OCCUPY WALL STREET

[Corkey]

Dear Mr.,
Thank you for contacting me about campaign finance reform. I appreciate hearing from you.

As you may know, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, overturned a federal ban on independent political advocacy by corporations and unions. I understand your concerns regarding this decision and political activities by outside groups and businesses. That said, the Supreme Court has long upheld that political speech, including the funding thereof, is protected by the First Amendment and is an integral part of our constitutional democracy. It is important that Congress be mindful of these constitutional principles, although I understand your concerns about this issue. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind as Congress continues reviewing changes to campaign finance laws.

Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.

Sincerely,



Pat Toomey
U.S. Senator, Pennsylvania


This idiot just doesn't get it.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Latinos and Blacks Missing in Occupy Wall Street


José Fernando López

Editor in Chief, PODER Magazine


Days before the arrest of 700 people in the Brooklyn Bridge in New York, I read in the El Pais newspaper, from Spain, an article about the Occupy Wall Street movement. Until the arrest, except for acknowledging certain fleeting appearances on record, such as the one from Michael Moore or Susan Sarandon, newspapers in this country had not given much importance to the protests taking place in the heart of Manhattan. El Pais, however, has followed the issue with interest from the beginning (mid-September), for its resemblance to the movement of the Indignados (Indignants) that shook Spain a few months ago.

In the El Pais article, my attention was caught by a quote from Gonzalo Venegas, a musician from the Bronx, who was going for the first time to the Zuccotti Park, the center of the protest given the police barrier of Wall Street. "Here," said Venegas, "Latinos and blacks are missing." Maybe, I said to myself while reading such a blunt assertion, it's because the movement has nothing to do with them. But looking more closely at the reasons for the protest, it became clear that it did.

The United States is experiencing the worst economic crisis of the last eighty years, due largely in part to the greed of banks and the lack of regulation of the financial system. And that crisis has not only swept away millions of jobs, but threatens to reduce social benefits -- in addition to those that lost their homes after the bursting of the housing bubble.

The responsibility for the financial system has been pointed out by tens of experts. But none have highlighted that responsibility as the government itself, which after handing out millions of dollars belonging to the taxpayers to the banks -- to avoid a debacle -- decided to sue 17 of them for having "cheated," according to them, state agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by selling toxic mortgages to them.

According to an article in The Wall Street Journal, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which was the official agency that brought the lawsuit, "said the mortgage-backed securities were sold to Fannie and Freddie based on documents that 'contained misstatements and omissions of material facts concerning the quality of the underlying mortgage loans, the creditworthiness of the Borrowers, and the practices used to originate such loan'."

It is no secret that the toxic mortgages -- and the practices followed to originate the loans -- are a great part of the origin of the crisis, and it is against these practices, among others, that the organizers of Occupy Wall Street protest. Well, according to a recent study by the Pew Research Center, Hispanics and blacks are among the groups most affected by the mortgage crisis.

According to the study, "in percentage terms, the bursting of the housing market bubble in 2006 and the recession that followed from late 2007 to mid-2009 took a far greater toll on the wealth of minorities than on whites. From 2005 to 2009, inflation-adjusted median wealth fell by 66% among Hispanic households and 53% among black households, compared with just 16% among white households". And "about a third of black (35%) and Hispanic (31%) households had zero or negative net worth in 2009, compared with 15% of white households".
I'm not sure that a protest movement like Occupy Wall Street is the best way to prevent this sort of thing from happening again. But after analyzing the causes for the protest and the impact the crisis has had on minorities, I understood Venegas' phrase better. For Hispanics living in the United States, and for those seeking to capture their vote in the upcoming elections, there are few issues that should be as important than the issue of migration.

[atomiczombie]

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

Latinos and Blacks Missing in Occupy Wall Street


José Fernando López

Editor in Chief, PODER Magazine


Days before the arrest of 700 people in the Brooklyn Bridge in New York, I read in the El Pais newspaper, from Spain, an article about the Occupy Wall Street movement. Until the arrest, except for acknowledging certain fleeting appearances on record, such as the one from Michael Moore or Susan Sarandon, newspapers in this country had not given much importance to the protests taking place in the heart of Manhattan. El Pais, however, has followed the issue with interest from the beginning (mid-September), for its resemblance to the movement of the Indignados (Indignants) that shook Spain a few months ago.

