St Paul's camp and anti-capitalism

[Marmora Man]

We have any opporutnity to reengineer / refine the way that capitalism is currently structured for the better

What is this opportunity of which you speak? What re-engineering are you proposing? What refinements would work?

Sitting in a tent near St Pauls doesn't seem to have achieved very much - except to undermine the quality of life of Londoners working and travelling in the area - and sending out the wrong message to potential tourists.

If people wish to engage in political dialogue - fine, make a speech, set up a political party, write an article. Squatting isn't dialogue - as Ian Hislop has pointed out all the St Pauls camp has actually achieved is the departure / dismissal of two or three rather woolly minded clerics.

[Loz]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Unregulated capitalism has seriously undermined global well being and democracy. The 'Occupy'

> movement is attempting to encourage a debate on how we organise our society and economy in light

> of the global economic crisis. This thread would suggest that they are going someway to achieving

> this aim. It is hardly fair to criticise them for not providing easy answers.

The Occupy protests remind me a little of the standard Hollywood prostitute scene:

Man: What's your name?

Woman: What do you want it to be?

The people taking part in the Occupy protests has wildly varying reasons for being there, and it seems all of the supporters are happy to read that their particular bugbear is the one that is at the heart of the protest. If I was being kind, I'd say it was a dazzling case of brilliant marketing.

For those of us a little more questioning, it still comes down to 'What do they want?' and that, it seems, is the number one question they don't seem to have an answer for. Whatever, the answer sure as hell does not seem to be 'a debate'.

[Jeremy]

Unregulated capitalism? What, as in... no regulation?

Surely we do have plenty of regulation. The discussion we need is about what additional regs we need to protect our society. Not a load of cliched vagaries.

[Earl Aelfheah]

> What is this opportunity of which you speak? What

> re-engineering are you proposing? What refinements

> would work?

There is a general feeling that the deregulation of the financial industry has seriously backfired. A consensus that the system needs to change and this could act as a catalyst for change. To suggest regulation of the financial markets has been politically difficult, but the crisis has presented an opportunity.

In terms of re-engineering the system, clearly this needs to be looked at very carefully and needs to follow a full, public debate. But, basically, it needs to ensure that markets are more balanced, that they deliver outcomes that are for the benefit of more than a small minority and that they incentivise efficient and value adding activities.

> Sitting in a tent near St Pauls doesn't seem to

> have achieved very much - except to undermine the

> quality of life of Londoners working and

> travelling in the area - and sending out the wrong

> message to potential tourists.

It's created a debate and it's kept some of the issues surrounding the financial crash at the top of the news agenda. It is important that the rightous indignation that followed in the immediate aftermath of the crisis doesn't fade and allow us to return to business as usual IMO.

> If people wish to engage in political dialogue -

> fine, make a speech, set up a political party,

> write an article. Squatting isn't dialogue - as

> Ian Hislop has pointed out all the St Pauls camp

> has actually achieved is the departure / dismissal

> of two or three rather woolly minded clerics.

For better or worse, the actions of the camp have actually done more to raise their profile and propogate their grievances than an letter to their MP would ever have done.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Unregulated capitalism? What, as in... no

> regulation?

>

> Surely we do have plenty of regulation. The

> discussion we need is about what additional regs

> we need to protect our society. Not a load of

> cliched vagaries.

OK, so you could say inadequately regulated capitalism, it amounts to the same point. Primarilly though the issue is about financial markets which have very little regulation indeed.

[DaveR]

"In terms of re-engineering the system, clearly this needs to be looked at very carefully and needs to follow a full, public debate. But, basically, it needs to ensure that markets are more balanced, that they deliver outcomes that are for the benefit of more than a small minority...."

Fine words, but what does this actually mean? What does a balanced market look like, and how do you regulate to achieve it? Delivering outcomes are what (in modern speak) organisations do, but markets are not single entities - they are messy bunches of transactions involving lots of different individuals and organisations.

I looked at the Occupied Times, and it's a none too impressive. I'm trying not to be too harsh but touchy-feely pseudo New Age bullshit will not take anybody any closer to understanding, let alone dealing with the genuinely complicated issues that the current economic situation has thrown up.

[Earl Aelfheah]

There are a number of very dubious practices which need regulating. Closing down so called vulture funds for example. restricting short selling for another. I posted this on another thread, but Professor Robert Frank recently presented a really good lecturer to an audience at the LSE which also outlined some interesting ideas on how one can reduce wasteful activities based on positional competition.

The current crisis has exposed some serious faults in the current system. It's not good enough to say it's too difficult a subject to think about so lets carry on as before.

