I literally payed no attention to this until today. I was bored on campus and have been reading all day and watching videos. Just wondering what everyones thoughts are on this subject, because I brought it up at work and all my coworkers had not even heard of it.
I think it's pretty awesome. people are finally calling out the bullshit:
New York Observer: Exclusive "Occupy Wall Street" Unaired Fox Footage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yrT-0Xbrn4#ws)
That guy loses all credibility because of his 1864 hat.
Plus, busting on Newscorp/Fox is old hat. Pun intended.
Mixed. While I'm glad someone is standing up, I have been pissed off at the people. Many are trust fund babies who can afford to do this because their parents made money on wall street (at least in Manhattan). Other times, I saw people whine because they paid $400,000 for a house that's now only worth $90k or $200k in debt for a dual major in english and "niche" study degrees.
Yes, some of the burden is on the system for charging so damn much for tuition because people want to make a better future, and yes, some of the burden is on the banks for knowingly giving bad mortgages then complaining when their bets went bust. That's what needs to be rallied against (the student loan shit hasn't hit the fan yet).
But at the same time, I feel like some people just want to scapegoat against the banks too because they wish they could be as reckless and irresponsible with their investments and get away with it. And while it's true that in many situations, it was a bad investment on both sides, I've never been one to believe in a quid-pro-quo system of doing things. One person cheating doesn't justify the other doing the same.
This "dialogue" that is starting because of these protests can only gain traction if they start to recognize that the blame for our financial mess lies not on wall street alone. This needs to become "occupy congress", and "occupy the front yards of people who bought a house they should have known they couldn't afford". The banks and their mortgage backed investments (derivatives) are to blame, but so are the politicians who made those products legal back in 1999-2000.
I'd like to "Occupy the Hummers, McMansions, Luxury Vacation Condos, and Giant Fucking Boats" that executives have bought for themselves with giant bonuses that corporations continue to pay after collecting bailout money while still making gigantic profits and employing fewer people.
Well yes there's that too.
Quote from: el_chode on Oct 06, 2011, 10:10 PM
Mixed. While I'm glad someone is standing up, I have been pissed off at the people. Many are trust fund babies who can afford to do this because their parents made money on wall street (at least in Manhattan). Other times, I saw people whine because they paid $400,000 for a house that's now only worth $90k or $200k in debt for a dual major in english and "niche" study degrees.
Yes, some of the burden is on the system for charging so damn much for tuition because people want to make a better future, and yes, some of the burden is on the banks for knowingly giving bad mortgages then complaining when their bets went bust. That's what needs to be rallied against (the student loan shit hasn't hit the fan yet).
But at the same time, I feel like some people just want to scapegoat against the banks too because they wish they could be as reckless and irresponsible with their investments and get away with it. And while it's true that in many situations, it was a bad investment on both sides, I've never been one to believe in a quid-pro-quo system of doing things. One person cheating doesn't justify the other doing the same.
the thing about these protests is they are economic protests. and it's the poor vs the wealthy. the truly poor people can't be out there occupying shit because they have to work to feed their families and pay their bills. they really aren't defined now at all, but I think at this point it's simply about spreading basic awareness to the public about the corruption going down. people shouldn't be shutdown if they feel outraged, it is a right to protest, even if you're a poop dick tea bagger. it's a bigger deal than the media is making it out to be. there are protests starting to build up everywhere. same basic movement. occupynation.org,
our country is fucked if the poor can't even afford to protest for their own rights. and they can't, it's up these people for now. still think it's more awesome than not awesome.
unrelated but about protesting. saw it on PT and want to post it up anyway, it's pretty solid:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqzcUMrDmjM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqzcUMrDmjM#ws)
You know Mr. Sticky, you really are hitting at the real issue here. As someone who wasted alot of time getting a niche degree with a specialization in Latin American politics - I had to spend hours comparing various revolutions to one another. The mistake that people always make is presuming that revolution comes from a gigantic gap between the top and the bottom of the pyramid, the bottom finally getting fed up, and revolting.
This is somewhat true, but rarely does change take place until there is a slip from the educated middle back into the bottom. Succesful dictators in Latin America are usually the ones who keep very few very rich and 95% of the people starving and controlled. The grip fails when the starving and controlled are fed and free and then asked to starve again.
I really think something is happening here. I recently read a very interesting article that argued that we are transitioning from a society where everyone expects a job and the abilty to work to a society where there aren't enough jobs for people. Essentially an unavoidable welfare state. Technology has made our lives easier as is always the goal, but at the same time, it takes alot less people to accomplish the same tasks. My phone replaces ten people that I used to need.
This movement hasn't quite coalesced into something I can support just yet. Though I share some of the protesters' viewpoints, I'm a pretty moderate liberal and wary of being painted (read: dismissed) with the hippie-dippie brush. Maybe some moderate Republicans feel the same way about the Tea Partiers.
With an election year on the horizon, I can't help but feel that this energy would be better spent finding, vetting and funding candidates who would further the movement's agenda.
The same protest (no doubt with some of the same protestors) is hitting Toronto very soon, probably on Bay Street, Canada's financial hub a la Wall Street. Although it's not organized and lacks focus, I can't but agree with the protest's overall message(s).
I read somewhere that it has moved to Canada, London, Australia, Egypt, and Europe (Occupy Europe in general).
I haven't read up fully on it, but I tend to agree with most of what I've read. What sucks, which has been said here, is that until there is any kind of actual recognition, people who are employeed can't just drop their lives to go live in a tent.
Quote from: e_wind on Oct 07, 2011, 01:37 PM
I read somewhere that it has moved to Canada, London, Australia, Egypt, and Europe (Occupy Europe in general).
I haven't read up fully on it, but I tend to agree with most of what I've read. What sucks, which has been said here, is that until there is any kind of actual recognition, people who are employeed can't just drop their lives to go live in a tent.
From what I gather, a big part of the message is unemployment, so the demographic of those involved makes sense. Also, unions are getting involved, which will only raise the profile and give the protest focus. If you think about it, if it could, Big Business would operate with as few (if any) employess as possible; we are all under threat.
Quote from: e_wind on Oct 07, 2011, 01:37 PM
I read somewhere that it has moved to Canada, London, Australia, Egypt, and Europe (Occupy Europe in general).
London and Amsterdam (and probably more cities) are planning big events for oct. 15
http://occupylondon.org.uk/ (http://occupylondon.org.uk/)
http://www.occupyamsterdam.org/ (http://www.occupyamsterdam.org/)
the DC protests seem to be picking up a little steam:
#OccupyDC Shuts Down US Chamber of Commerce Peacefully and Demand Jobs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikI8VhPGZks#ws)
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2011/10/07/some-'occupy-sacramento'-protesters-lash-out-at-questions/ (http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2011/10/07/some-'occupy-sacramento'-protesters-lash-out-at-questions/)
We've got our best and brightest on the job out here in Sacramento. ::)
sort of like this (NSFW)
Rant worth listening too.mp4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mAUQYn6DjM#)
STOP POLICING THE WORLD! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKfuS6gfxPY#ws)
add (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlYG6vh2T-M#ws)
I have never been a republican, im just a supporter of Ron Paul..
I'll be honest and say I just don't get it. I hear interviews with people who are protesting that are saying they want to put an end to corporations and greed. Really? That's pretty broad.
I live in Sacramento and it seems like the protests are costing our already broke city a lot of money that we don't have and there does not appear to be a clear, realistic goal behind them.
Quote from: lucylew on Oct 07, 2011, 11:17 PM
I'll be honest and say I just don't get it. I hear interviews with people who are protesting that are saying they want to put an end to corporations and greed. Really? That's pretty broad.
I live in Sacramento and it seems like the protests are costing our already broke city a lot of money that we don't have and there does not appear to be a clear, realistic goal behind them.
it seems like a lot of people feel that way. it's hard to imagine what it's going to take to accomplish something. there are all types of people even ron paul supporters pushing the gold standard: www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZmPWcLQ1Mk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZmPWcLQ1Mk#ws)
all types of ideas being spread right now like herpes on both side
Quote from: lucylew on Oct 07, 2011, 11:17 PM
I'll be honest and say I just don't get it. I hear interviews with people who are protesting that are saying they want to put an end to corporations and greed. Really? That's pretty broad.
I live in Sacramento and it seems like the protests are costing our already broke city a lot of money that we don't have and there does not appear to be a clear, realistic goal behind them.
You gotta look at it in a broader scope. The protest costs Sacramento money for sure, but when it's over it's over. Corporate greed, soft-taxing the ultra rich and the huge unemployment of youth etc... is ongoing with no end in sight, and inevitably monumentally more expensive than a one day/one week sit-in. Making people think about what's actually going on and/or asking questions is a good thing, regardless of whatever the perceived short-term pain.
I don't think the "big picture" of this movement has been made clear enough for me to understand.
my interpretation is that people are finally waking up en masse to the fact that their government doesn't represent them - it represents the best interests of whomever pays the politicians the most money (corporations and banks), and people are pissed.
Personally I voted for a symbol of hope in the last election, and have been underwhelmed at what has been accomplished. I blame obstructionist tactics from the right and a president lacking the balls to force the issues and run roughshod over the wants of the opposing party as his predessor did. I'd like to see him institute single payer healthcare (but the Healthcare industry has the public brainwashed into thinking that the status quo is peachy keen). But there is enough blame to spread around. Democrats, Republicans, Tea Partiers - they all are concerned with themselves first, and whomever is writing the biggest checks second. The public they placate to avoid violent revolution- and it seems that is getting harder every day.
Articles that say the world is over are just as dumb as the apocalypse people in the fringe religions. I mean at a certain level, a welfare state must collapse into anarchy until a stable system re-emerges. That's not to say it'll be easy and painless or even a revolution. It'll just happen over time. Nothing is permanent. The recession will not be any more permanent than the boom times we went through. It might take time, decades even. Or at least, 20 years. It doesn't mean people shouldn't be scared or pissed or anything. At least FDR put Andrew Mellon on a show trial during the Depression to give people some sense of comeuppance.
Here's my list of things that piss me off:
- Protesters protest wall street for playing by the rules they lobbied the corrupt politicians to set up.
- Protestors blindly and violently cling to their ideologies, and by proxy, their binary thought process of "democrats vs republicans".
- They fear the other side so much they can't stand to have them get elected, so they cling to their side fiercely.
- They vote in the same and/or more of the corrupt politicians who promise them more money at election and then turn their backs when it matters most.
- Wash, rinse, repeat.
The only odd thing I notice about the occupy Wall Street thing is that it seems to be an amalgam of tea partiers, socialists, anarchists, and too-dumb-to-know-much-but-protests-are-fun types - groups typically diametrically opposed to one another.
Again, while I do appreciate someone finally taking some stance and causing inconvenience, I wish they were better organized, at least enough to not have a bunch of people prostesting corporations while wearing ironic corporate logo vintage retro tshirts.
(http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/occupy100711/s_o15_RTR2S6NY.jpg)
Not to mention misspelling "billionaires"! >:(
The Toronto "Occupy" will be held October 15th. The organizers had a meeting in a downtown park yesterday and handed out pamphlets stating what the protest is all about. Quoting the today's Toronto Star: "young people who are fed up with the current economic and political status quo". Basically, the pamphlet asks a series of questions such as: do you have debt, are you satisfied with the government's response to climate change, do you think the land we farm should be treated with more respect, and have you lost any investments.
