Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

I Totally Support the Occupy Movement...Follow

#27 Oct 17 2011 at 8:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
No, ThiefX is varus's retarded cousin.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#28 Oct 17 2011 at 8:51 AM Rating: Excellent
******
49,831 posts
Completely interchangeable.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#29 Oct 17 2011 at 10:17 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
10,795 posts
Saw the movement down here in San Diego and I saw that the protesters were from all different walks of the world. But I did have one problem with a couple of protesters where I got the impression that they were using the OWS to avoid their responsibilities.
#30 Oct 17 2011 at 10:30 AM Rating: Good
******
20,020 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Completely interchangeable.


And your avatar represents both shockingly well. Just needs to include more foaming-at-the-mouth anger.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#31 Oct 17 2011 at 10:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
I know we're not supposed to compare Occupy Wallstreet with the Tea Party, but there are lots of good comparisons to be made.

I've been impressed with the grassroots movements of both.

I wonder if, like the Tea Party, the Occupy Wallstreet deal will also coalesce into it's own political party or an off-shoot of the dems (if so, it has a stupid name). I think it's past time to shake up our 2-party system.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#32 Oct 17 2011 at 2:38 PM Rating: Good
******
20,020 posts
I doubt it will. The Tea Party movement was demanding something from an existing system, but OWS seems to largely be about what people see as the fundamental defects of such a system, which is why they desire a new one.

Kinda hard to create a unified political platform when your issues and incompatible with the politics you'd need to engage with.

This is definitely an over-simplification of course. But one thing that's important to note about OWS is that it isn't so tied to demographics as the TP is. TPers are almost entirely staunch social conservatives mixed with middle- to far-right political conservatism. OWS is certainly a liberal movement, but it's much less focused on liberalism--it extends from the right-center to the far-left (including many libertarians--place them wherever you think they fall).
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#33 Oct 17 2011 at 4:15 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Olorinus wrote:
I think it is fair game to question your roomate's self-interested motives for latching on to the occupy movement/their ideology. Perhaps for her, it represents a codification of her abdication of responsibility.

Honestly, if that is the case, she doesn't really get it (at least from my perspective). The fact is, what the core of the movement appears to be trying to do is to create a new dialogue about democracy and the values of our society. Truly participating in such an "occupation" would actually be a lot of work. And honestly, people who have to work (within the system) to scrape by actually might be the least able to participate in such an excercise.


But doesn't that make the message (and certainly the messengers) a bit dishonest? How much weight should we put on a group of people complaining about wall street and bank bailouts, when they are by far the least (negatively) impacted by those things in the first place? How can you complain about "our money" being used to bail out wall street, when you haven't paid taxes (and that's ignoring the whole "TARP money to banks paid back in full with interest bit)?

While I can accept that there are some legitimate complaints to be made (from many directions), the main face of the Occupy movement seems to be young people with minimal work/life experience, basically showing up to demand a free ride and pretending that somehow the fact that other people's tax dollars were spent in ways that they don't like gives them the justification to make said demand. Meanwhile, most of the people who actually work and pay taxes seem to understand the issue better and aren't jumping into the Occupy bandwagon.


On an amusing side note, when I first read that (especially the bolded section), it reminded me of the Hippy movement and how most of the communes failed. What happened in many cases was that about 10-20% of those in the communes actually wanted them to succeed and realized that hard work was involved. Real hard work. Like digging irrigation ditches, planting crops, building and repairing homes, etc. The other 80-90% wanted to live in a "free society" in which everyone shared everything. And they came up with all sorts of justification as to how their work making crafts, and singing songs, and thinking/talking about how wonderful their society could/should be, was just as valuable to the commune as any other work. Meanwhile, they "shared" the food at the table, and the water from the dug and maintained well, and thought everything was wonderful and perfect.

What inevitably happened was that the folks who were actually working in productive ways either took control of the commune and imposed some rules to make sure everyone was pulling their weight, or, failing that, left in disgust. Which resulted in communes that either became as authoritarian (or moreso) than the world they'd left or which collapsed due to the simple fact that you can only support so many people selling flowers and songs on the side of the road.