In the El Pais article, my attention was caught by a quote from Gonzalo Venegas, a musician from the Bronx, who was going for the first time to the Zuccotti Park, the center of the protest given the police barrier of Wall Street. "Here," said Venegas, "Latinos and blacks are missing." Maybe, I said to myself while reading such a blunt assertion, it's because the movement has nothing to do with them. But looking more closely at the reasons for the protest, it became clear that it did.

The United States is experiencing the worst economic crisis of the last eighty years, due largely in part to the greed of banks and the lack of regulation of the financial system. And that crisis has not only swept away millions of jobs, but threatens to reduce social benefits -- in addition to those that lost their homes after the bursting of the housing bubble.

The responsibility for the financial system has been pointed out by tens of experts. But none have highlighted that responsibility as the government itself, which after handing out millions of dollars belonging to the taxpayers to the banks -- to avoid a debacle -- decided to sue 17 of them for having "cheated," according to them, state agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by selling toxic mortgages to them.

According to an article in The Wall Street Journal, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which was the official agency that brought the lawsuit, "said the mortgage-backed securities were sold to Fannie and Freddie based on documents that 'contained misstatements and omissions of material facts concerning the quality of the underlying mortgage loans, the creditworthiness of the Borrowers, and the practices used to originate such loan'."

It is no secret that the toxic mortgages -- and the practices followed to originate the loans -- are a great part of the origin of the crisis, and it is against these practices, among others, that the organizers of Occupy Wall Street protest. Well, according to a recent study by the Pew Research Center, Hispanics and blacks are among the groups most affected by the mortgage crisis.

According to the study, "in percentage terms, the bursting of the housing market bubble in 2006 and the recession that followed from late 2007 to mid-2009 took a far greater toll on the wealth of minorities than on whites. From 2005 to 2009, inflation-adjusted median wealth fell by 66% among Hispanic households and 53% among black households, compared with just 16% among white households". And "about a third of black (35%) and Hispanic (31%) households had zero or negative net worth in 2009, compared with 15% of white households".
I'm not sure that a protest movement like Occupy Wall Street is the best way to prevent this sort of thing from happening again. But after analyzing the causes for the protest and the impact the crisis has had on minorities, I understood Venegas' phrase better. For Hispanics living in the United States, and for those seeking to capture their vote in the upcoming elections, there are few issues that should be as important than the issue of migration.

What do you think accounts for the low black and latino turnout at these rallies?

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

What do you think accounts for the low black and latino turnout at these rallies?

This is "my" personal opinion as to why, if large groups of Latinos and Black gathered in large numbers to "protest" I feel it would be seen differently.. I also believe that this information is not being passed to people who do not have access like we do and don't know that these kinds of gatherings are going on, add economic status and you can count a lot of peoples voices. My hopes this spreads so all towns not just big citties and all peoples are being educated on the chance to use their voices too.

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

What do you think accounts for the low black and latino turnout at these rallies?

This ineresting as I have read a couple of blubs to the contrary. In SF, those that have gathered have been represented by POC quite clearly. Maybe because CA is a border state to Mexico? Or, is it just a SF thing?

The article Snow posted certainly points to how the mortgage lending practices and ensuing foreclosure rates hit POC in much higher numbers than whites.

It also can be atributed to the fact that historically, social movements tend to begin among white, middle class people. In the past this has been due to a very simple factor- they could have more "leisure" time. Although, since the recession has crossed economic and racial lines and is continuing to do so, my guess is that this social movement will keep climbing in numbers of POC and run across class status in ways we may have never seen before.

I wonder if one of the main reasons there are less Latinos involved in public demomstrations is also in play. Fear of harrassment about legal status. I was thinking earlier today after looking at the site that has the schedule of these demonstrations all over the US about cities in AZ and other states that have passed legislation about police being able to just demand documents from people. How the hell will Latinos, many of whom have had foreclosures, feel about participating?