Ontario just had a provincial election two days ago and the enviro-friendly incumbent Liberal Party won its 3rd term, but it was tight race and they will rule in minority gov't. However, I think the protest on the 15th is aimed mostly at Canada's out-of-touch federal Progressive Conservative government and big business and banks on both sides of the border.
The Star article goes on to say that you have to admire the spirit and grassroots nature of the movement, even it appears somewhat directionless to some. Organized labour here in the city are watching proceedings closely. Hey, I'm in a union and I'll be watching (although I have no choice since I work for both the Business Network and a 24-hour news channel).
I heard you Torontoans (is that what's right? Torontoids?) have some other fracas with your waterfront being sold to developers who are related to one of the party's major candidates or something? Like total nepotism at taxpayer expense stuff, no?
Quote from: el_chode on Oct 08, 2011, 09:16 PM
I heard you Torontoans (is that what's right? Torontoids?) have some other fracas with your waterfront being sold to developers who are related to one of the party's major candidates or something? Like total nepotism at taxpayer expense stuff, no?
You are thinking about the nearby city of Mississauga, which is actually a giant suburban "city". Their mayor made a back-alley deal to help out her developer son, but it was not on the water.
We downtown Torontonians have to endure two buffoon right-wing brothers running things, one is the mayor. They and their executive council recently got out voted regarding their crazy revision of the 25-year east waterfront plan... and thank the heavens they lost, since their vision was destructive and insane: world's biggest ferris wheel, high-end shopping mall, glitzy office towers, shipping channel and very little residential. The east waterfront master plan is finally coming to fruition (vibrant mixed-use neighbourhoods with shops, transit and parks) and these two idiot Ford brothers are the anti Jane Jacobs (they hate the arts, libraries, zoos, bikes, parks etc...).
Quote from: Sticky Icky Green Stuff on Oct 08, 2011, 12:09 AM
Quote from: lucylew on Oct 07, 2011, 11:17 PM
I'll be honest and say I just don't get it. I hear interviews with people who are protesting that are saying they want to put an end to corporations and greed. Really? That's pretty broad.
I live in Sacramento and it seems like the protests are costing our already broke city a lot of money that we don't have and there does not appear to be a clear, realistic goal behind them.
it seems like a lot of people feel that way. it's hard to imagine what it's going to take to accomplish something. there are all types of people even ron paul supporters pushing the gold standard: www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZmPWcLQ1Mk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZmPWcLQ1Mk#ws)
all types of ideas being spread right now like herpes on both side
I agree with Occupy as a whole, though the lack of organization and unification is making it really hard. The last minute of that video just seemed like a clusterfuck of people who can't agree on what they're fighting for
The Facebook Occupy Nashville page sums up all the confusion of "protesting for protesting" sake: you have all these messages of organizing and philosophical pining against government, wall street, the military, etc... and on the right side of the page you have ads for Capital One Credit Cards; refresh the page and it's Chase Bank. refresh the page and it's Groupon....
I have very little hope for America changing its course. Other than a catastrophic economic collapse where people are FORCED to change I don't see these protests having a huge effect on anything.
However, the statement that the guy in the picture makes on the previous page- the one where billionaire is misspelled and advocating for socialism- drives home one important point: Ignorance is bliss.
Quote from: e_wind on Oct 09, 2011, 04:19 AM
Quote from: Sticky Icky Green Stuff on Oct 08, 2011, 12:09 AM
Quote from: lucylew on Oct 07, 2011, 11:17 PM
I'll be honest and say I just don't get it. I hear interviews with people who are protesting that are saying they want to put an end to corporations and greed. Really? That's pretty broad.
I live in Sacramento and it seems like the protests are costing our already broke city a lot of money that we don't have and there does not appear to be a clear, realistic goal behind them.
it seems like a lot of people feel that way. it's hard to imagine what it's going to take to accomplish something. there are all types of people even ron paul supporters pushing the gold standard: www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZmPWcLQ1Mk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZmPWcLQ1Mk#ws)
all types of ideas being spread right now like herpes on both side
I agree with Occupy as a whole, though the lack of organization and unification is making it really hard. The last minute of that video just seemed like a clusterfuck of people who can't agree on what they're fighting for
Let's keep in mind one last piece of the puzzle that has yet to materialize: student debt.
Yes, you see lots of these kids with +$200k in liberal arts debt. That sucks, and they're unemployed, so they're there. Good. However (and I say this as a liberal arts major) they're also the ones who couldn't get jobs, and they honestly made a mistake getting niche degrees for that price. And I'm not making fun of niche degs - political philosophy and philosophy took me this far. But I had the benefit of having my parents help me out partially with that part of my education. I'm still in heavy debt for my law degree. The fault there is the university scam where people are trying to make a better life for themselves with a better education - things that should not be burdens on anyone's life.
The shit will hit the fan when enough people with more useful and advanced degrees show up. But right now, they can't. They have jobs, though often just barely. I have interns with me now who have masters in Genetics and Chemical Engineering + law degrees, and they can't get jobs.
We The People Have Found Our Voice (Occupy Wall Street) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSfcuwtkVbo#ws)
I don't know. I really think that there is more to all of this; some sort of inter-connectiveness (I think I just made that up). It wasn't like the general protests of the 60's were all that "organized" and "focused" - there were a million different social agendas driving disperate groups of people to cry out for change. Whether real change was acheived or not is open to debate, but the power of it all is beyond question.
Quote from: bowl of soup on Oct 10, 2011, 04:30 PM
I don't know. I really think that there is more to all of this; some sort of inter-connectiveness (I think I just made that up). It wasn't like the general protests of the 60's were all that "organized" and "focused" - there were a million different social agendas driving disperate groups of people to cry out for change. Whether real change was acheived or not is open to debate, but the power of it all is beyond question.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/interconnectedness (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/interconnectedness) (haha you aren't making words up). I'm the same way sometimes with words. dictionary.com is your friend haha. when in doubt type something that looks like the word you want and they'll give you a list to choose from haha.
people want somebody to go after, they want something specific to be able to breakdown and criticize. so far this movement hasn't given anybody anything real to bitch about out. it's a constitutional right to peacefully protest. it never stopped the god hates fags people. it's a progressive movement that is looking for better living conditions for the poor. with so many people it's easy for the media, bloggers, op-ed pieces to single out the dumb idiots or hippies and generalize what's going on as unorganized but the bottom line is a lot of the people out there have legitimate, personal concerns. it's their right to protest. there are protestors protesting the protestors. it's insanity. but it's a constitutional right.
and choder I've heard student loans/debt mentioned more than once by different people involved in this movement. so give it some time I think that's going to be a big issue that goes with this movement. who knows, it's interesting and I'm glad to be alive right now to experience so many people being completely fed up and pissed off. it's the america I've always dreamed about. maybe one day weed will be legal?
Speaking of the protests in the 60s...you know...the same people who sold us out, the same ones who fought to legalize it then kept it illegal, the same ones who fought the establishment and then became it.
Fuck them all. Even if there is student loan reform, it won't affect me. Obama already tried it once, and it ended the subsidized stafford loan. So now there's no non-interest bearing loan for students. And of course, any and all changes will be prospective. There'll be nothing done to change the bad contracts already signed; there will just be changes going forward giving lip service to students while just making loans harder to get.
Quote from: el_chode on Oct 10, 2011, 07:50 PM
Speaking of the protests in the 60s...you know...the same people who sold us out, the same ones who fought to legalize it then kept it illegal, the same ones who fought the establishment and then became it.
Fuck them all. Even if there is student loan reform, it won't affect me. Obama already tried it once, and it ended the subsidized stafford loan. So now there's no non-interest bearing loan for students. And of course, any and all changes will be prospective. There'll be nothing done to change the bad contracts already signed; there will just be changes going forward giving lip service to students while just making loans harder to get.
it really is sickening how much that part of the loan market or whatever it's called squeezes kids. nothing like starting off your life without a job and 30K-125K+ in debt in a bad economy that simply does not have the jobs anymore. things are straight fucked, being sensible and peaceful is the only way these protests will progress. I really hope there is more help to college students. it's all about the middle class. but legit solutions, not this rhetorical bullshit romney and the other politicians are pushing. even obama, that fucker lost major points with me this week when his administration went after the California marijuana industry. it feels like he pissed in my face.
should be interesting to what happens tomorrow:
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/culture/2011/10/3722467/bloomberg-tells-occupy-wall-street-protesters-clear-zuccotti-park-fr (http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/culture/2011/10/3722467/bloomberg-tells-occupy-wall-street-protesters-clear-zuccotti-park-fr)
I don't see many people leaving. Only the ones who are there for the thrill, not the cause
Crazy Hippies @ Occupy Wall Street (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOkMizZjhBI#ws)
That wookie looks like the guy who played Shaggy in the Scooby Doo films.
Quote from: Jaimoe on Oct 14, 2011, 02:25 PM
That wookie looks like the guy who played Shaggy in the Scooby Doo films.
;D Matthew Lillard
hahahahahahaha
Occupy Toronto starts this morning in the Financial District. A tent city is being erected and a timeline when the protest will end is not known. The Canadian economy is strong and we don't have the same financial problems afflicting the US and many Euro countries, but these protestors say they are still concerned about the growing disparity between rich and poor, worldwide, along with rising poverty. We are not expecting another G20 fiasco since most of those idiot rioters were organized hoodlums trucked in from other cities and counties.
Here's a good article of why I'm less than enthralled with the movement
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/occupy-wall-streets-greatest-strength-is-neutering-it/246671/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/occupy-wall-streets-greatest-strength-is-neutering-it/246671/)
Wow, I love that.
that article is bullshit. it's a good example of the apathetic people in this country.
AS IT'S HAPPENING - Occupy Times Square - approx 5:40pm - 10.15.11 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2h_Uk9f0dQ#ws)
I'm assuming that writer wrote the article purely because they thought "which drum circle should I join" was a funny joke. the article reminds me of some dude whose pissed they've gotta fight a little more traffic in the morning. a well off, normal person who generalizes these protests as a bunch of hippies. it's worthless commentary.
Occupy Toronto is still going on, but it's petering out. Unseasonably cold weather hasn't helped, but I'd say its been a success.
BTW, anyone see the footage from Santiago, Chile? WOW! 60,000 marching in their dowtown hoisting a giant flag. Also, Rome is burning, literally. It's one thing to sit here somewhat smug and think the protestors in NA are a bunch of directionless hippies, but the face of protest in other countries doesn't look like Wavy Gravy.
Unpopular post coming, and Sticky you'll hate me, but these protests are BS (at least the one down here). Protests don't really do anything. It's not 1967. Change comes a hundred other ways, innovation, education, figuring out how to keep jobs here, staying on top of elected officials and knowing who/what you're voting for. There are so many different facets of this economic turmoil, most of it inevitable and further downturn to come. SEC turned a blind eye, a couple of scumbags at AIG and all of Goldman Sachs, brokers persuading people they could afford houses with no down payments. These protests aren't organized and it doesn't seem like most of the protesters understand the bigger picture. The heart of this country is jobs, it's not a partisan issue (tiny parts of it CAN be). The jobs are gone. As a country, we need to figure out how to keep jobs here. It's not the govt's job to create jobs, nor can they. (take all the failed green initiatives)..One example of how change can come about is how Obama was elected. Learning how to turn 3 or 4 states in the electoral college. Very well thought out, meticulous, grass roots effort with specific attainable goals. (or even one close to this band's heart, the anti-mountain top removal movement).
