Occupy Wall Street Movement Spreads Across the World!

Yes, Barak Obama jumped back in time and set the whole financial system up... damn him and his time travel...

Took long for faux news to make this an anti obama campaign didnt it...

 

Well it's that we can assume that these protestors are basically wanting reforms. But these reforms have already happened under Obama and the democrats. So what are they protesting against? These protests would have made more sense in 08.

 

They would have made more sense in 08, I will agree... but I won't agree with the rest.

What are the changes you think are wanted, that have already been met?

 

^

Well do the protestors know about this?


President Obama signs most sweeping Wall Street reform bill since Great Depression - New York Daily News

 

Do they know about that particular article? I am unsure as to how I would know such a thing.

Are they aware that of the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the agency that was created out of it? I would assume so... How is it you think that is meeting anyones demands?

Just because it is called 'reform' doesnt mean that is what it does... It just makes those at the top hide their games a little more, it does nothing to stop them.

 

Wow. I just saw on Occupy Together that there are at least 85 confirmed, ongoing and active occupations & 1,150 communities in some stage of planning worldwide.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/09/us/occupy-wall-street/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

Good you mentioned this Tom,. For years I've ranted about the lack of consumer protections and big business buying away regulations and laws shielding them from fair business practices. I remember when the Pres. introduced the new Consumer Protection Act and the fanfare around the agency director. Elizabeth Warren was picked to run the new Consumer Protection agency. From what I her she was stonewalled and pretty much powerless to do her job. Where was her support? Washington ate her alive. Another major disappointment from Obama. Real change could have been set in motion. Hardly a word was written about her and the lack of authority and power she was given to change corporate behavior and protect consumers.
This is just one example of the 'real change' Obama campaigned on.

Consumer Protection Act

The Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 was signed into law on 29 April 2009 by the State President and comes into effect in stages, with the first part having come into effect on the early effective date on 24 April 2010 including the basic franchise agreement requirements of Section 7 and the so called "no fault" liability provisions of Section 61. The remainder of the Act is now scheduled to come into effect on the general effective date which was postponed by notice published on 23 September 2010 to 31 March 2011.

Off-course it is still possible that someone will challenge sections of the Act in the Constitutional Court which could delay the coming into effect of those sections. Click here to read a copy of the act. Click here to read a copy of the regulations.

Section 7, which as mentioned above came into effect on 24 April 2010, provides for Franchise Agreements to be in writing, signed on behalf of the franchisee, include any prescribed information, or address any prescribed categories of information (none at the moment) and be in plain and understandable language. Further, a franchisee may cancel a franchise agreement without cost or penalty within 10 business days after signing such agreement, by giving written notice to the franchisor.

Of more interest to the ordinary consumer, is the "no fault" liability provision in Section 61 which provides that regardless of whether they are negligent or not, a producer, importer, distributor, retailer, or installer are jointly and severally liable for any harm, injury or damage caused wholly or partly as a consequence of
(a) supplying any unsafe goods;
(b) a product failure, defect or hazard in any goods; or
(c) inadequate instructions or warnings provided to the consumer pertaining to any hazard arising from or associated with the use of any goods.

What the above means, in plain language, is that where a consumer is injured or harmed in any way, or any property of a consumer is damaged by or due to goods, if the consumer can prove that the goods actually caused the harm or damage, the consumer would be able to claim damages including any economic loss suffered, such as loss of earnings, present and future medical costs, and the like, in addition to the value of the product. This is a huge improvement in the protection of consumers as in the past, before the Consumer Protection Act came into effect, the consumer would have also had to prove that the retailer was negligent (did not act reasonably) which is almost impossible to do for most consumers. Furthermore, the consumer can now claim damages from anyone, or the entire supply chain, so that the retailer cannot blame the manufacturer, who then blames the distributor and the consumer cannot identify who is responsible for their harm or damage, as someone in the supply chain will be responsible although it may not be the retailer if the problem arose as a result of poor workmanship, however, the consumer will not need to figure this out, the retailer and the manufacturer will each have to prove why they are not the responsible ones and one of them would be responsible. Click here to read an article on the 'Impact of the Consumer Protection Act on the food industry'

A detailed analysis of the Consumer Protection Act as it effects the Snack Foods industry, but which is applicable to a greater or lesser extent to all food industries, is provided here for general information only and should not be taken as legal advice and there is no substitute for professional legal advice from an attorney specialising in this new but complex field. It is off-course even better of your attorney is an engineer or scientist too, as we are. click here to read more....
http://www.hahnlaw.co.za/consumer-protection-act.htm

 

Maybe we cant beat the bankers and corporations. But dam at least give us something to fight them with.