Not sure what reminded me of that, but it did. I suspect that many of those young kids at those protests are like the people in the communes who thought a perfect society was one in which everything was "free". But someone has to work and pay for those things, right? I don't think many of them really understand that. That's the impression I get from this movement. As you said, an abdication of responsibility. And I while I'm sure there's a small number of people who want to take a more responsible approach, they, like the hard workers in the commune are inevitably outnumbered by those who leap upon such movements thinking it'll be a free ride.


The abdicators may not be the "core", but they are the majority.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#34 Oct 17 2011 at 4:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
OWS Is a less homogenous group than TP.

But the core of their demands fall into the large tent of the democratic party (It's ideals, not the DNC of reality) most of which include shifting tax law to adjust wealth/control levels to create more parity, and beter use of central financial instruments to smooth economic curvature.

Some of this is waylaid by the "unclear" message which ends up turning the group into more of a socio-political inkblot test where people see what they want to see (even more than usual)
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#35 Oct 17 2011 at 4:31 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,547 posts
Quote:
But doesn't that make the message (and certainly the messengers) a bit dishonest? How much weight should we put on a group of people complaining about wall street and bank bailouts, when they are by far the least (negatively) impacted by those things in the first place? How can you complain about "our money" being used to bail out wall street, when you haven't paid taxes (and that's ignoring the whole "TARP money to banks paid back in full with interest bit)?


That is a pretty bold statement. I have been well off, just getting by, underemployed underemployed. I will tell you a few things about "Our Money". One time in my life I was unemployed, I paid no income taxes and had no costs. This was about 3 years ago. I have paid taxes since I was 14 nearly 2 decades of taxes with 1 year of that time not paying any.

I have reaped minimally, Ive never been on welfare, Ive never taken EI, Ive never used a non repayed form of government assistance.

You know what I ******* about while I was unemployed, the fact that when it was my turn sit on the bench my Government denied me getting money even with the 10's of thousands a year I help put into these various programs, I got nothing back. Maybe it is because I moved back in with family who knows the point is I have put up my part, and got nothing back for it.

I can totally see why people would be ****** off if they paid and paid and paid, now have no work, and the Govt instead gives money to banks and corporations.

While I do agree there are a lot of freeloaders and people who just float along, they are far from the majority, they are as much a minority as the extremely wealthy. The majority are people like you and I who clock in and out everyday watching 20-30% of our pay get taken by various government agencies.

Personally I am tired of supporting freeloaders, but I am more ****** at governments around the world dropping billions into huge companies. That is the peoples money, not some fat cat who already has a healthy 100 mil at his disposal.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#36 Oct 17 2011 at 4:33 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
But the core of their demands fall into the large tent of the democratic party (It's ideals, not the DNC of reality) most of which include shifting tax law to adjust wealth/control levels to create more parity, and beter use of central financial instruments to smooth economic curvature.


Which are, for the most part, the very parts of Dem fiscal policies the public has been condemning for the last couple years as largely to blame for the very financial mess we're in. People don't want more wealth redistribution and more government in private business. They want less of it.

Quote:
Some of this is waylaid by the "unclear" message which ends up turning the group into more of a socio-political inkblot test where people see what they want to see (even more than usual)


I can't argue directly that this is deliberate, but it does provide a great smoke screen. The usual liberal suspects arguing for raising taxes on the rich and passing more government regulations on big business would fail. But get a bunch of people banging on bongos and just saying that they don't like bank bailouts and government corruption and corporate greed without any firm and consistent agenda, and suddenly you can gain support for this "non-movement" you've got going on.

Follow that up with the usual Dem suspects showing up on TV and giving interviews about what all these people want, and you can effectively co-opt the chaos. Not sure how well it's going to work, but that certainly seems to be what the liberal pundits and political groups are trying to do right now.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#37 Oct 17 2011 at 4:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Quote:
Which are, for the most part, the very parts of Dem fiscal policies the public has been condemning for the last couple years as largely to blame for the very financial mess we're in. People The rich and the poor who have been brainwashed into protecting the rich don't want more wealth redistribution and more government in private business. They want less of it.


FTFY. Remember, Dems are people too and they still comprise a good 25% of the population. So "people" is a pretty poor over generalization, especially considering a lot of left-moderates who don't identify as Dem but rather identify as independent also don't agree with your statement.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#38 Oct 17 2011 at 4:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Quote:
Which are, for the most part, the very parts of Dem fiscal policies the public has been condemning for the last couple years as largely to blame for the very financial mess we're in. People don't want more wealth redistribution and more government in private business. They want less of it.