I'm not upset or angry, I just really think they should all pack up, go home, and start strategizing. There ARE ways to change things, this isn't one of them. I'm not saying ALL the protests, other countries are different. Maybe that CAN work other places.
Quote from: Penny Lane on Oct 17, 2011, 12:43 PM
Unpopular post coming, and Sticky you'll hate me, but these protests are BS (at least the one down here). Protests don't really do anything. It's not 1967. Change comes a hundred other ways, innovation, education, figuring out how to keep jobs here, staying on top of elected officials and knowing who/what you're voting for. There are so many different facets of this economic turmoil, most of it inevitable and further downturn to come. SEC turned a blind eye, a couple of scumbags at AIG and all of Goldman Sachs, brokers persuading people they could afford houses with no down payments. These protests aren't organized and it doesn't seem like most of the protesters understand the bigger picture. The heart of this country is jobs, it's not a partisan issue (tiny parts of it CAN be). The jobs are gone. As a country, we need to figure out how to keep jobs here. It's not the govt's job to create jobs, nor can they. (take all the failed green initiatives)..One example of how change can come about is how Obama was elected. Learning how to turn 3 or 4 states in the electoral college. Very well thought out, meticulous, grass roots effort with specific attainable goals. (or even one close to this band's heart, the anti-mountain top removal movement).
I'm not upset or angry, I just really think they should all pack up, go home, and start strategizing. There ARE ways to change things, this isn't one of them. I'm not saying ALL the protests, other countries are different. Maybe that CAN work other places.
I agree with some of this. I think protests can work, but not until things get so bad for the protestors that it isn't worth it any more (Kent state, for example)
Protest can definitely cause change in other places, and Egypt is living proof in 2011.
Penny Lane, I'm assuming you are directing your thoughts on the situation in the US? Whether protests get immediate results or not (more times it's the latter), seeds are planted and things can and will change. It's happening in Syria, Egypt and down the road, Italy and Greece (and probably the rest of the PIGS). There's certainly a growing worldwide discontent, and these types of protests at least put problems up-front and generate discussions. Without them, we can all go back to complacency and grumbling about the government.
Yeah, definitely directing my thoughts domestically. I think they have more of an impact in other countries. I just think seeds are planted better in other ways. Not sure it will bring about results immediately or down the road.
As for countries like Greece, I have no idea where the govt even goes from here or what good those protests will do...in the end, aren't they really at the mercy of Germany? Workers who've had their wages cut or lost jobs or what not..everyone has a right to protest, but I think it's different if it's for a specific reason.
I've talked to a few of the protestors, each one of them said something different...I walked away going..huh?
Quote from: Penny Lane on Oct 17, 2011, 01:28 PM
Yeah, definitely directing my thoughts domestically. I think they have more of an impact in other countries. I just think seeds are planted better in other ways. Not sure it will bring about results immediately or down the road.
As for countries like Greece, I have no idea where the govt even goes from here or what good those protests will do...in the end, aren't they really at the mercy of Germany? Workers who've had their wages cut or lost jobs or what not..everyone has a right to protest, but I think it's different if it's for a specific reason.
I've talked to a few of the protestors, each one of them said something different...I walked away going..huh?
Sometimes protest is the only way the average citizen with a beef can get noticed. Writing a letter to the newspaper and/or calling a radio station is generally an insignificant means, and all media has bias, usually of the conservative variety. One thing protests do is force attention to a certain cause to the Joe Six-packs and the generally ignorant masses. You only need to convince a few. I don't need convincing about what big business are up to and the growing disparity between rich and poor. I think major urban centres are already hip to many of the worldwide issues, but the US is a different bag entirely given how divisive your country is becoming or has become (and I worry the same thing might happen to my homeland down the road). Thus, the timing of Occupy is perfect for NA.
I'm sorry to say this penny but even suggesting that protests do not work is retarded. suggesting that these people shut up and go home is undemocratic. the tea party protests worked who says these won't? why censor the publics voice?
I think there are other ways to do things, what with twitter, Facebook, local elections, getting musicians on board, making documentaries..I just think these are too unorganized...I'm all for uprising and giving people a voice, I'm just speaking about these specific protests...
BTW Sticky, censorship is telling ME not to voice my opinion...I'm not suggesting they don't have a right to do what they're doing. I'm saying it's not going to achieve much in the end. I relish the fact that we live in a country where people gather (actually that park is private property but the ower is allowing them to be there) in public to protest. That's not my point.
"suggesting that these people shut up and go home" is DEMOCRATIC (not undemocratic), that's my right to express my opinion, just as you have the right to call it retarded...but I'm not trying to censor anything..
edited--and i never suggested that these people shut up and go home, i suggested that they stop the protests, by no means shut up or stop trying..it's almost 2012, Kent State happened 42 years ago, protests need to change with the times as well.
Quote from: Penny Lane on Oct 17, 2011, 02:07 PM
I think there are other ways to do things, what with twitter, Facebook, local elections, getting musicians on board, making documentaries..I just think these are too unorganized...I'm all for uprising and giving people a voice, I'm just speaking about these specific protests...
The gadget age offers relevant platforms for protest, but twitter and Facebook are faceless and even more unorganized than the Occupy groups. Musicians are always protesting and seem to feed off public discontent, so the two are interconnected. Politicians? Good luck with that. If you want a large section of the populace to pay attention to a movie, make a documentary.
Quote from: Penny Lane on Oct 17, 2011, 02:07 PM
I think there are other ways to do things, what with twitter, Facebook, local elections, getting musicians on board, making documentaries..I just think these are too unorganized...I'm all for uprising and giving people a voice, I'm just speaking about these specific protests...
BTW Sticky, censorship is telling ME not to voice my opinion...I'm not suggesting they don't have a right to do what they're doing. I'm saying it's not going to achieve much in the end. I relish the fact that we live in a country where people gather (actually that park is private property but the ower is allowing them to be there) in public to protest. That's not my point.
"suggesting that these people shut up and go home" is DEMOCRATIC (not undemocratic), that's my right to express my opinion, just as you have the right to call it retarded...but I'm not trying to censor anything..
edited--and i never suggested that these people shut up and go home, i suggested that they stop the protests, by no means shut up or stop trying..it's almost 2012, Kent State happened 42 years ago, protests need to change with the times as well.
they're already doing all of things you've suggested.
1.) they are socially networked out the butt. twitter, facebook, webstreams with chats, webpage now, etc. ever expanding. they have social media dominated. after all that is where awareness of these protests came from in the first place. the network news channels haven't taken these protests serious in the slightest. this is a big deal and the way you can tell is people like rush limbaugh generalizing the entire movement as dirty hippies, etc. this will not be given the light it deserves by the corporate news networks.
2.) I'm not telling you to not voice your opinion. say whatever you want, I don't give a fuuuck. but who are you to say these, now, thousands of people aren't going to make a difference? they sure think they're going to and they have spread awareness at the very least, about the wealth gap. telling these people to pack up and go home because YOU don't think they'll accomplish anything or because YOU do not think they're organized enough is fine but you're wrong. It's an assumption, you aren't there occupying shit so why do you care how organized they are? and on top of that you do not have the ability to see the future. would you have guessed the gun wielding tea baggers would have gained as many seats in congress as they did? I wouldn't have, I thought they were full of shit and then the 2010 elections happened. there are far more occupy protestors and members of the movement than the tea party. These people will influence the next election one way or the other.
3.) the park is private property but last I checked all of new york is privately owned. the movement already conceded once and moved from their initial spot at that bull statue when they were barricaded out. russell simons offered to pay for the cleaning of the park so that nothing would get out of hand, but the protestors ended up cleaning it themselves instead. the main reason I think the cops didn't move in was the city council signed a letter asking bloomberg and his fellow boners to back the fuck down and chill. so I think the private park bullshit is just another excuse to dissolve the movement.
4.) telling people to stop protesting is telling them to shut up.
5.) Musicians have played for the protestors. Tom Morrello played a short set the other day, Neutral Milk Hotel played a set. small events have happened but if the past proves anything it's that you can't convince people to vote one way or the other with corporate concert events. (See: Vote For Change Tour 2004 which pushed John Kerry hardcore and did absolutely nothing for his numbers).
6.) you keep saying it's not the 60's or it's not this or that and that all things have changed since the 60's. well you're right, things have changed, mostly for the worse. Reagan, one of the worst presidents in our history, just under bush jr, fucked shit up sleeping with the banks like merrill lynch and co. during his presidency leading to all the bullshit deregulation. same with bush and his bullshit policy. deregulated everything, give corporations as much power as possible. and now, a few years later corporations have more rights than the citizens. it's bullshit. instead of race wars and Vietnam, we've got a top heavy economy where a few percent of the population is all comfy and cozy while the rest of us suffer. there is plenty of reasons to protest that is why you can't get a straight answer about who believes what. sure there are the outliers, ala the "save the whales" people and whatever but overall this is an economic protest and the poor is in the right. these protests are just and necessary. there is nothing more democratic than protesting for your own rights. making your voice heard. and that's what all of this is about, our voices. the manipulation of the way we live our entire lives from the day we're born until the day we die is a structured system. corporations patenting gene sequences and all sorts of crazy shit.
these protests will achieve much more than people want to admit. especially conservatives who are now realizing they can't trick the public for longer than a couple years. this is the progressive, liberal answer to the tea party movement. It's bigger, stinkier, and more bad ass than the tea party was or ever will be.
I guess what it really comes down to is I can't understand why any person in this country would want to stand in the way of something like this, even if it's all over the place idea wise as to what needs to get done. it's about initiating a discussion and I think they've succeeded in that regard also. I hate the tea party but the only thing I've really had against their protests were the guns they brought. otherwise, who I am to judge? It's not like this is a Klan Rally. let them speak, let them occupy the parks, that's what they're there for, public organizing and other bullshit. new york is gross as fuck as it is, these people aren't going to make it any grosser.
These protests are a year too soon. Agree with them or not, the Tea Party protests put pressure on politcal candidates at the right time and really made an impact. If the Occupy people could organize and vocalize specific demmands and keep the momentum up until next November, that's how they can affect change.
2012 is gunna be ugly.
here's a like for most of the available live streams from the various protests going down:
http://www.occupystream.com/ (http://www.occupystream.com/)
Quote from: bbill on Oct 17, 2011, 07:39 PM
These protests are a year too soon. Agree with them or not, the Tea Party protests put pressure on politcal candidates at the right time and really made an impact. If the Occupy people could organize and vocalize specific demmands and keep the momentum up until next November, that's how they can affect change.
2012 is gunna be ugly.