 

We have everything we need to fight them and win.

People and time...

There is no reason that we have to run out of either of them.

If people stay and it grows, we will win. If they give up and leave, we lose.

It really is as simple as that.

 

This is not new people have been retaining lawyers for such things for quite some time now.

 

Break the chains of the right left, us versus them, paradigm. It will only serve to distract.

Do not allow yourselves to be taken over the democrats/republicans, down that path lies failure.

Beware instigators. There will be those who will try to convince you to commit violence, vandalism or other illegal acts. Shun and ignore them.

Realize that the media will try to make you appear illegitimate. Defeat their attempts by doing nothing illegitimate. First they mock you...

Avoid issues of emotion and divisiveness, focus on that which unites you. The media, which is the tool of the enemy, keeps the masses focused on issues like gay marriage, abortion, socialism. While these issues are important to many, those battles are for later and in many cases are impossible to resolve in todays world.

Find mechanisms by which the common man identifies with you. If they see a person in khaki's and a polo, someone like them, being maced the outrage will grow.

Find a few uniting issues that EVERYONE will get behind. For example:

- The federal reserve system fosters corruption and the redistribution of wealth from the many to the few. It must be abolished

- The large international banks are the enemy. Throughout history those who inspire and are admired have fought the international bank. Emulate them.

- The wars are the tools of the banks, who fund both sides just like they profit on both sides of each bubble. They care naught for the deaths of our troops, or the civilians of other lands.

- Glass–Steagall must be restored. This is one of the main tools by which the banks defeat us.

There will be more.

Diogenes The 99

http://diogenesthe99.blogspot.com/?v=0

 

What an ass-hat...

William D. Cohan wrote in Bloomberg Business Week:

"Zuccotti Park, truth be told, seemed more like a low-energy Manhattan street fair in desperate need of funnel cake and grilled sausages than the world-changing movement"

http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...eds-goals-or-funnel-cake-william-d-cohan.html

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/09/us/occupy-wall-street/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 

Good to see some people here who get it.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/10/us/occupy-wall-street/index.html

 

With your money. Not all corporations are bad, but there are some really bad corporations. Don't give them your money. Vote with your $. It's one of your loudest voices.

 

Boycotts are one of our most powerful tools in this movement. Before making a purchase do a little research on what you plan on buying. I know its a pain in the ass but you will only have to research a product once and then you will know if it is something worth buying. If I need tools or something I will usually go to garage or estate sales and look for older tools that were made in the USA, even though they are old the quality is far superior to what is sold in stores today.

 

I've seen a lot of politicians and Wall Street types describe the protests in similiar terms.

Underestimating this will prove to be their downfall.

 

(this is paraphrased-I did not record it).Last night on 60 minutes,the CEO of General Electric showed exactly one reason people are pissed. Lesley Stahl asked him how much money GE made overseas. 50 % ,he said and they showed workers in Brazil working on aircraft engines. Of course ,they employ workers in other countries too. He said 'I work for the stock holders and we go anyplace in the world to make a profit in keeping with THE NEW WORLD ORDER ".She said something like-" don't you understand why people could be upset when you make such huge profits, and receive tax breaks from the government when the economy is so bad and people need jobs here"? He said something like "I don't know WHY people wouldn't want us to be successfull". She missed a chance to tell him " you just told us why. Those jobs belong here--now. Why can't your products be made HERE and shipped to buyers in other countries"? He,in fact re-affirmed that profits above country--any country--is the bottom line for corporations. It's been obvious for quite a while,but interesting to see a clueless jack-ass admit it. Is this the man chosen to help with the jobs bill for Obama? Shhhiiiitttt!!