[Earl Aelfheah]

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I looked at the Occupied Times, and it's a none

> too impressive. I'm trying not to be too harsh but

> touchy-feely pseudo New Age bullshit will not take

> anybody any closer to understanding, let alone

> dealing with the genuinely complicated issues that

> the current economic situation has thrown up.

There is no doubt that the Occupy movement is a fairly disparate group. It's a bit incoherent, but for better or worse, it takes something controvercial and inconvenient like the camp to keep the issue live. Prior to their appearance, we were in very real danger of the debate fading from public attention.

What has actually changed as a result of the financial crisis in terms of how we regulate markets. Very little indeed. There is nothing to stop the same thing happening again? In fact I see only yesterday that the government are encouraging 95% mortgages again.

[Jeremy]

Totally agree that the solution to this mess lies in effective regulation, but to say that financial markets have very little regulation is completely untrue. As for short-selling... it's an essential tool of risk management, and I'm not convinced there's an effective way to ban "naked" shorting.

[DaveR]

"The current crisis has exposed some serious faults in the current system. It's not good enough to say it's too difficult a subject to think about so lets carry on as before."

That's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is these are not camping-protest type issues. This not Greenham Common - say no to nukes! This is "how do you incentivise institutional investors to be more interventionist in the companies that they own to improve corporate governance and long-term planning?" "How do you regulate OTC derivatives trading to achieve robust risk pricing without stifling genuine creativity in capital markets?" Call me a cynic but I doubt I am going to get interesting answers to those questions from a moonlighting social worker in Peruvian knitwear.

[Brendan]

If you put all that on a T-shirt there isn?t enough room left for the silhouette of Che Guevara

[Jeremy]

The media - and the public at large - aren't really interested in discussing constructive ways to prevent this happening again. Bankers' bonuses and students in tents make more entertaining headlines than the shortcomings of Basel-III.

[TE44]

http://www.economicvoice.com/occupy-london-makes-ubs-building-into-bank-of-ideas/50025817#axzz1eSz77Zrv

Occupy Londons website

"The centre was opened on Saturday morning as the ?Bank of Ideas?, with activists promising to make space available for those that have lost their nurseries, community centres and youth clubs to Government spending cuts."

Why not use a building thats standing empty, pity the goverment couldn't come up with ideas like this.

[????]

Don't worry if we don't get our debt under control and start balancing our budget the whole country will soon be empty for the face painters, tipee builders and drum beaters

[TE44]

And where will every1 go ????s.

[Loz]

Nowhere. They'll just join the swelling ranks of face painters, teepee builders and drum beaters. You can never have too many teepees.

[????]

Pity we can't export lounging around talking shite doing nothing rather than trying to sort out the mess we're in

[Brendan]

We do. People from all over the world can read this forum.

[????]

:))

[Jeremy]

Nobody is going to volunteer to run a nursery out of an empty office building in the City. The whole episode is totally absurd.

[Loz]

I think without CRB checks and OFSTED checks it might be a tad illegal as well. Bet no one takes any responsibility if a kid gets hurt or a kiddie-fiddler gets in there.

[TE44]

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We do. People from all over the world can read

> this forum.

Was thinking the same Brendan.

Jeremy This is not a new concept, theres loads of squats, social centres been offering there spaces to be used.

If parents want to take up this offer, and create something different, obviously there are some who would find the idea

absurd, regardless of this building lying empty over two years. What would you like to see happen with this space or would you rather it lay empty.

[Marmora Man]

I suppose such action (self help. Urseries, schools etc) could be considered as an example of the "Big Society" and people doing things for themselves, rather than expecting a paternalistic government to provide for every want using money it doesn't have.

[Jeremy]

Doesn't a nursery need staff (who have had the appropriate training and safety checks)? Does the building have heating, electricity and plumbing? Is it a clean, safe environment for young children? Get real!!

I don't mind them squatting an unused building (I believe it's earmarked for demolition, along with much of the Broadgate estate). But to pretend it's for the good of the greater community is plainly ridiculous.

[TE44]

Everyone should feel safe and welcome in the Bank. Our Safer Spaces Policy asks people to be mindful and respectful of how their ideas or actions might effect others, and there is a No Drugs and Alcohol Policy. As this is a public space any damage or disrespect to the property would be an act of disrespect and violence towards your own community, a community trying to come together to find positive solutions to our current crises. We ask all people who come into the space to come in with respect.

Above of there website here http://www.bankofideas.org.uk/

This may be hard for you to understand Jeremy, but not all parents are happy with education, many home educating.

Nor does everyone feel there children are safe in school.