Occupy Wall Street

Because I've spent hours watching these people on occupystream.com. Listening to their speeches, the interviews, the propaganda. They're libs, plain and simple.
--- merged: Oct 24, 2011 4:58 AM ---

Well, my dad bought a bunch of farmland back in the early 1970s and sold most of it a few years ago.

 

I don't think either can be productive without the other.

 

I do agree with your observations, I think the money should just go into a trust at a LOCAL bank and used exclusively for legal purposes such as permits, setting up a 501 3 (c) and any lawsuits that may happen. They best not cry too much about the money because the IRS will then start looking into it and that's the one part of government to truly fear. Or donate it all back to churches, homeless centers and so on. IF it is truly that much, get rid of it and show the banks and government that money truly doesn't help a cause. My feeling is that if you don't want something missing don't take it. I won't be taking anything of value when I go to Cleveland this week. Some food, my phone and a cheap video cam that I can carry at all times. So to me the drummers crying about stolen or damaged drums is moot. They knew the chances they were taking and if the money wasn't coming in, what would they have done then? It's like Cleveland's group talking about the computers/laptops that have been stolen, why take them if you know that is a possibility? There are libraries around that have internet access, a lot of phones have it, as does mine one reason I'm taking it and not my laptop or pc.

As for bureaucracy, yes, when things get too large you need leadership. Whether it is in group (committee) form or an individual, either elected or volunteer. You have different "working groups to maintain some form of purpose. One can be security, one for information, one for PR, one to go up to get permits and so on. Each group then has an election and appoints someone to the committee that deals with the city and has discussions and negotiations. (Something Bloomberg pointed out a lack of). It's great to have demonstrations and protests but there comes a time when there has to be a negotiating period so that both sides can offer up resolutions. Otherwise, one side says, "look we are willing to try to talk things out, but the other side is not organized enough to come to the table." One gets sympathy the other looks in all honesty like a joke.

 

I would have to say the most financially productive people are the rich, not the middle class. That is my final answer.

 

What other areas? And yes, the rich by virtue of being rich are going to be more productive financially.

But do they create wealth? No.

Do they spread wealth around? Based on how the average pays have decreased, unemployment has skyrocketed, housing is a mess and small businesses (with 10 or more employees) don't exist, I'd say nope.

Are they donating large sums to colleges for scholarships and research? No.

So the wealthy of today are no where near the semi-class acts of the TRUE wealth builders of this country, the Rockefellers, the Vanderbilts, the Carnegies and Mellons, and so on.

Anyone can inherit millions and not do shit but live off their family name. Or go to an Ivy League school and get a job because of their heritage and who they knew at school. Nice old fashioned European aristocracy. The very thing our forefathers fought against. The exact opposite of "all men being created equal and bestowed by God certain inalienable rights."

So you are in essence wanting a feudal system here, Eddie. You may not in real life but your arguments here point you in that direction.

 

All men are created equal, no doubt in my mind about that. Which is why I hate discussions where people are labeled based on their financial wealth. lower class, middle class, upper class. It's all so ignorant to me.

 

Financially productive=making money

 

And yet your very own quote earlier would dispel that view, so which view do you hold to? the one I just quoted or the previous where you proclaim the rich are more productive in areas other than just wealth? And you refused (which I notice you are a pro at) to answer the rest of the posted argument. What you get to pick and choose what you want instead of facing and discussing the WHOLE argument? Wow, what color is the sky in your world, Eddie?

 

All men are created equal, that doesn't mean there aren't unique talents and abilities amongst the people.

 

Ah so in your view only the wealthy can make money? I guess that is why we outsource so many jobs and the banks won't loan money to small businesses and people have to work 2-3 jobs just to pay their bills. They aren't being "productive". Hell Eddie, why not just call the poor feeders and proclaim that they are destroying resources for the people who truly deserve to be here and kill everyone else off... ooo wait you want to do that by making healthcare inaffordable to the workers.

Just admit it Eddie you desire to be an elitist and it sounds like you buy into the accusations that the occupiers are "rich kids" while your daddy bought farmland in the 70's and sold it off and you want to live off that.