It may very well be that since more and more white, middle-class people are feeling the effects of long term unemployment in much higher numbers and also would be among higher percentages of people that have bank accounts and credit cards as well as mortgages, etc. People that suffer with chronic unemployment and have been dealing with the poverty level in their lives don't use banks (usually can't even get an account due to poor credit scores) or have credit cards. If they do, they are of the type that the person fills themselves and is really not an extension of credit (the pre-paid cards).

My hope is that this will be a movement in which all that are angry with how people are being taken advantaged of by big banks and public corporations can join together and not get diverted by "how many of what color is out here today." That's another thing, this is a revolving movement in which people demonstrate on dats they can and not on others. Demonstartors are revolving in and out as they can with their own obligations. So, there are different people every day of the demonstrations.

I'm just throwing out some possibilities here- and I am going to go look for the links of articles that state that there is a good turn-out in various areas of POC.

[Martina]

Originally Posted by AtLastHome

It also can be atributed to the fact that historically, social movements tend to begin among white, middle class people.

That is simply not true. The Civil Rights Movement was not started by white middle class people. The Labor Movement was not. The LGBT rights movement was not. The Disability Rights movement was not. Anti-Apartheid was not. Indiginous Peoples Movements were not. And on and on.

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Martina

That is simply not true. The Civil Rights Movement was not started by white middle class people. The Labor Movement was not. The LGBT rights movement was not. The Disability Rights movement was not. Anti-Apartheid was not. Indiginous Peoples Movements were not. And on and on.

And you are very misinformed and ignorant of the facts! I have taught social problems and movements for many years. Look up middle-class leisure time variables and social movements in the united states and most certainly the Second Wave of feminism. You are very much out of your league here.

Poor and working poor people are usually struggling to keep food on the table, work more than one job and don't have the all of the "free" time that the middle class has had.

[EnderD_503]

Originally Posted by AtLastHome

And you are very misinformed and ignorant of the facts! I have taught social problems and movements for many years. Look up middle-class leisure time variables and social movements in the united states and most certainly the Second Wave of feminism. You are very much out of your league here.

Poor and working poor people are usually struggling to keep food on the table, work more than one job and don't have the all of the "free" time that the middle class has had.

Eh. It depends on the movement. I agree that a great deal of rights movements were given breath by middle class people, but it wasn't the case in every movement of the early modern/modern era. Martina does have a point about certain movements she's mentioned: the birth of the Gay Rights movement, if we trace it from Stone Wall, stemmed from some of the most marginalized people of contemporary society (trans sex workers, drag queens, working or impoverished gay men) becoming fed up with police raids and mistreatment. Of course, the academics that gave a louder voice to the movement (though did not initiate it), were certainly indispensable.

Anti-Apartheid was a mixed bag, and without black South Africans and white South Africans coming together there would not have been as great a success. Same can be said for the Civil Rights movement in the US.

There are quite a few rights movements and revolutions out there that had little to do with white middle class people. At the same time, many rights movements also required the involvement of white middle class academics in particular (the feminist movement as you mentioned. Without middle class white women in particular, there would be no feminist movement, either first or second wave), in order to gain widespread success.

The poor not having leisure time to think of acting on their own oppression is not as true in the 20th century as it was in the 19th and 18th centuries (and before, of course). Especially in groups that were frequently the targets of regular state violence and brutality.

I'm not sure it's a generalisation that can be applied to all movements, is what I'm trying to say.

[dykeumentary]

Originally Posted by AtLastHome

And you are very misinformed and ignorant of the facts! I have taught social problems and movements for many years. Look up middle-class leisure time variables and social movements in the united states and most certainly the Second Wave of feminism. You are very much out of your league here.

Poor and working poor people are usually struggling to keep food on the table, work more than one job and don't have the all of the "free" time that the middle class has had.

Whoa.
"Very misinformed," "ignorant," and "out of your league"?
Is this CNN or a social website?

