kurtrussell
Banned
GrotesqueBeauty said:
I thought it had already been widely established that the bulk of the protestors were representative of one, very specific, subset of the community?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Occupy Wall St - Occupy Everywhere, Occupy Together!
- Thread starter magicstop
- Start date
- Status
I thought it had already been widely established that the bulk of the protestors were representative of one, very specific, subset of the community?
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
I don't doubt that you thought that.kurtrussell said:
kurtrussell
Banned
GrotesqueBeauty said:
Okay and seeing as you jumped all over one of the points I made, perhaps you'd like to address the other one?
These people as a collective could be an amazing force. They could right lots of wrongs in their local community. They could start off small by looking after their own and take positive action to accomplish positive things. Why do you think that they choose not to do these things? Why have they all suddenly developed a social conscience and a voice in the last month?
It's like the idiom: Charity Begins at Home
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
I reject the idea that "these people" aren't accomplishing anything positive. I think they're exercising their civil liberties in an intelligent and constructive manner, in spite of continued efforts to portray them as unfocused and directionless. Raising public awareness and creating a dialogue between average people that's not diluted by corporate interests is worthy of admiration and respect imo. I also think it's completely ridiculous to say that those participating "suddenly developed a social conscience and voice in the past month". The movement is just already widespread sentiment reaching a critical mass. The difference is that these protests are creating a platform to convey certain underlying messages without being drowned out by the endless white noise of corporate media.kurtrussell said:
JohnnyPhatsaqs
Banned
aronnov reborn said:
I was laughing at the "I'm going to occupy for a few hours...." and the I have "occupied for 20-30 minutes."
That's not occupying. That's visiting.
kurtrussell
Banned
Dead Man said:
Because if a collective group of people sitting around in tents, not really being able to list any demands makes global media, then an organised group of people going around and doing good things for the less fortunate sure as hell would.
Alpha-Bromega
Member
kurtrussell said:
absolutely false, they are bringing awareness and the topics to beyond the halls of academia and of activists, but rather to the dinner table, and ultimately it's now in the collective narrative of us as a culture and we are collectively discussing it BEYOND the bullshit of the corporate media. This is the exact aim of a movement, a public, organized show of discontent
It wasn't. Now it is. You know what the front page news on economy and money solely used to be? Economists and Industrialists incessantly yammering about how taxes needed to be lower so they could go about creating jerbs and really starting to trickle down that wealth and then how great it was for the GDP and everything that jobs were being outsourced. That that bullshit narrative is finally getting visibly contested in itself is an incredibly major accomplishment.
You mean like the hundreds of thousands of people who work in soup kitchens, or shelters, or are community organizers get a whole lot of media attention?
Those people don't get attention as they work incredibly hard to ease the symptoms of an incredibly unequal society and help people that the mainstream media has demonised over the last few decades (unemployed, homeless, low income, working poor). What OWS is doing that is distinct is that they have started highlighting a large source of many of the issues we face. The disproportionate influence that the richest 1% has over everything.
kurtrussell
Banned
Alpha-Bromega said:
So, I'm not in the 1% and not particularly discontent either. So how can they claim to represent me?
Oh - and looking at the protest camps (I walked past one, so saw it first hand) there seems to be a distinct lack of ethnic groups and people over the age of 40. How are they representing the "99%" again?
kurtrussell
Banned
Azih said:
And I in turn would counter that OWS would have a disproportionate influence over the people in classes below them. To use the "homeless guy on the street" analogy - he could live or die based on the whims of an OWSer! If that OWS person drops $5 in his begging tin, he can buy a blanket... or he can freeze to death.
ZOMG! OWS don't represent the majority of homeless people! They have a disproportionate influence over them! Quick! Let's occupy..... something?
Anecdotal evidence? Really?kurtrussell said:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/faces-of-people-protesting-on-wall-street
Dead Man said:
Sounds like the usual left-wing tripe. And Jensen is actively pushing for the 'failed system' analysis to advance the more radical views within the movement mainly the anti-capitalist strain. Something the OWS probably don't want to happen to their movement.