Wow, you provide a good example of why I am going to be a part of Occupy Cleveland in the coming days.

 

You know, most rich people aren't bankers and ceo's. They're just people who have been more effective at making money, that's all. That's the problem with this whole ows thing; it's demonized rich people.

 

THIS is the most sense you have made in anything you have written, but again you refused to answer the posts above you pick and choose and don't address the whole picture. Because I have noticed when you do, you tend to show inconsistencies in your rebuttals. So it is all you can do to pick and choose without having to face and acknowledge your own hypocrisies. Which none of us truly want o face, but sometimes we must to actually learn and grow and make ourselves and the world around us better.

Again, I've been there. Many here can tell you in the old place I was somewhat like you Eddie spewing hate and trying to cover it with bullshit irrational rationale. And I fought just to fight even when the arguments I made no longer made sense to me.

What I was and where I am now... I argue to learn and to try to understand the other side and to find common ground so that EVERYONE can benefit. I don't argue for points or to "win", there is no winning, there are no points when you want to totally dismiss the opposing side. There can never be anything gained or ANY advancement personally or in humanity without realizations that we must all coexist and we must ALL find ways to do so.

 

I don't hate anyone. I know I said that I hate cops, but I don't hate them as people, I just hate their profession because it's sort of fascist.

 

Who has it demonized and how?

I do correct what I stated above, Gates and Buffett both have established trust funds and foundations to spread their wealth when they pass. Probably to escape estate taxes (but that is my bias). For whatever the reason they are choosing NOT to just hand the wealth THEY made to their kids. That is respectable but rare these days.

Again you fail to argue about the institutions of the bankers and Wall street. You seem to want to make it be all about class. It's not. I don't begrudge rich people that worked hard their money. Before my stroke I aspired to be among them. My dad is self made. But the opportunities he had no longer exist. They don't. A college degree with student loans has become indentured servitude because the banks can now put liens on everything you own or may own, if you don't pay. Which in this economy, not many can. My sister has her Master's and 2 kids. the best job she can find is part time with no benefits, there is no way on that alone can she pay rent, utilities, food and her student loan. And as I stated, even after I have been declared disabled, they still threaten to take money out of my disability checks (which I am not getting yet). The student loan contracts I signed when I got the loans stated IF I became disabled or died, the loans were null and void. Meaning, if I died my son would not nor could not be held liable for the loans. But the banks now own all the student loans, Freddie Macs and Fannie Mae loans and the VA loans and the small business loans, and to them it's all about profit. Back when they first were conceived they were great ideas, the government loaned these monies and people paid them back as they moved up in class. Now there is no movement upward as there was previously and government allowed the banks to take over all those loans and programs. Hence the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae debacles. Which the Right wishes to pin on government, but government truly didn't have much to do with MOST of those loans.
--- merged: Oct 24, 2011 6:25 AM ---

No you just blame the poor and liberals for everything you dislike. And no the Law enforcement profession is in no way fascist in and of itself. Are there cops that abuse the system? YES, just as there are those in any profession that abuse the system in which they are employed. Are there politicians that basically lay down the laws to be enforced that work for themselves or donors? YES, just as some bank tellers and stock brokers are honest people just working and trying to make ends meet being told to enforce rules the banks management has made for their own gains.

In other words, if you want to keep the badge or job you do what those above you tell you to do. I come from a family that has had quite a few police officers in it. In fact my Great grandfather was a chief of police here. So to me it's a very noble profession that gets bad publicity from the rotten eggs.

 

With the exception of Edward, there is just about a consensus here. I'd rather ignore the trolls and see if there isn't something else to expand on...

 

you know, i've read this thread, which now features eddie instead of ace performing the role of banal recycling of conservative memes---i cannot imagine anyone giving a shit what eddie thinks of the movement, giving a shit about the way he seems to hunt around for some way, any way, to frame it as the cartoon the right would prefer it is---and prefer because this is eroding the right's ability to pretend it speaks to or for anyone except people like eddie, close-minded religious devotees of a backwater ideology that's disintegrating before his eyes.

there was a time when the right media apparatus actually framed issues. those days appear to be gone.