An example that comes to mind right off the bat is the struggle of Indigenous Peoples in North America. I'm a working person, so probably someone who teaches knows more than I do, but I'm pretty sure that First Nation people have been fighting for their continued existence since they first had contact with European people. I'm guessing that makes them the longest-fighting resistance here, even without the help of the white middle class. This thread does have the word "Occupy" in it's title.

Seems like if the white middle class is writing the script, they might be giving themselves a starrng role, and set the definitions? My view of history leads me to think the white middle class is best at looking after it's own interests. Most of the time that's involved complacency. I think disenfranchised people have shown a lot of energy and inventiveness working on their own behalf. I think that's one of the reasons the NYPD has to use terrorism to discourage resistance.

[Corkey]

On the news, ABC and MSNBC when they were showing the protesters I saw a mix of races, many many young and many many women. Sorry not into tallying the numbers. I know our city has a protest to be staged, no one has intimated it's only for white people. So far it is mostly academics doing the talking however. Not many poor people have access to computers outside of work or school, so when it is staged the poor may just well join.

[Dominique]

Originally Posted by Corkey

Not many poor people have access to computers outside of work or school, so when it is staged the poor may just well join.

Computers and the internet are free at all libraries, career link provides the same free services. Most YMCA's and YWCA's have compter labs and the use is free. Dress for Success, (a woman's back to work program) has a no charge computer lab.....computer access, to folks who can not afford it, is readily available, if one wants it. just saying.

[MsMerrick]

AtLast, I disagree with your general statement. If you wanted to reword it to s say that often a movement caught fire or got media recognition, when it was taken over by the white middle class..I "might" agree. But I remind you that "historical facts" are reported by the white middle class..Particularly going back to the 50's and for many years forward, whites were pretty much the only people recognized as being a story !

[Greyson]

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

What do you think accounts for the low black and latino turnout at these rallies?

Like Snowy (and ty for responding to this question) what I am posting is only my opinion. No science, statistical anything to back it up. Purely my oberservation and judgment.

It is a little bit different for POC and especailly for those without a certain level of education and/or money, resources when gathering in large numbers. First, if you must be somewhere to earn a living and it is going to make the difference as to whether you can put a roof over your family and food on the table, guess which one you choose? You go to work, not the march.

Second, if you are a member of a group of people that historically have been treated unfailry by our figures of authority and power; One tends to learn how to avoid being in situations that might render you "guilty until proven innocent" or harrassed within the frame of what is legal, maybe, or just humiliating. Many POC have had a few generations to learn the skills of how to survive in a hostile environment. These lessons are not easily unlearned. The trust is not there.

Some people may be undocumented and if arrested fear they will be deported. Others may have a previous criminal record that is recent or decades old. It is possible they cannot afford to have another arrest on their record. Even if the arrest is only civil disobedience.



__________________________________________________ ______________________________

African Americans and Hispanics suffer disastrously high unemployment rates in metro areas
Two new EPI briefing papers by Algernon Austin, director of EPI’s program in race and ethnicity detail the catastrophic effect the nation’s jobs crisis has had on African American and Hispanic communities across the nation. In High black unemployment widespread across nation’s metropolitan areas, Austin compares the post-recession unemployment rates of 2010 to those before and at the end of the recession (2007 and 2009) in 31 metro areas.
http://www.epi.org/publication/high-...politan-areas/
At 24.7 percent, Detroit led the nation in black unemployment in 2010. Likewise, Milwaukee, Las Vegas, and Minneapolis all had black unemployment rates over 20 percent. Sun Belt cities were once a refuge for African Americans seeking employment before the recession, but the metropolitan areas of Charlotte, Miami, Tampa, and Las Vegas all had unemployment rates above the national black average and were among the highest rates of all the metro areas examined.
The Huffington Post used the paper’s findings to create this interactive slideshow depicting the 10 cities where black unemployment is rising fastest.
Hispanic unemployment rates in metropolitan areas around the country had similarly discouraging findings. http://www.epi.org/publication/hispa...ent-northeast/ Of the 38 places studied, 18 saw an increase in Hispanic unemployment of over one percentage point since 2009. Providence, Rhode Island had the highest unemployment for Hispanics with a rate of 25.2 percent, followed by Hartford, Connecticut at 23.5 percent.
This week’s Economic Snapshot further illustrates the high rates of Hispanic unemployment across the nation.
The metropolitan areas with the highest rates of Hispanic unemployment were much higher than the national Hispanic average of 12.5 percent and even rival the peak national unemployment rate during the Great Depression.
“Without a strong federal jobs program, the pain of very high unemployment is likely to be long-lasting for most of America’s metropolitan blacks and Hispanics,” said Austin.