2012 will be a fucking bloodbath. I think they started it at a good time and I think it will be around until the election. it took them a month to grow from like 150people to where they are now and now it's spreading exponentially across the globe. the past week or so the movement really has seemed to grown more steam.
people won't forget about shit like this:
URGENT - Occupy Wall Street - NYPD Cop Punches Female Protester In Face - Do They Want A Riot? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIP7qtgbAsM#)
Here is an excellent article on why protesters are protesting. Make sure you go the bottom of the page and click on- "click here to see what the protestors are so upset about" -it will take you to 41 slides which do a very good job expressing in a clear manor what is and has been occurring in this country. This information is very important to have IMO before continuing a debate regarding the movement.
/www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10
I agree with Penny. Protests like this won't affect anything for one reason: Corporations don't owe you shit. They are not accountable to you. If you want them to be, become a shareholder. That's that.
Who is accountable to you? The Government. But go poll the protesters and see how many know what district they reside in, who their representative is; when does their state hold state elections next, what their federal representative's voting record is. Voting isn't sexy. It's not fun. Basic civics are boring, which is why we all ignored them in High School or make fun of Liberal Arts majors.
The protests are the equivalent of staking a McDonalds until they agree to serve you a whopper.
You want change? Run for office. Or just vote. Protest the government. The reason the 60s protests worked was because they were protesting government policy. They were pissed about many things - civil rights (gov't policy), the war (gov't policy), corruption (again, policy).
Protesting Wall St. will not make the SEC any more accountable. It won't change anything besides cause the corporations you hate to become more entrenched and solidify their power further.
Who allowed the corporations to get away with this? The gov't.
==
Pt. 2: to the guy who asked me what street wall st was on this weekend in the village - be smart about your protest. Pick your fights:
Occupy Wall Street 10/15/11 NYPD arrest Times Square (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w44titOkKE#)
Unless I missed something in law school, "trusting the police" does not equal entrapment. Your outrage won't win you any fans when it is fundamentally misplaced.
That is a really good, informative slide show, Peacemaker. I think everyone should watch that. I also hope most people understand the income disparity by now. My original comment was not questioning the reasons behind the protest, I questioned the organization and methods of bringing about change. Income inequality, lack of jobs, these are things worth protesting.
Sticky, this is a message board. All I can DO here is state my opinion. I'm not sure why that's so awful. None of us can see into the future. I'm not going to get into Reagan and everything else you said, it wasn't related to what I originally said. And yes, I know some artists have been playing different shows. Remember Live Aid in 1986 when Phil Muther-F-ckin Collins played on 2 continents and Chevy Chased hosted? That was some mobilization. All artists have to ban together and there should be protests in every major city, not just NYC, Boston and a few others.
So I open the new Rolling Stone mag today and I see Matt Taibbi's article "My Advice to the Protestors" and the subheading is "Don't just occupy Wall Street-hit bankers where it hurts". Matt Taibbi's been writing mind-blowing articles on Goldman Sachs, AIG, and the SEC for a year now, blowing the roof off anyone's understanding of how CDOs work and what's really going on down on Wall Street. He likes the idea of these protests but says they need to organize into concrete goals and really go after specific agencies/laws/rules/ways public money is used. He suggests focusing on 5 demands:
1. Break up the monopolies
2. Pay for your own bailouts
3. No public money for private lobbying
4. Tax hedge-fund gamblers
5. Change the way bankers get paid
I just think my main point was this is not the way to build a massive grassroots movement. I think the best changes come about by being FOR things rather than being AGAINST them...it's really easy to say this isn't fair or right, but how do we make it better? Just think the protestors should put their focus elsewhere other than these occupy movements.
I've agreed with Taibbi except for "change how bankers get paid". That's not my business. The banks can pay their employees however they see fit. However, should they insist on doing so, a few things need to happen:
1) The market needs to be structured so that there are viable options for shareholders to jump to for a safe investment in order to protest what they feel is an inequitable business practice
2) It should not be on the backs of taxpayers. If they want to continue to have taxpayers fund their business, then consider them nationalized and then we can structure their pay scales
3) They should not be rewarded for poor investments. Whenever I see foreclosures, after I get over my anger at someone willing to pay half a million dollars for a 2 br, 1 bath ranch on a busy road in a shitty suburb of NYC, I get mad at the banks who were shocked to find their risky investments were risky and they ended up with the collateral they demanded.
really disappointed by the yuppies in this thread. much respect has been lost for those who think these protests are bullshit. both chode and penny, I'm sorry but the attitude you two display is the attitude that will eventually kill our country. "nothing can be done, fuck it". way too apathetic for me. you guys seem disconnected, not the protestors.
I love how you two think you have the answers but dis on these protestors. it's arrogant as fuck, how can't you see that?
The Tea Partiers say our country is being destroyed.
The Occupy Wall Streeters say our country is being destroyed.
And, we're all going to die one day; I think I'll go stare at the moon... ::)
Good Luck! :)
Quote from: el_chode on Oct 17, 2011, 10:01 PM
I agree with Penny. Protests like this won't affect anything for one reason: Corporations don't owe you shit. They are not accountable to you. If you want them to be, become a shareholder. That's that.
Who is accountable to you? The Government. But go poll the protesters and see how many know what district they reside in, who their representative is; when does their state hold state elections next, what their federal representative's voting record is. Voting isn't sexy. It's not fun. Basic civics are boring, which is why we all ignored them in High School or make fun of Liberal Arts majors.
The protests are the equivalent of staking a McDonalds until they agree to serve you a whopper.
You want change? Run for office. Or just vote. Protest the government. The reason the 60s protests worked was because they were protesting government policy. They were pissed about many things - civil rights (gov't policy), the war (gov't policy), corruption (again, policy).
Protesting Wall St. will not make the SEC any more accountable. It won't change anything besides cause the corporations you hate to become more entrenched and solidify their power further.
Who allowed the corporations to get away with this? The gov't.
this :thumbsup:
you really articulated yourself well there tracy, A+ work with the thumbs up.
"Corporations don't owe us shit---" here is a recent quote to thoughtfully reconsider the conclusion that corporations don't owe society (us) anything (shit)
"There is nobody in this country who got rich on their own. Nobody. You built a factory out there - good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory... Now look. You built a factory and it turned into something terrific or a great idea - God bless! Keep a hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along."
― Elizabeth Warren
Now if you accept the above statement and link it with the facts in the slide presentation I posted and then ask yourself if corporations should be gracious and thankful to society (us) who in the large picture support them with our taxes, our commerce--and for those who work for them-- part of their time in life. You may find room in your conclusion for some questioning of your thinking...however small... it always starts small...then grows of whether corporations "don't owe us shit" to perhaps corporations may owe us (society-- you and me) something... however small...
I think it is ok to ask people to be kind and fair to one another--- and corporations are made up of people.
I also feel that any form of a person standing up for themselves should not be judged provided it is not in violent form. People camping out together in unity is a beautiful thing....will it ultimately be effective....it is yet to be determined. But we can all agree that if they simply did nothing that that wouldn't have the chance to influence any change at all.
Well, I don't want to hop into this one too deep, but I'm really refreshed to finally see people making some kind of relatively non-violent scene about things. Or maybe it's more violent than I know of (I haven't watched the youtube, but I see the title of the cop punching a girl...) I haven't really involved myself enough in the witnessing of the whole thing. I ran into a friend from herb school the other day who headed over to Wall Street and camped alongside the others for 4-5 days the other week, and he reported back positive people and experiences. Guess it's all how you look at it.
I like when things get stirred up, in any case. Peacemaker, I'm liking your posts! You've made a lovely entrance to the board, welcome! :)
thank you peacemaker, I think you saved me from having an aneurism.
I would also add that these peoples form of protest has been effective in countless ways. In the moment it has influenced (effected) the creation of a thread on a bands website that otherwise may not have been here; has influenced several of you to question "better" ways to protest/that they should protest; has created a dialogue between some members of this forum which has made the readers of the posts think about the subject; and has influenced me to post on a site I typically just peruse cause the band members seem cool and genuine and I like to see cool genuine people do well. I'd say by all accounts that the movement is moving people... including all of us who have posted here regardless of agreement. Amazing! How many more people will it move...and to what extent... to what end..........................
Peacemaker you officially receive the award for best/most appropriate board name ever!!!
Thank you for expressing exactly how I feel better than I myself was able to convey!
Quote from: woodnymph on Oct 18, 2011, 12:19 AM
Peacemaker you officially receive the award for best/most appropriate board name ever!!!
Thank you for expressing exactly how I feel better than I myself was able to convey!
I liked your post too nymph. the elizabeth warren quote peacemaker posted was on the money. I love that bitch for some reason.
[Occupytimessquare] 1 Marine vs. 30 Cops (Marine Wins) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmEHcOc0Sys#ws)
Quote from: Sticky Icky Green Stuff on Oct 18, 2011, 12:21 AM
Quote from: woodnymph on Oct 18, 2011, 12:19 AM
Peacemaker you officially receive the award for best/most appropriate board name ever!!!
Thank you for expressing exactly how I feel better than I myself was able to convey!
I liked your post too nymph. the elizabeth warren quote peacemaker posted was on the money. I love that bitch for some reason.
Oh man, I can only agree! I have a tough time expressing my thoughts and feelings on these kinds of things. I tend to, well, stray from the topic if you can imagine me doing such a thing hahahah Peacemaker has brought the focus and precision to what I think we've maybe all been feeling, to different degrees :) We're all in this crazy thing together.....
Quote from: PeaceMaker on Oct 17, 2011, 11:54 PM
"Corporations don't owe us shit---" here is a recent quote to thoughtfully reconsider the conclusion that corporations don't owe society (us) anything (shit)
"There is nobody in this country who got rich on their own. Nobody. You built a factory out there - good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory... Now look. You built a factory and it turned into something terrific or a great idea - God bless! Keep a hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along."
― Elizabeth Warren
Now if you accept the above statement and link it with the facts in the slide presentation I posted and then ask yourself if corporations should be gracious and thankful to society (us) who in the large picture support them with our taxes, our commerce--and for those who work for them-- part of their time in life. You may find room in your conclusion for some questioning of your thinking...however small... it always starts small...then grows of whether corporations "don't owe us shit" to perhaps corporations may owe us (society-- you and me) something... however small...
I think it is ok to ask people to be kind and fair to one another--- and corporations are made up of people.
I also feel that any form of a person standing up for themselves should not be judged provided it is not in violent form. People camping out together in unity is a beautiful thing....will it ultimately be effective....it is yet to be determined. But we can all agree that if they simply did nothing that that wouldn't have the chance to influence any change at all.
It's idealist. Not reality.
Corporations are more robotic than human. Maybe cylon. Maybe. They are beholden to one group only: shareholders. That's it. It's a legal, binding duty and obligation. In fact, the CEO and the board of directors can face serious legal issues should they forget that notion.
That is the reality. You must accept it before you can change it. Until there is a legal duty owed to the public, a corporate entity will never ever ever do what makes the public happy unless it is part of its business model (e.g. Zappos).
So you can go on and on about what many philosophers, politicians, and other brains have thought about the matter, but the fact is that until anyone who wants to make a change understands what I just posted, nothing is gonna happen. Ever. Which brings me back to my point form before: you want a change - blockade the offices of your representative. He has two ears and hears two voices - the $$ from the corporation paying him to cover their ass, or your stank ass body outside his door for weeks on end. The senator is your employee; the CEO is not. It should not be complicated to get a congressional inquiry into the misuse of taxpayer money. Unfortunately, Congress is focused only on Solyndra and not the banks.
