'principle etc. etc'. 

After all the principle you are talking about are rules and in democracy we are still supposed to be able to write the rules that regulate the markets and direct the principles. 

One for all: experts might be able to pinpoint how to make the PIB grow, but if that meant lowering again taxes to the richest and rising them to retired people while increasing pollution and waste, the sovereign people might well decide that making the PIB grow is not the priority, whatever the 'principles' and that we better redistribute less than having more in the hands of the happy few.  

@translator
Don't worry about my luck as long as my bailout is subsidized by the taxpayers for the common good! (see Greece)

Yes, governments and the business interests that back them certainy share in the blame as well.

well... we can continue to blame lots of people (after the event)  and furiously sit around stewing about it, suggesting socialistic answers to past events which will not help the future one bit...or we can move on, realise that sitting and stewing about the sheit we are all in is pretty stinky and find a common way to get everyone back on track... whilst perhaps making sure it doesnt happen again.