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

Latinos and Blacks Missing in Occupy Wall Street


José Fernando López

Editor in Chief, PODER Magazine


Days before the arrest of 700 people in the Brooklyn Bridge in New York, I read in the El Pais newspaper, from Spain, an article about the Occupy Wall Street movement. Until the arrest, except for acknowledging certain fleeting appearances on record, such as the one from Michael Moore or Susan Sarandon, newspapers in this country had not given much importance to the protests taking place in the heart of Manhattan. El Pais, however, has followed the issue with interest from the beginning (mid-September), for its resemblance to the movement of the Indignados (Indignants) that shook Spain a few months ago.

In the El Pais article, my attention was caught by a quote from Gonzalo Venegas, a musician from the Bronx, who was going for the first time to the Zuccotti Park, the center of the protest given the police barrier of Wall Street. "Here," said Venegas, "Latinos and blacks are missing." Maybe, I said to myself while reading such a blunt assertion, it's because the movement has nothing to do with them. But looking more closely at the reasons for the protest, it became clear that it did.

The United States is experiencing the worst economic crisis of the last eighty years, due largely in part to the greed of banks and the lack of regulation of the financial system. And that crisis has not only swept away millions of jobs, but threatens to reduce social benefits -- in addition to those that lost their homes after the bursting of the housing bubble.

The responsibility for the financial system has been pointed out by tens of experts. But none have highlighted that responsibility as the government itself, which after handing out millions of dollars belonging to the taxpayers to the banks -- to avoid a debacle -- decided to sue 17 of them for having "cheated," according to them, state agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by selling toxic mortgages to them.

According to an article in The Wall Street Journal, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which was the official agency that brought the lawsuit, "said the mortgage-backed securities were sold to Fannie and Freddie based on documents that 'contained misstatements and omissions of material facts concerning the quality of the underlying mortgage loans, the creditworthiness of the Borrowers, and the practices used to originate such loan'."

It is no secret that the toxic mortgages -- and the practices followed to originate the loans -- are a great part of the origin of the crisis, and it is against these practices, among others, that the organizers of Occupy Wall Street protest. Well, according to a recent study by the Pew Research Center, Hispanics and blacks are among the groups most affected by the mortgage crisis.

According to the study, "in percentage terms, the bursting of the housing market bubble in 2006 and the recession that followed from late 2007 to mid-2009 took a far greater toll on the wealth of minorities than on whites. From 2005 to 2009, inflation-adjusted median wealth fell by 66% among Hispanic households and 53% among black households, compared with just 16% among white households". And "about a third of black (35%) and Hispanic (31%) households had zero or negative net worth in 2009, compared with 15% of white households".
I'm not sure that a protest movement like Occupy Wall Street is the best way to prevent this sort of thing from happening again. But after analyzing the causes for the protest and the impact the crisis has had on minorities, I understood Venegas' phrase better. For Hispanics living in the United States, and for those seeking to capture their vote in the upcoming elections, there are few issues that should be as important than the issue of migration.

I can only speak from personal experience about the protest I attended yesterday, (Wednesday),evening. The organizers were a groupcalled United, and the majority of them were people of colour. They were very recognisable in their red t-shirts, and they did an excellent job keeping the crowd safe. Perhaps the news media chooses to focus on the white protestors, (I wouldn't know because I don't have a TV), but the mix of demonstrators that I saw seemed to be a good reflection of the diversity of our NYC population.