Even FDR knew this when he put Andrew Mellon on trial in 1935. He was so persistent that when they couldn't indict the banker, they made him sit through a civil proceeding that they knew was a sham if only to give the public some faith in the government.
http://www.economist.com/node/8077461 (http://www.economist.com/node/8077461)
You can label me all you want, use of a personal attack reveals your own weaknesses. The fact remains that I've been out in the trenches; I've paid my dues and fought the good fight for political dissatisfaction. It nearly cost me my future, and I lost big time. But I did it by actually effectuating a change and getting my hands dirty in the system and the process, not by yelling louder than the next guy.
Lots of good points flying in this thread, especially Peacemaker's quote. Chode and Penny Lane are right; these protests aren't going to solve anything by themselves, because the current system doesn't hold Wall Street accountable to you, the citizen. It's an entity in itself; Wall Street isn't trying to sell you a product, it's selling a product to big business, tempting them to invest foolishly with your money and your jobs. You aren't their target market. However, you are politicians' target market, and they are the ones who have the power to hold Wall Street and big businesses accountable for what they do. And Peacemaker is right; big businesses do hold a social contract. They owe us for the opportunities that generations of American taxpayers has given them. If they aren't required to pay back to society what we've given them through our tax money, then they get rich and the rest of us only get back our market value, which is diminishing by the year (surely many people here can relate to their job becoming obsolete thanks to new technology or cheaper replacement workers). That's not good for American society, and as citizens, we're obliged to demand our representatives to enact better regulation of the corporate system.
I'd like to add, however, that as good as that sounds, there's that other viewpoint (the Tea Party) that says that those policies often drives those businesses to foreign countries, where accountability is less stringent. It's a fatalistic view to be sure, but money is a nasty business to be sure. If that's true, then we're stuck between watching businesses depart for greener pastures, or watching as the middle class disintegrates and our value as workers circles the drain. I'm inclined to believe that the latter is more serious, but it's important to compare the two.
Quote from: el_chode on Oct 18, 2011, 12:58 AM
It's idealist. Not reality.
Corporations are more robotic than human. Maybe cylon. Maybe. They are beholden to one group only: shareholders. That's it. It's a legal, binding duty and obligation. In fact, the CEO and the board of directors can face serious legal issues should they forget that notion.
That is the reality. You must accept it before you can change it. Until there is a legal duty owed to the public, a corporate entity will never ever ever do what makes the public happy unless it is part of its business model (e.g. Zappos).
So you can go on and on about what many philosophers, politicians, and other brains have thought about the matter, but the fact is that until anyone who wants to make a change understands what I just posted, nothing is gonna happen. Ever. Which brings me back to my point form before: you want a change - blockade the offices of your representative. He has two ears and hears two voices - the $$ from the corporation paying him to cover their ass, or your stank ass body outside his door for weeks on end. The senator is your employee; the CEO is not. It should not be complicated to get a congressional inquiry into the misuse of taxpayer money. Unfortunately, Congress is focused only on Solyndra and not the banks.
Even FDR knew this when he put Andrew Mellon on trial in 1935. He was so persistent that when they couldn't indict the banker, they made him sit through a civil proceeding that they knew was a sham if only to give the public some faith in the government.
http://www.economist.com/node/8077461 (http://www.economist.com/node/8077461)
You can label me all you want, use of a personal attack reveals your own weaknesses. The fact remains that I've been out in the trenches; I've paid my dues and fought the good fight for political dissatisfaction. It nearly cost me my future, and I lost big time. But I did it by actually effectuating a change and getting my hands dirty in the system and the process, not by yelling louder than the next guy.
sounds like you have some protests you need to setup. you're right that the corps. and dbags who have exploited the system won't pay their dues unless they're made to but I think that is one of the basic problems of this. it's a system that once worked well then thru whatever chain of events has now become completely dysfunctional. we're getting bled. you can't re-write any type of policy with the current congress we have. plus a presidential election cycle is coming up. the next 14months are going to be a fucking circus one way or the other. I don't think it's idealistic at all to strive for some of these basic ideas. if people become more aware of what's going on in this country it will have been a success. we are a stupid fucking country, myself included in that generalization. corporate media is slanted and bias, they do not cover stories that matter so hope of them making our society better is worthless. they're the same as the rest of the mf'ers who are only worried about short term market share, some quick revenue. or whatever. the transition that needs to take place is massive. it goes against the status quo and it involves a small bit of optimism. if that's idealistic then every positive idea for change that hasn't been implemented must be also. being creative, innovative, etc comes from being slightly idealistic, no?
my apologies for being a dick.
you weren't a dick, it's how political discourse goes. i'm drowning in student debt that i picked up simply because i like to argue
but like you said, it's the reason why i don't like these protests - not because the protestors are wrong, it's because they're going about it the wrong way and i think it hurts their over all argument. it's too idealistic. fighting what ought to be is not going to get you as far as fighting for what is.
i think the best thing we can hope for at this point is that while the unrest ferments for a bit, if the administration/wshington does nothing about it, it shows they have lost touch with those who put them in office to begin with.
This :thumbsup:
Chris Hedges in Times Square, October 15, 2011 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-1TdemR7_Q#ws)
I came across a few articles, one of which is here:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2011/10/oscotus_what_ows_protesters_should_focus_on_at_the_supreme_court.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2011/10/oscotus_what_ows_protesters_should_focus_on_at_the_supreme_court.html)
This is what I'm talking about - they are actually going to the gov't to protest. I didn't know Cornel west was arrested, and I find it odd no one is reporting on this side of it.
Meanwhile, I read that there is a self-made media camp in the middle of the Wall Street one in an attempt to monitor the coverage and create their own to avoid being labeled by the media.
Perhaps it's slow, but things seem to be getting more on what I thnk will be an effective track. And as mentioned, the one thing they have on their hands is time. At least a year, that is.
Quote from: Sticky Icky Green Stuff on Oct 18, 2011, 02:18 AMit goes against the status quo and it involves a small bit of optimism. if that's idealistic then every positive idea for change that hasn't been implemented must be also. being creative, innovative, etc comes from being slightly idealistic, no?
Well said, Stickster
cue Flaming Lips "My Cosmic Autumn Rebellion (The Inner Life as Blazing Shield of Defiance and Optimism as Celestial Spear of Action)"
Christopher Nolan is supposedly tweaking the Dark Knight Rises to include OWS protestors in the background. Weather it's to agree with the protestors or to show civil unrest that the story includes I dont know.
Also, supposedly MTVs next Real World is open to exclusively OWS protestors
Sign of the Times - Arrests in the WI Assembly Gallery; 10 Cops, Really? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCx-3VoT9JE#ws)
George Carlin ~ The American Dream (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q#ws)
This shit out of oakland is absurd.
Quote from: el_chode on Oct 28, 2011, 06:30 PM
This shit out of oakland is absurd.
yeah it is. Oakland Policeman Throws Flash Grenade Into Crowd Trying To Help Injured Protester (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZLyUK0t0vQ#ws)
video blows my mind. fuck those cops, fuck them hard. put them in prison and let them get butt fucked by big joe.
decent interview on tell me more today:
http://www.npr.org/programs/tell-me-more/ (http://www.npr.org/programs/tell-me-more/) (fridays show)
has a decent discussion with a tea party member and an occupy dude then a dude whose neutral. if your bored, worth a listen.
Police Attack Oakland Solidarity March - NYC October 26th, 2011 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQlU8ra_8OE#ws)
The white house apparently indicated the DOJ will not investigate
mutha fuckin DoJ yo. fucking bureaucrats.
Having worn a gun and serving in a law enforcement capacity for a couple of years, I feel for the BS those policemen are having to put up with. Just as every police officer isn't a saint, every protestor isn't a saint either and I am seeing great restraint by some of those cops with punks pushing them and yelling in their faces. It's got to be wearing on them and I applaud their service to our cities.
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on Oct 28, 2011, 09:51 PM
Having worn a gun and serving in a law enforcement capacity for a couple of years, I feel for the BS those policemen are having to put up with. Just as every police officer isn't a saint, every protestor isn't a saint either and I am seeing great restraint by some of those cops with punks pushing them and yelling in their faces. It's got to be wearing on them and I applaud their service to our cities.
I agree to some extent. but the force being used on these people is without a doubt excessive. my uncle was a police officer for years and years, total bad ass. so you're definitely right that some of those guys are out there just doing their job. the police in detroit don't give a fuuuuck. it's nowhere near as massive but the occupy people shutdown/blocked off the ambassador bridge the other day. the cops asked them to leave and they left peacefully. nobody was hurt. the shit that went down in oakland is inexcusable. the atlanta shit is iffy too. the mayor or governor or whomever was on NPR and kept bringing up a dude who was caring around an AK-47 or something. it was probably one guy. but he tried to paint the scene like tons of people were strolling around with AK's. it's straight bullshit. they didn't shoot rubber bullets and tear gas at the tea party when they were walking around with a lot more weapons than the people in atlanta.
cops seem to be protecting the insurance companies more than the people.
have you guys read this article by Matt Taibbi from rolling stone?
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/owss-beef-wall-street-isnt-winning-its-cheating-20111025 (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/owss-beef-wall-street-isnt-winning-its-cheating-20111025)
discuss.
http://wdet.org/shows/wdetraw/episode/occupy-wall-stree-constructive/ (http://wdet.org/shows/wdetraw/episode/occupy-wall-stree-constructive/)
The Occupiers in NYC seem to be a lot more organized and educated about the issues than those here in Philly.
The "occupation" in Philly is taking place on the west side of City Hall. That's fine by me since that little area always smells like piss. Anyway, Wednesday they walked a couple blocks to Comcast's HQ and held a sit-in of sorts in the lobby, about 10 of them got arrested. They think that Comcast should pay more taxes. Maybe they should, but when it comes to paying taxes, Comcast is playing by the (arguably terrible) rules set in place. They also happen to employ a huge number of people in the Phila area.
The occipiers should have done some more research and saved their energy before they picked Comcast as their sit-in location; IRS offices are 2 blocks closer to their campsite.
From Be Here Now.....
(http://www.american-buddha.com/abeherenow.226.gif)
Gov. Scott Walker gets checked, Mic Checked! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oHRdiklTlU#ws)
CROSBY AND NASH OCCUPYING WALL STREET FOR A LONG, LONG, TIME ;)
Crosby and Nash @ Occupy Wall Street - Full Set - NYC (http://vimeo.com/31828269)
WHOA there's a tasty bite from Crosby's solo work!
What the fuck is going on over there? ???
Occupy Cal 11/9/11 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buovLQ9qyWQ#ws)
Quote from: SaraBananaBear on Nov 10, 2011, 12:17 PM
What the fuck is going on over there? ???
