The Bloomberg Nation

How downright scary is this?

"I have my own army in the NYPD, which is the seventh biggest army in the world.  I have my own State Department, much to Foggy Bottom's annoyance.  We have the United Nations in New York, and so we have an entree into the diplomatic world that Washington does not have." -Mayor Michael Bloomberg

The New York Observer recorded the above quote from a speech Mayor Bloomberg gave to students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on 29 November 2011.  It is simply shocking to me that he would claim such an "army" mere weeks after citizens were brutalized in the streets.  

It is only in the light of this human tragedy that burning the Occupy Wall Street Library is a lesser evil.  The obsession with power makes this seemingly moderate mayor come off as a brute.  That he would cite these powers as valuable experience for the presidency is as clear of a sign of megalomania we citizens can get from elected officials.

What is more frightening is that this admission comes only a few months after the shocking news that the NYPD has been working closely with the CIA in order to secretly spy on citizens in the years since 11 September 2001.  As the Huffington Post reports this is still going on, unabated, and without any real accountability.  Furthermore, the police department has been using its funding to spy across the tri-state area, which is clearly a violation of its jurisdiction.

These actions, taken together, make it very easy to present the case that the New York Police Department is out of control.  In addition the department and the mayor's administration have hardly offered apologies for any of these "minor" atrocities.  What happened to protecting and serving?  What happened to the democratic spirit in the governance of New York City?

Declaration of Occupation of Wall Street

From what I can tell, the so-called Declaration of Occupation was released a little over a month ago.  But I only noticed it in its most recent media resurrection, and I thought it was worthy of commentary.  In short, sorry if this is all too repetitive.

The primary intent of the document is to list some of their grievances, which I will get to below the fold.  But I think the preamble requires comment as well.  One of the most problematic statements is "[...] corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth."  First of all, the idea that corporations or any conscious agent requires consent to do something is not the attitude of a free people.  I am not an anarchist or even that hardcore of a libertarian*.  However, I am distressed by the pervasiveness of statements like the above, or that tax cuts cost the government money.  But the occupiers claim is the worst I have heard, because the restriction they seek to place on corporations is against economic agency.  Furthermore, the idea that wealth is something that can be extracted is incredibly naive.  Better writers than me have tackled the subject, but just in case any occupiers happen across this post, wealth is not some sort of finite good.  As the wealthiest 1% gain more wealth, it does not necessarily mean there is less for the rest of us.  As Penn Jillette, Matt Ridley, and lots of other libertarians like to say "Things generally get better." (more below the fold)

My Take on Occupy Wall Street

Noam Chomsky gave a rousing speech to the Occupiers yesterday saying:

After the first few years, by the mid-1930s, although the situation was objectively much harsher than it is today, the spirit was quite different [...] There was just a sense that somehow we're going to get out of it. It’s quite different now. Now there’s kind of a pervasive sense of hopeless [sic], or, I think, despair.

Full disclosure: Professor Chomsky is consistently called the smartest man in academia and has a lot of credentials to prove it.  I am an unemployed college graduate.  Long story short, his analysis is probably right.

However, I don't know anyone with a sense of hopelessness or despair about the current economic climate, and I am willing to bet most people don't.  I also find it strange that he thinks the protests are really indicative of those feelings to begin with.  My reading of the situation is that a lot of unemployed liberal and fine arts types have banded together with socialists and market-reformers to protest the banks' actions over the past couple of decades.  A few videos I have seen have featured protesters who say they love capitalism.  Though maybe Dr. Chomsky is right; perhaps those sentiments are widespread.  My question is: should that really affect policy?