No, 'people' don't want less of it, you want less of it. And wealth redistribution has already been going on, albeit in the opposite direction these 'socialists' are calling for.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#39gbaji, Posted: Oct 17 2011 at 4:47 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) What is the people's money? Failing to tax the rich more isn't the same as giving money to the rich. We already take more from them than they cost us. Far far far more. What you are proposing isn't really about protecting the people's tax dollars from the evil rich corporations, but rather proposing that we take more of the corporations money to increase the "people's money" (the governments money really), which you then want to spend I assume on giving handouts to people.
#40 Oct 17 2011 at 4:51 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Quote:
Which are, for the most part, the very parts of Dem fiscal policies the public has been condemning for the last couple years as largely to blame for the very financial mess we're in. People don't want more wealth redistribution and more government in private business. They want less of it.


No, 'people' don't want less of it, you want less of it. And wealth redistribution has already been going on, albeit in the opposite direction these 'socialists' are calling for.


Which is why candidates adopting the very clear Tea Party position in opposition to wealth redistribution and higher taxes for more government programs won huge in elections last year, right? Meanwhile, the left has to muddle their position with a bunch of bongo playing and flailing protesters.


If raising taxes to pay for more social programs was really popular Democrats would be running on it. They aren't. They're running away from that. But the Left just has to win elections, not convince the public of their agenda. If they can win while obscuring their agenda, they will. I suspect that's what they're trying to use this movement to accomplish.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#41 Oct 17 2011 at 4:51 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Quote:
Follow that up with the usual Dem suspects showing up on TV and giving interviews about what all these people want, and you can effectively co-opt the chaos. Not sure how well it's going to work, but that certainly seems to be what the liberal pundits and political groups are trying to do right now.


In the same way the conservative pundits are trying to cast the group as some kind of anarcho-anti-Corp mass causing trouble. This is why I called it an inkblot. There is massive leeway to see meaning in chaos, even more than human cognition is preprogrammed to. It's very interesting in that sense.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#42 Oct 17 2011 at 4:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
But that's not most of the people who attend these protests. Most of them are high school and college aged kids, who have either never worked a job, or never worked more than part time, have lived most of their life being provided for by their parents and have not contributed much of anything (yet).

Huh. And here I was reading a bunch of their little stories and seeing how many of them were people who had been laid off and were upset at how the banks and Wall Street get bailed out when they're in trouble while they get to lose their mortgage and watch their kids go without health care. Totally a high school problem or one held by slackers living in their mom's basement Smiley: rolleyes

Oh, well. At least we know you're not immune to the same knee jerk stereotyping and pigeon-holing you cried so much about when it was applied to the Tea Party.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#43 Oct 17 2011 at 4:55 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
catwho wrote:
Quote:
Which are, for the most part, the very parts of Dem fiscal policies the public has been condemning for the last couple years as largely to blame for the very financial mess we're in. People The rich and the poor who have been brainwashed into protecting the rich don't want more wealth redistribution and more government in private business. They want less of it.


FTFY. Remember, Dems are people too and they still comprise a good 25% of the population. So "people" is a pretty poor over generalization, especially considering a lot of left-moderates who don't identify as Dem but rather identify as independent also don't agree with your statement.


At the risk of repeating myself, the last mid term election was a massive statement about how much the voting public (people) don't agree with the very policies of wealth distribution we're talking about. They overwhelmingly rejected the arguments to end the Bush tax cuts (even just on the rich). And the voters spoke loud and clear about overspending by our government and on the health care bill.

I think it's quite reasonable to say that "the people" have clearly expressed their disagreement with the idea of redistribution of wealth. And as I stated in my last post, there was no garbling of that message. It was not hidden behind some kind of vaguely stated set of protest signs. It was front and center.

Edited, Oct 17th 2011 3:56pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#44 Oct 17 2011 at 5:00 PM Rating: Excellent
****
9,526 posts
gbaji wrote:
rdmcandie wrote:
I can totally see why people would be ****** off if they paid and paid and paid...