Occupy Cal 11/9/11 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buovLQ9qyWQ#ws)
the land of the free.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-i-stopped-worrying-and-learned-to-love-the-ows-protests-20111110?utm_source=dailynewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-i-stopped-worrying-and-learned-to-love-the-ows-protests-20111110?utm_source=dailynewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter)
Quote from: Sticky Icky Green Stuff on Nov 11, 2011, 08:34 PM
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-i-stopped-worrying-and-learned-to-love-the-ows-protests-20111110?utm_source=dailynewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-i-stopped-worrying-and-learned-to-love-the-ows-protests-20111110?utm_source=dailynewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter)
Sticky, you tha man :-*
Quote from: woodnymph on Nov 11, 2011, 09:25 PM
Quote from: Sticky Icky Green Stuff on Nov 11, 2011, 08:34 PM
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-i-stopped-worrying-and-learned-to-love-the-ows-protests-20111110?utm_source=dailynewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-i-stopped-worrying-and-learned-to-love-the-ows-protests-20111110?utm_source=dailynewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter)
Sticky, you tha man :-*
Oooh nice one!
So, is it over now?
The Daily Show is making fun of it tonight. I like John Stewart, but the Daily Show sometimes tries to appeal to all audiences by pretending that liberal things can be crazy too, when in actuality its an obviously liberal show.
Quote from: Sticky Icky Green Stuff on Nov 16, 2011, 08:12 PM
Quote from: el_chode on Nov 15, 2011, 09:19 PM
So, is it over now?
nah
it is a crucial point. what happens next determines whether it becomes a "remember that from last year?" or "shit it worked" moment during the election
Quote from: e_wind on Nov 16, 2011, 11:23 PM
The Daily Show is making fun of it tonight. I like John Stewart, but the Daily Show sometimes tries to appeal to all audiences by pretending that liberal things can be crazy too, when in actuality its an obviously liberal show.
stewarts brother is a big wig on wallstreet I think. can't remember the deetz. makes ya wonder tho. I dig me some daily show and colbert report. colbert has been doing a decent job of covering it. It's nice to see him showing the police violence so people are at least aware of the overuse of police force.
Quote from: el_chode on Nov 17, 2011, 12:45 AM
Quote from: Sticky Icky Green Stuff on Nov 16, 2011, 08:12 PM
Quote from: el_chode on Nov 15, 2011, 09:19 PM
So, is it over now?
nah
it is a crucial point. what happens next determines whether it becomes a "remember that from last year?" or "shit it worked" moment during the election
I'm really not sure. the future is an interesting place. I think more people will be out in the spring and when it's closer to the election. shit'll get loud yo.
Quote from: e_wind on Nov 16, 2011, 11:23 PM
The Daily Show is making fun of it tonight. I like John Stewart, but the Daily Show sometimes tries to appeal to all audiences by pretending that liberal things can be crazy too, when in actuality its an obviously liberal show.
Why can't liberal things be crazy too? One should always be able to poke fun at oneself...I find it pretty infuriating when people are unwilling to acknowledge any shortcomings on their side of the coin. As well as the idea that there are only two sides to be considered in the first place! I like that Stewart et. al. recognize weirdness wherever they find it.
Quote from: Crispy on Nov 17, 2011, 10:57 AM
Quote from: e_wind on Nov 16, 2011, 11:23 PM
The Daily Show is making fun of it tonight. I like John Stewart, but the Daily Show sometimes tries to appeal to all audiences by pretending that liberal things can be crazy too, when in actuality its an obviously liberal show.
Why can't liberal things be crazy too? One should always be able to poke fun at oneself...I find it pretty infuriating when people are unwilling to acknowledge any shortcomings on their side of the coin. As well as the idea that there are only two sides to be considered in the first place! I like that Stewart et. al. recognize weirdness wherever they find it.
For example, the show will make fun of Palin, and then to make up for it try to make up for it by making fun of the "liberal equivelent" to her. I'm sorry, but there isn't a liberal (at least in the spotlight) that is anything like Palin. Obviously there are liberals that I don't support, but there are not liberals that act like Palin - or Bachman or Bush for that matter. I think Stewart is really smart, and I like him. I also think his writters or ComedyC are afraid that if they're too anti-right wing it will hurt their ratings.
As someone who probably supports OWS, or at least most of his viewers do, it seems like he's more worried about his ratings, and politically that segment was counter productive. It is, after all a political show.
Like I said, I like Stewart, I think he does a great job with his guests, especially the ones he disagrees with. Hes like a less edgy, more pleasant, funnier Bill Mahr. (though I trike Mahr too.)
Quote from: Crispy on Nov 17, 2011, 10:57 AM
Quote from: e_wind on Nov 16, 2011, 11:23 PM
The Daily Show is making fun of it tonight. I like John Stewart, but the Daily Show sometimes tries to appeal to all audiences by pretending that liberal things can be crazy too, when in actuality its an obviously liberal show.
Why can't liberal things be crazy too? One should always be able to poke fun at oneself...I find it pretty infuriating when people are unwilling to acknowledge any shortcomings on their side of the coin. As well as the idea that there are only two sides to be considered in the first place! I like that Stewart et. al. recognize weirdness wherever they find it.
Whatever Crispy ::)
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_e_nEuFs74tI/RdnNxlZp0UI/AAAAAAAAAkA/ItIO1fxUJNo/s320/tofu_robot_blk_main1.jpg)
Damn you, Ruckus! ;D
(http://pbfcomics.com/archive_b/PBF115-Hug_Bot.jpg)
Quote from: Crispy on Nov 17, 2011, 11:51 AM
Damn you, Ruckus! ;D
(http://pbfcomics.com/archive_b/PBF115-Hug_Bot.jpg)
;D
Quote from: Crispy on Nov 17, 2011, 10:57 AM
Quote from: e_wind on Nov 16, 2011, 11:23 PM
The Daily Show is making fun of it tonight. I like John Stewart, but the Daily Show sometimes tries to appeal to all audiences by pretending that liberal things can be crazy too, when in actuality its an obviously liberal show.
Why can't liberal things be crazy too? One should always be able to poke fun at oneself...I find it pretty infuriating when people are unwilling to acknowledge any shortcomings on their side of the coin. As well as the idea that there are only two sides to be considered in the first place! I like that Stewart et. al. recognize weirdness wherever they find it.
I agree with His Crispiness. South Park does the same. The Right doesn't have the market cornered on crazy. There are plenty of crazy people on the Left as well. Here are a couple that I can't stand:(and don't get me started on the crazy far-left Hollywood people)
(http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/nancy-pelosi-angry.JPG)
(http://stoopidpoliticians.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/frank-barney-clueless.jpg)
(http://www.nypost.com/rw/nypost/2010/07/28/news/photos_stories/cropped/charles_rangel--300x300.jpg)
(http://danshamptons.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/anthony-weiner2-434x289.jpg?1cd427)
and I must say the OWS movement is a lot easier to laugh at than the Tea Party folks (I mean seriously)
(http://cdn3.standard.net/sites/default/files/imagecache/max_800/2011/10/03/67112-kb-gallery-wall-street-zombies-2-101883.jpg)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Cry2hN-xUQM/Sd4NSMR3MAI/AAAAAAAABYM/MEyIyVCi_Kg/s400/tea+party+3.jpg)
Rage Against The Machine - Sleep Now In The Fire (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w211KOQ5BMI#)
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on Nov 17, 2011, 01:57 PM
and I must say the OWS movement is a lot easier to laugh at than the Tea Party folks (I mean seriously)
(http://cdn3.standard.net/sites/default/files/imagecache/max_800/2011/10/03/67112-kb-gallery-wall-street-zombies-2-101883.jpg)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Cry2hN-xUQM/Sd4NSMR3MAI/AAAAAAAABYM/MEyIyVCi_Kg/s400/tea+party+3.jpg)
I think the difference is that the OWS folks have a sense of humor.
If anyone wants a good laugh check this out....
http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-ows-demands/ (http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-ows-demands/)
QuoteRepeal the Taft-Hartley Act. Unionize ALL workers immediately.
Raise the minimum wage immediately to $18/hr. Create a maximum wage of $90/hr to eliminate inequality.
Institute a 6 hour workday, and 6 weeks of paid vacation.
Institute a moratorium on all foreclosures and layoffs immediately.
Repeal racist and xenophobic English-only laws.
Open the borders to all immigrants, legal or illegal. Offer immediate, unconditional amnesty, to all undocumented residents of the US.
Create a single-payer, universal health care system.
Pass stricter campaign finance reform laws. Ban all private donations. All campaigns will receive equal funding, provided by the taxpayers.
Institute a negative income tax, and tax the very rich at rates up to 90%.
Pass far stricter environmental protection and animal rights laws.
Allow workers to elect their supervisors.
Lower the retirement age to 55. Increase Social Security benefits.
Create a 5% annual wealth tax for the very rich.
Ban the private ownership of land.
Make homeschooling illegal. Religious fanatics use it to feed their children propaganda.
Reduce the age of majority to 16.
Abolish the death penalty and life in prison. We call for the immediate release of all death row inmates from death row and transferred to regular prisons.
Release all political prisoners immediately.
Immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Abolish the debt limit.
Ban private gun ownership.
Strengthen the separation of church and state.
Immediate debt forgiveness for all.
End the 'War on Drugs'.
Man, some of this is good material.
And yes I know its just a forum post and not official OWS release, but some of those items truly are laughable.
I agree with some of those demands, but not to the extent of the more extreme examples.
Quote from: Jaimoe on Nov 17, 2011, 03:31 PM
I agree with lots of those demands, but not to the extent of some of the more extreme examples.
I've bolded the ones I believe are just absolutely ludicrous.
QuoteRepeal the Taft-Hartley Act. Unionize ALL workers immediately.
Raise the minimum wage immediately to $18/hr. Create a maximum wage of $90/hr to eliminate inequality.
Institute a 6 hour workday, and 6 weeks of paid vacation.
Institute a moratorium on all foreclosures and layoffs immediately.
Repeal racist and xenophobic English-only laws.
Open the borders to all immigrants, legal or illegal. Offer immediate, unconditional amnesty, to all undocumented residents of the US.
Create a single-payer, universal health care system.
Pass stricter campaign finance reform laws. Ban all private donations. All campaigns will receive equal funding, provided by the taxpayers.
Institute a negative income tax, and tax the very rich at rates up to 90%.
Pass far stricter environmental protection and animal rights laws.
Allow workers to elect their supervisors.
Lower the retirement age to 55. Increase Social Security benefits.
Create a 5% annual wealth tax for the very rich.
Ban the private ownership of land.
Make homeschooling illegal. Religious fanatics use it to feed their children propaganda.
Reduce the age of majority to 16.
Abolish the death penalty and life in prison. We call for the immediate release of all death row inmates from death row and transferred to regular prisons.
Release all political prisoners immediately.
Immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Abolish the debt limit.
Ban private gun ownership.
Strengthen the separation of church and state.
Immediate debt forgiveness for all.
End the 'War on Drugs'.
Yeah, some of those points are crazy. However I'm for unions, but they are not a good fit in all aspects of society. Interesting theory though.
Minimum wage should be increased. In my province of Ontario, minimum wage is $10.25/hr, but I'd like to see it go up to $15 given inflation and the cost of living.
I already get 6 weeks paid, but I think most should be entitled to some sort of paid vacation, even if it's a weekend.
Equal funding for campaigns paid by taxpayers? Interesting notion. It certainly would even the playing field and keep politicians more accountable.
Lowering retirement age would only work if social sercurity benefits were raised. However, the mess in Greece and Italy makes this prospect seem rather foolish. But, social security benefits in the US should be raised.