And I'd love to have a discussion on the efficacy of empires , and what the alternative empires are another time. Hint: The choices aren't great.
kurtrussell
Banned
Azih said:
They blatantly aren't representing the views of 99% of society, the protest is solely in their best interests.
It's been proven time and time again that when the working class suffer, they suffer. When the middle class also start to suffer, revolution happens. Sadly, after the revolution, the working class still suffer. I believe there's even a famous quote about that, albeit about a gazillion times more eloquent.
And the tall heads and pundits on the media were pushing the 'high taxes mean fewer jerbs' lie pretty much unopposed and were even referring to it as 'class warfare'. Not so much anymore thanks to OWS and the ridiculous 'class warfare' line is starting to get bashed as it deserves.remnant said:
Disagreed. Most of what benefits the middle and the working class is the exact same.
Universal healthcare benefits both.
High quality public education from pre-school to post graduate benefits both.
Investing in public infrastructure benefits both.
Not having the richest 400 people hoarding as much wealth as the lowest 100 million sure as hell benefits both.
Not having 1% lobbyists running all over Washington, 1% owned media, huge donations from the 1% to political candidates also benefits both.
There were many cuts.remnant said:
It's true that the overall level of federal spending has gone up since 2000, but that does not mean that nothing was cut.
Let me know if you want a list.
Also, generally speaking, over time, regardless of the level of services that you think the government should provide, spending will go up, at least as long as we have population growth.
Fenderputty
Banned
kurtrussell said:
kurtrussell said:
I'm sorry you don't value the movment. It's unfortunate. For the people that do value the movement though, the "sitting around in tents" is doing plenty of good. The ability to form protests and affect change is a wonderful thing and shouldn't be trivialized.
They claim to represent you beacuse you're not in the 1%. Even if you disagree, any benefits that might spring from this movement would also benefit you.
empty vessel
Member
Fenderputty said:
Right, he's either ungrateful or ignorant. And it's almost certainly the latter, which, while regrettable, is at least not malevolent. Kurtrussell is not "discontent" simply because he doesn't understand or recognize what he has lost. He doesn't get that, regardless of how well he has personally done relative to other people in the bottom 99%, he has done worse than he otherwise would have due to the shrinking of the leftover pie after the top 1% has taken its slice. This requires some level of nuance to understand, and it can't be done by simply looking to one's left and right and asking if you have "succeeded" relative to those around you. Indeed, that people like kurtrussell don't even understand how they have lost out is exactly how the top 1% has been getting away with what they've been doing the last thirty years.
Fenderputty
Banned
empty vessel said:
Arde5643 said:
The fact that he's come in here spouting every point right leaning talk radio can come up with speaks volumes about the validity of both of your posts.
Something Wicked
Member
gcubed said:
Pssh, the 99% doesn't need any bootstraps... though they could use some new mask straps to fix a few of their broken Guy Fawkes ones.
kame-sennin
Member
Triumph the Insult Comic Dog visits Occupy Wall Street:
http://teamcoco.com/video/triumph-occupy-wall-st
http://teamcoco.com/video/triumph-occupy-wall-st
ColonelColon
Member
Another veteran at Occupy Oakland was injured by police.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/04/us-protests-oakland-veteran-idUSTRE7A37A820111104
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/04/us-protests-oakland-veteran-idUSTRE7A37A820111104
cooljeanius
Member
You know, sometimes it bothers me how over-represented the 1% are at my college. It makes them feel like they can flaunt it.
Alpha-Bromega
Member
ColonelColon said:
it's like the cops are trying to create martyrs. keep mobilizing us, keep giving us legitimacy, and may peace be with those hurt.
Mortrialus
Banned
With the veterans, deliberately aiming at protesters, and letter the driver of attempted vehicular homicide, it really is like they're trying to piss off protesters to the point of violence. They couldn't do a better job if they tried.Alpha-Bromega said:
Alpha-Bromega
Member
Mortrialus said:
as long as it stays peaceful on our side, we need a MLK like figure to keep it balanced and level headed. When they bombed his house and they were ready to beat some white ass, King calmed them! violence begetting violence? can not be allowed. and this granted moral legitimacy to the movement...
it's wrong to be shot at, run over and spit on, but it's a greater evil to ever return that favor.