But that's not most of the people who attend these protests. Most of them are high school and college aged kids, who have either never worked a job, or never worked more than part time, have lived most of their life being provided for by their parents and have not contributed much of anything (yet).


Really? Cause the protest I went to actually had a ton of older people, people with kids, people with full time jobs - and actually everyone I saw there who I knew is already very active in conventional politics as well (that's the other argument I've heard - that ppl should be voting etc)

Did you actually go to any of these things and talk to the people there? Because in my experience the demographic spread of the protest was very wide in terms of age and life responsibilities

Here is a nice photo essay which has a handful of people - yes some of them are young - but even those ones seem to be making really lucid criticisms about things that DO or WILL effect them.

For example, do you really think that a kid just out of high school shouldn't be concerned about either having to forgo university or be 40K in debt?

http://thetyee.ca/News/2011/10/15/OccupyVancouver/

Edited, Oct 17th 2011 4:02pm by Olorinus
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


#45 Oct 17 2011 at 5:04 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Huh. And here I was reading a bunch of their little stories and seeing how many of them were people who had been laid off and were upset at how the banks and Wall Street get bailed out when they're in trouble while they get to lose their mortgage and watch their kids go without health care.


And those people were in the majority? I've seen the pictures of the crowds Joph. We all have. On every station. You can't tell me that more than a minority (probably a small minority) of those people have ever held more than part time jobs while attending school. There are a **** of a lot of young faces in those crowds.

Quote:
Totally a high school problem or one held by slackers living in their mom's basement Smiley: rolleyes


Yup. Are you looking at the same crowds I am?

Quote:
Oh, well. At least we know you're not immune to the same knee jerk stereotyping and pigeon-holing you cried so much about when it was applied to the Tea Party.


Get back to me when by saying that most of these people are young student age people, I'm actually misrepresenting them. But I'm not, am I?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#46 Oct 17 2011 at 5:13 PM Rating: Excellent
****
9,526 posts
gbaji wrote:

Yup. Are you looking at the same crowds I am?



Maybe you watch too much Glee or something but 25-35 year olds don't look like teenagers to me. And I don't see any signs saying "I live in my parents basement"

Also... I don't think you really understand what these people are saying - young people ARE having to live with their parents longer - not because they are slackers but because rents are high and wages are low.

Edited, Oct 17th 2011 4:14pm by Olorinus
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


#47 Oct 17 2011 at 5:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Yup. Are you looking at the same crowds I am?

Are you?

Are these all high school students?

That was from the first page of image results. Thanks for proving my point for me, though.

Which isn't to say that youth doesn't make up a percentage of the protests and probably makes up a majority of the tent dwellers (hard to live in a tent when you have kids at home) but do they make up a majority of the protesters at large or a majority of the movement? You'll have to do better than pointing at some select photos of youth acting goofy (and thus photo-worthy) to make that point.

Quote:
Get back to me when by saying that most of these people are young student age people, I'm actually misrepresenting them. But I'm not, am I?

Getting back to you right now! Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#48 Oct 17 2011 at 5:32 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,982 posts
Olorinus wrote:
Also... I don't think you really understand what these people are saying - young people ARE having to live with their parents longer - not because they are slackers but because rents are high and wages are low.


And how exactly does targeting those most likely to provide them with good paying jobs help them? They may as well call themselves the "hit me over the head with a shovel" movement. It would be just as productive.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#49 Oct 17 2011 at 5:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
It's so nice to know that since I'm not having any luck on the job hunt that I've regressed back to a teenager (ugh) and moved in with my parents.
#50 Oct 17 2011 at 5:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
gbaji wrote:
Olorinus wrote:
Also... I don't think you really understand what these people are saying - young people ARE having to live with their parents longer - not because they are slackers but because rents are high and wages are low.


And how exactly does targeting those most likely to provide them with good paying jobs help them? They may as well call themselves the "hit me over the head with a shovel" movement. It would be just as productive.


Where are all these mythical good paying jobs? That's what they are out there protesting. Them being out there isn't going to take away what currently doesn't exist in the first place.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#51 Oct 17 2011 at 5:55 PM Rating: Good
****
9,526 posts
Yeah not protesting about the richest 1% taking more and more and more and more has sure produced a lot of jobs... yep. That's why the unemployment rate in the US is... what?
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 1 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (1)