I'm for abolishing the death penalty (the death penalty is not a deterrent). And if you released all death row inmates into regular prison, it would seal the fate of many of the perps: What con wouldn't want to knock off a child killer or celeb such as Charles Manson etc...? Then again, I wouldn't shed any tears.
I wish there were a gun ban across the board, except for registered hunters. But since the US is armed more than any country in the world, it would be impossible to root out all the guns and something tells me that criminals would still have the upper hand.
Quote from: Jaimoe on Nov 17, 2011, 04:09 PM
Yeah, some of those points are crazy. However I'm for unions, but they are not a good fit in all aspects of society. Interesting theory though.
Minimum wage should be increased. In my province of Ontario, minimum wage is $10.25/hr, but I'd like to see it go up to $15 given inflation and the cost of living.
I already get 6 weeks paid, but I think most should be entitled to some sort of paid vacation, even if it's a weekend.
Equal funding for campaigns paid by taxpayers? Interesting notion. It certainly would even the playing field and keep politicians more accountable.
Lowering retirement age would only work if social sercurity benefits were raised. However, the mess in Greece and Italy makes this prospect seem rather foolish. But, social security benefits in the US should be raised.
I'm for abolishing the death penalty (the death penalty is not a deterrent). And if you released all death row inmates into regular prison, it would seal the fate of many of the perps: What con wouldn't want to knock off a child killer or celeb such as Charles Manson etc...?
I wish there were a gun ban across the board, except for registered hunters. But since the US is armed more than any country in the world, it would be impossible to root out all the guns and something tells me that criminals would still have the upper hand.
My major concern with this list is that many of those proposals fly right in the face of the constitution.
I'm all for raising the minimum wage to a more realistic living wage, but a maximum wage? What about contractors who, for example, are employed by a company who provides their services to a government agency. If the maximum wage was $90/hr, even the most generous corporation would only pay that employee $60-70/hr.
I'm against a gun ban for a multitude of personal, logistic, and legal reasons. Criminals will always get guns, laws have never stopped them before. If I want to use my own legally purchased firearms to shoot some holes in paper targets with my grandpop (which I do) how am I harming anyone or anything?
I am all for a death penalty ban. It isn't a deterrent, it is overly expensive, and most importantly the state kills innocent people far too often. Life in prison should stay in place.
Quote from: YouAre_GivenToFly on Nov 17, 2011, 04:17 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on Nov 17, 2011, 04:09 PM
Yeah, some of those points are crazy. However I'm for unions, but they are not a good fit in all aspects of society. Interesting theory though.
Minimum wage should be increased. In my province of Ontario, minimum wage is $10.25/hr, but I'd like to see it go up to $15 given inflation and the cost of living.
I already get 6 weeks paid, but I think most should be entitled to some sort of paid vacation, even if it's a weekend.
Equal funding for campaigns paid by taxpayers? Interesting notion. It certainly would even the playing field and keep politicians more accountable.
Lowering retirement age would only work if social sercurity benefits were raised. However, the mess in Greece and Italy makes this prospect seem rather foolish. But, social security benefits in the US should be raised.
I'm for abolishing the death penalty (the death penalty is not a deterrent). And if you released all death row inmates into regular prison, it would seal the fate of many of the perps: What con wouldn't want to knock off a child killer or celeb such as Charles Manson etc...?
I wish there were a gun ban across the board, except for registered hunters. But since the US is armed more than any country in the world, it would be impossible to root out all the guns and something tells me that criminals would still have the upper hand.
My major concern with this list is that many of those proposals fly right in the face of the constitution.
I'm all for raising the minimum wage to a more realistic living wage, but a maximum wage? What about contractors who, for example, are employed by a company who provides their services to a government agency. If the maximum wage was $90/hr, even the most generous corporation would only pay that employee $60-70/hr.
I'm against a gun ban for a multitude of personal, logistic, and legal reasons. Criminals will always get guns, laws have never stopped them before. If I want to use my own legally purchased firearms to shoot some holes in paper targets with my grandpop (which I do) how am I harming anyone or anything?
I am all for a death penalty ban. It isn't a deterrent, it is overly expensive, and most importantly the state kills innocent people far too often. Life in prison should stay in place.
I know I'll never be able to convince a pro-gun American to go along with a gun ban. Heck, I'm not actually anti-guns since I'm ok with hunters. I'm not even a pacifist: I'm a card-carrying non-pacifist tree-hugger. But there's far too many guns in households in the US and pulling a trigger has become a far too easy solution. In a perfect world, there wouldn't be any guns. But this isn't a perfect world.
Quote from: Jaimoe on Nov 17, 2011, 04:28 PM
Quote from: YouAre_GivenToFly on Nov 17, 2011, 04:17 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on Nov 17, 2011, 04:09 PM
Yeah, some of those points are crazy. However I'm for unions, but they are not a good fit in all aspects of society. Interesting theory though.
Minimum wage should be increased. In my province of Ontario, minimum wage is $10.25/hr, but I'd like to see it go up to $15 given inflation and the cost of living.
I already get 6 weeks paid, but I think most should be entitled to some sort of paid vacation, even if it's a weekend.
Equal funding for campaigns paid by taxpayers? Interesting notion. It certainly would even the playing field and keep politicians more accountable.
Lowering retirement age would only work if social sercurity benefits were raised. However, the mess in Greece and Italy makes this prospect seem rather foolish. But, social security benefits in the US should be raised.
I'm for abolishing the death penalty (the death penalty is not a deterrent). And if you released all death row inmates into regular prison, it would seal the fate of many of the perps: What con wouldn't want to knock off a child killer or celeb such as Charles Manson etc...?
I wish there were a gun ban across the board, except for registered hunters. But since the US is armed more than any country in the world, it would be impossible to root out all the guns and something tells me that criminals would still have the upper hand.
My major concern with this list is that many of those proposals fly right in the face of the constitution.
I'm all for raising the minimum wage to a more realistic living wage, but a maximum wage? What about contractors who, for example, are employed by a company who provides their services to a government agency. If the maximum wage was $90/hr, even the most generous corporation would only pay that employee $60-70/hr.
I'm against a gun ban for a multitude of personal, logistic, and legal reasons. Criminals will always get guns, laws have never stopped them before. If I want to use my own legally purchased firearms to shoot some holes in paper targets with my grandpop (which I do) how am I harming anyone or anything?
I am all for a death penalty ban. It isn't a deterrent, it is overly expensive, and most importantly the state kills innocent people far too often. Life in prison should stay in place.
I know I'll never be able to convince a pro-gun American to go along with a gun ban. Heck, I'm not actually anti-guns since I'm ok with hunters. But there's far too many guns in households in the US and pulling a trigger has become a far too easy solution. In a perfect world, there wouldn't be any guns. But this isn't a perfect world.
I hope I don't come off as some pro-gun nutjob ;D
I don't ever carry, and I know that some people just don't like them or just don't want to be around them. Some more extreme pro-gun people think that everyone should carry at all times to protect themselves, but that's just as terrible an idea as an outright ban. But this is America, and the Contitution protects our rights to make decisions for ourselves. Too many items on that list completely eliminate our right to make a decision, or a businesses right to make a decision (ie: union labor, leadership).
Quote from: YouAre_GivenToFly on Nov 17, 2011, 04:35 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on Nov 17, 2011, 04:28 PM
Quote from: YouAre_GivenToFly on Nov 17, 2011, 04:17 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on Nov 17, 2011, 04:09 PM
Yeah, some of those points are crazy. However I'm for unions, but they are not a good fit in all aspects of society. Interesting theory though.
Minimum wage should be increased. In my province of Ontario, minimum wage is $10.25/hr, but I'd like to see it go up to $15 given inflation and the cost of living.
I already get 6 weeks paid, but I think most should be entitled to some sort of paid vacation, even if it's a weekend.
Equal funding for campaigns paid by taxpayers? Interesting notion. It certainly would even the playing field and keep politicians more accountable.
Lowering retirement age would only work if social sercurity benefits were raised. However, the mess in Greece and Italy makes this prospect seem rather foolish. But, social security benefits in the US should be raised.
I'm for abolishing the death penalty (the death penalty is not a deterrent). And if you released all death row inmates into regular prison, it would seal the fate of many of the perps: What con wouldn't want to knock off a child killer or celeb such as Charles Manson etc...?
I wish there were a gun ban across the board, except for registered hunters. But since the US is armed more than any country in the world, it would be impossible to root out all the guns and something tells me that criminals would still have the upper hand.
My major concern with this list is that many of those proposals fly right in the face of the constitution.
I'm all for raising the minimum wage to a more realistic living wage, but a maximum wage? What about contractors who, for example, are employed by a company who provides their services to a government agency. If the maximum wage was $90/hr, even the most generous corporation would only pay that employee $60-70/hr.
I'm against a gun ban for a multitude of personal, logistic, and legal reasons. Criminals will always get guns, laws have never stopped them before. If I want to use my own legally purchased firearms to shoot some holes in paper targets with my grandpop (which I do) how am I harming anyone or anything?
I am all for a death penalty ban. It isn't a deterrent, it is overly expensive, and most importantly the state kills innocent people far too often. Life in prison should stay in place.
I know I'll never be able to convince a pro-gun American to go along with a gun ban. Heck, I'm not actually anti-guns since I'm ok with hunters. But there's far too many guns in households in the US and pulling a trigger has become a far too easy solution. In a perfect world, there wouldn't be any guns. But this isn't a perfect world.
I hope I don't come off as some pro-gun nutjob ;D
I don't ever carry, and I know that some people just don't like them or just don't want to be around them. Some more extreme pro-gun people think that everyone should carry at all times to protect themselves, but that's just as terrible an idea as an outright ban. But this is America, and the Contitution protects our rights to make decisions for ourselves. Too many items on that list completely eliminate our right to make a decision, or a businesses right to make a decision (ie: union labor, leadership).
No, you probably are in the norm regarding attitudes towards guns in the US. It's inherent. If you were raised in another country you'd probably look at things quite a bit differently.
I look at big business this way: if it could get away with having little to ZERO employess, it would. Like 'em or not, unions look out for everyone's interests and make the playing field fair. Of course, there's always a few union workers that abuse the system (I work with several in the broadcasting field), but I wouldn't want the alternative. And, since I make more money than non-union workers in my field, I tend to spend more on taxes, in supporting local businesses and give more to charities. The middle class have to be the backbone of a stable world and equal and far wages are essential. Oh, and I don't consider myself a lefty compared to others in my country - I'm more left of centre :)
Since NJ banned assault weapons, extended magazines, dum dum and hollow points, and really any and all concealed carry permits, gun violence has essentially disappeared.
In a more serious tone, I don't understand why people must be so binary and all-or-none "if it works for me, it therefore works for everyone".
Some of those bullet points are good, but other ones border on pure ignorance.
I think OWS best argument is summed up like this:
This country is/was on the brink of collapse, yet almost nothing has changed. Over the past decade people have a general feeling that life is changing for the worse and in ways beyond simply hits to the wallet. They feel less secure despite more security, less free despite the promise of preserving the way of the land of the free. Banks are bigger than ever and the risk of failure is just as strong. CEOs at these institutions claim that to remain profitable they must nickle and dime those at the very bottom while letting those at the middle and top coast along, then demand multi-million dollar bonuses (which in one form or another is a form of a redistribution of wealth). The political system by, for, and of the people seems less transparent than ever and by, for, and of the corporate entity that rigs the political system to rig the economic system.