Pissing off veterans isn't a smart move, Americans don't like when their hero's are getting messed with. And people don't trust the police anyway.
I think the protest will turn very violent at some point in the future.
I bet the police will try to escalate the protests, so that they can use a lot of force against the protestors.
I think the protest will turn very violent at some point in the future.
I bet the police will try to escalate the protests, so that they can use a lot of force against the protestors.
Don't know if this has been posted, but here is a cool video.
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/133119143.html
It shows some douchebags trying to vandalize some stores. Promptly the rest of the protesters make a ring around the stores and scare them away. I liked the black guy with the stick. Awesome.
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/133119143.html
It shows some douchebags trying to vandalize some stores. Promptly the rest of the protesters make a ring around the stores and scare them away. I liked the black guy with the stick. Awesome.
UltimaPooh
Member
JGS said:
I was wondering this as well... Banks close at noon on Saturdays...
Also you're small bank so I wouldn't expect anything.
CrocMother
Banned
This been posted?
cooljeanius
Member
Because "Remember remember the 5th of November" and all thatJGS said:
makingmusic476
Member
So, grand scheme of things, what would you like to see come of these protests?
I'd like to see:
Though I fear the "down with capitalism!" angle I'm seeing a lot will paint the movement as too extremist. Capitalism works in most areas, you just have to recognize that the lack of easily accessible competition in certain markets (healthcare, education) or companies growing too powerful (banking) are situations where capitalism, in and of itself, is not the best path to take. Sometimes we need significant regulation, or full out government control.
I'd also like to see other changes, like streamlining our tax code, but those are only tangentially related to the issues being brought forth by the OWS movement.
I'd like to see:
- Significant campaign finance reform.
- Proper banking regulation, like bringing back the Glass-Steagall act, and preventing future banks from ever getting as big as BoA or JPM.
- Military budget being reduced to ~1/3rd it is now. Right now we're spending more in a single year on our military than Russia's planning to spend over the next ten years. Cutting us down to a third of our current budget ($700 billion > $200-250 billion) would leave is with plenty of extra cash that we can spend in other areas of government, while still investing ~4x as much into our military as our closest competitors like Russia.
- Repeal Bush's tax cuts on the highest tax bracket.
- Add a new tax bracket at 1 or 1.5 million at a higher rate (45%? 50%?). Back in the 40s, the highest tax bracket began at $200,000, but that's equivalent to around $2.3 million today.
- Some change to the capital gains tax system, though I'm not sure what. Maybe include long term capital gains in your income tax filings for that year.
- Spend the extra money from the above in three areas:
- Decrease our deficit.
- Implement a pubic healthcare system.
- Further subsidize or nationalize post-secondary education.
Allowing high school graduates to pursue a college education without selling their souls to the devil and entering the job market with thousands in debt and little way to deal with medical expenses would go a long way towards creating an equal opportunity environment for both rich and poor students.
Though I fear the "down with capitalism!" angle I'm seeing a lot will paint the movement as too extremist. Capitalism works in most areas, you just have to recognize that the lack of easily accessible competition in certain markets (healthcare, education) or companies growing too powerful (banking) are situations where capitalism, in and of itself, is not the best path to take. Sometimes we need significant regulation, or full out government control.
I'd also like to see other changes, like streamlining our tax code, but those are only tangentially related to the issues being brought forth by the OWS movement.
makingmusic476
Member
CrocMother said:
makingmusic476
Member
The figures I've seen put this much higher. Michael Moore first claimed 50% of the US (155 million), but who can trust him? So PolitiFact.com decided to test his figures, and they found that top 400 actually have more money than the bottom 60% of the US. More than around 184 million people.Azih said:
Edit:
Though I suppose those figures are much different when you exclude people who are unable to work (children, etc.)
Edit 2:
Ahh. It's more than half of 100 million households. So that's where the 100 million figure comes from.
Mortrialus
Banned
MikeTyson said:
A group of Occupy Wallstreet Protesters are marching. A group of them slit with the group and start stealing chairs. The rest of the group circles around the chair looters and shout them down.
- Status