Everything else is tertiary and a scapegoat. If you bought a house you couldn't afford it's your fault just as much as the bank for thinking it was a good idea to give you that cheap money. You both are owed a penalty, not a reprieve.
Minimum wage is meaningless so long as China, India, and Brazil are cheap. The more the cost of labor rises here, the more domestic jobs we'll see shipped overseas. That's not an argument against a living wage, it's an argument against our current policy on job growth.
I enjoy knowing that thousands of people apparently marched across the Brooklyn Bridge, and someone projected a huge display on the side of the Verizon building too 8)
Regardless of what it "means" or "changes" or "doesn't change" or any other description people may want to immediately give it, I really love seeing people acting up :D
Pro Occupy Wall Street Messages Projected on the Verizon Building (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGsKWbp3v3I#ws)
Quote from: el_chode on Nov 17, 2011, 10:12 PM
Since NJ banned assault weapons, extended magazines, dum dum and hollow points, and really any and all concealed carry permits, gun violence has essentially disappeared.
Not exactly. In fact, the opposite.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state)
QuoteWhile gun crime is down in the vast majority of states, it is up in New York, Virginia, New Jersey, Mississippi, Missouri, Arizona, Delaware, New Hampshire
Massachusetts, North Dakota, Connecticut and several of the smaller states.
On the other hand.... you couldn't be more right about this....
QuoteMinimum wage is meaningless so long as China, India, and Brazil are cheap. The more the cost of labor rises here, the more domestic jobs we'll see shipped overseas. That's not an argument against a living wage, it's an argument against our current policy on job growth.
If our current policy on job growth remains the same, the only jobs left will be ones that are impossible to ship oversees, or will be outright replaced (self-checkouts, mail-order pharmacy, etc.). There will be a major brain drain, with people coming to our universities, but heading overseas to make their fortune.
Raise the minimum wage immediately to $18/hr. Create a maximum wage of $90/hr to eliminate inequality.
Institute a 6 hour workday, and 6 weeks of paid vacation.
Institute a moratorium on all foreclosures and layoffs immediately.
Repeal racist and xenophobic English-only laws.
Open the borders to all immigrants, legal or illegal. Offer immediate, unconditional amnesty, to all undocumented residents of the US.
Create a single-payer, universal health care system.
Pass far stricter environmental protection and animal rights laws.
Allow workers to elect their supervisors.
Lower the retirement age to 55. Increase Social Security benefits.
Ban the private ownership of land.
Make homeschooling illegal. Religious fanatics use it to feed their children propaganda.
Reduce the age of majority to 16.
Abolish the death penalty and life in prison. We call for the immediate release of all death row inmates from death row and transferred to regular prisons.
Release all political prisoners immediately.
Immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Ban private gun ownership.
Strengthen the separation of church and state.
End the 'War on Drugs'
And this is why I have a hard time taking this "movement" seriously. You have a problem with these things? Then you are occupying the wrong street. It's like having a problem with the way chickens are raised/slaughtered so you occupy a Bed, Bath & Beyond outlet.
I believe if Bush were in office, the focus of this occupy movement would be more squarely on government, where, according to these "demands" the focus should be on the first place. But Obama gets a pass b/c he leans to the Left.
I still think our government made a mistake with the bailouts b/c as chodester sez,
"This country is/was on the brink of collapse, yet almost nothing has changed." The only way to "fix" greed/corruption is to have negative consequences for greed/corruption. And we are talking Great Depression consequences for things to change. I shudder to think of the calamity down the road that will actually bring change, but it ain't gonna be pretty. And we will crawl right back in the hole once we're out of it.
Quote from: YouAre_GivenToFly on Nov 18, 2011, 10:11 AM
Quote from: el_chode on Nov 17, 2011, 10:12 PM
Since NJ banned assault weapons, extended magazines, dum dum and hollow points, and really any and all concealed carry permits, gun violence has essentially disappeared.
Not exactly. In fact, the opposite.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state)
QuoteWhile gun crime is down in the vast majority of states, it is up in New York, Virginia, New Jersey, Mississippi, Missouri, Arizona, Delaware, New Hampshire
Massachusetts, North Dakota, Connecticut and several of the smaller states.
Mayhaps I ought to have used the sarcasm font haha. Or just used more sarcasm. Unless working in Newark has used up all my sarcasm and replaced it with dry cynicism
Quote from: el_chode on Nov 18, 2011, 12:12 PM
Quote from: YouAre_GivenToFly on Nov 18, 2011, 10:11 AM
Quote from: el_chode on Nov 17, 2011, 10:12 PM
Since NJ banned assault weapons, extended magazines, dum dum and hollow points, and really any and all concealed carry permits, gun violence has essentially disappeared.
Not exactly. In fact, the opposite.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state)
QuoteWhile gun crime is down in the vast majority of states, it is up in New York, Virginia, New Jersey, Mississippi, Missouri, Arizona, Delaware, New Hampshire
Massachusetts, North Dakota, Connecticut and several of the smaller states.
Mayhaps I ought to have used the sarcasm font haha. Or just used more sarcasm. Unless working in Newark has used up all my sarcasm and replaced it with dry cynicism
Shame on me for missing it. I need to get better at the internet.
Everyone realizes that those demands are just a random guy posting on a forum.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/next-up-occupy-congress/2011/11/18/gIQAGObiYN_blog.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/next-up-occupy-congress/2011/11/18/gIQAGObiYN_blog.html)
Well, that's a start.
Police pepper spraying and arresting students at UC Davis (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmJmmnMkuEM#ws)
Here's why I am generally anti-union in the current state of things:
The salary of the police officer who sprayed the UC students:
$110,000
http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/salary-details/?firstname=John&lastname=Pike&totalpay=107792.2&agency=UC+Davis (http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/salary-details/?firstname=John&lastname=Pike&totalpay=107792.2&agency=UC+Davis)
The salary of an Assistant Professor at UC Davis:
$64,000
http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/salary-details/?firstname=Nathan&lastname=Brown&totalpay=66244.96&agency=UC+Davis (http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/salary-details/?firstname=Nathan&lastname=Brown&totalpay=66244.96&agency=UC+Davis)
Now, please feel free to bitch at me if I'm wrong, but professors are not unionized in the same way as public school teachers, correct?
While unions are good for organizing against unfair labor practices, they are not to be used to milk taxpayers and create an artificial job market.
The Global R(evol)ution-2011-Occupy Love (New) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQPDwYSoX7g#ws)
another nice video
Quote from: el_chode on Nov 20, 2011, 02:01 PM
Here's why I am generally anti-union in the current state of things:
The salary of the police officer who sprayed the UC students:
$110,000
http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/salary-details/?firstname=John&lastname=Pike&totalpay=107792.2&agency=UC+Davis (http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/salary-details/?firstname=John&lastname=Pike&totalpay=107792.2&agency=UC+Davis)
The salary of an Assistant Professor at UC Davis:
$64,000
http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/salary-details/?firstname=Nathan&lastname=Brown&totalpay=66244.96&agency=UC+Davis (http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/salary-details/?firstname=Nathan&lastname=Brown&totalpay=66244.96&agency=UC+Davis)
Now, please feel free to bitch at me if I'm wrong, but professors are not unionized in the same way as public school teachers, correct?
While unions are good for organizing against unfair labor practices, they are not to be used to milk taxpayers and create an artificial job market.
I think there are some down sides to the bigger union's like the UAW and whatever. but at the same time unions only make up like 7-14percent of the jobs out there or whatever. I'm on nyquil and sick so I'm spacy as shit right now. i work at my dad's printing company and there are only 4 of us who work there. a chick in the office who answers phones, an old dude who does deliveries and me and my pops who print the shit. we're a union shop, I've got a pension and all that jive but for the most part it's exactly the same as when I worked at a non-union window washing company. we do work for other union shops but it's not like we hook them up over our other customers or anything. we're priced low as fuck right now because of private companies that do printing online and all sorts of shit right now. the post office could fuck us if it goes down because we do a lot of envelope orders and shit.
it's definitely a power grab attempt for big business trying to dissolve these unions. if you want to see how bad shit can get do some reading about detroits current situation. we'll be broke by april, no later than june so they're cutting thousands of jobs, bleeding the pensions people have worked years to build up, etc.
and when you dissolve a union it's not sporadic choosing the people that you get rid of either, it's 100's of people at a time, often all from the same communities.
all I know is when we try and get union work usually we have to put in a bid to go up against other companies. there's no secret handshake or anything like that. it's business.
as sad as it is I'm pretty ignorant to the downsides of unions so it's always interesting to hear what up. as far as I can tell they're doing more good than bad. they gave us the weekend, they gave us a minimum wage, they eliminated child labor, etc.
with all the problems going down the last people we should blame and punish for it are teachers or firefighters or whomever. seems like the classic example of big business picking on the little guy. alright I'm not sure if what I said even made sense I feel like I'm robo-trippin.
all that said, I agree with your point about those police choders. fuck the police, fuck them hard dude. we waste so much fucking money on those bitches. they're over armed. over funded and have too much power. it really does feel like they want to protect insurance companies more than people.
Quote from: el_chode on Nov 20, 2011, 02:01 PM
Here's why I am generally anti-union in the current state of things:
To be fair, choder, those are two very different professions. Let's not blame unions for that particular gap in the pay scale.
Quote from: Sticky Icky Green Stuff on Nov 19, 2011, 01:37 PM
Police pepper spraying and arresting students at UC Davis (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmJmmnMkuEM#ws)
this seems to be quite the hot talk in recent occupy business. its sad/true that until authority steps out of line nothing major happens.
being campus police, I'm sure the action the see is minimal. I guess they just got too damn excited that people were noticing them.
I am beginning to come around (i.e. this is starting to make sense to me)
Amy Goodman & Chris Hedges With Charlie Rose Exploring the Occupy Movement
http://newparadigmdigest.com/6951/amy-goodman-chris-hedges-with-charlie-rose-exploring-the-occupy-movement/ (http://newparadigmdigest.com/6951/amy-goodman-chris-hedges-with-charlie-rose-exploring-the-occupy-movement/)
Quote from: ALady on Nov 21, 2011, 03:59 PM
Quote from: el_chode on Nov 20, 2011, 02:01 PM
Here's why I am generally anti-union in the current state of things:
To be fair, choder, those are two very different professions. Let's not blame unions for that particular gap in the pay scale.
I agree they are different, but as a matter of labor markets, I do not think one is worth six figures and it is artificially inflated due to a bargaining position that many others do not have access to. That is not right.
Or in other words, their proper role is to act as shields against the swords of unfair practices, not the other way around.
The cops are possibly kicking out the remaining protestors still entrenched in St. James Park in downtown Toronto at some point overnight, making work for me a living hell. I have to cut out of programming for live news hits every half hour and then fly by the seat of my pants in switching back to shows while keeping things on time before the Breakfast TV morning news program begins at 5am. This will not look pretty.
Ron Paul Town Hall Gets Occupied (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cJCqw8XVw0#ws)