Support NeoGAF

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Are you trying to get the number one posting position back?

 

[Karma Kramer]

Are you trying to get the number one posting position back?

Hey manos... now that I have your attention can you please respond to the post of mine you ignored earlier.

You might answer? Are you Herman Cain?

Of course criminality is wrong... I mean, duh! But stealing a soda or sleeping in a park doesn't equate to the level of destruction that wall street criminality caused. Can you agree with this? If so, can I ask you why you never seem to balance your posts in this thread with this kind of perspective and instead only focus on the criminality of the people who are trying to bring justice to a much greater problem?

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Hey manos... now that I have your attention can you please respond to the post of mine you ignored earlier.

You trying to get back the number one posting position?

To answer your question, no I am not Herman Cain.

I am happ you finally agree that criminality by the squatters was wrong though.

 

[remnant]

Have you ever watched Fox News before? lol

The so called "liberal" media is a hoax.

And about internet journalism, do you have any stats on how much attention is given to "independent" news sources?

Whats your feeling about this internet censorship bill?

That Fox news bash/liberal media crap has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.

You are making the argument that internet news sources, by posting a graph that explicit says it doesn't consider the internet a news source, is not independent news. Intellectually dishonest but this is a OWS thread....

Burden of proof falls on you to prove that smaller publishers having more avenues to disseminate news is better for us. Something people tend to forget when talking about this subjects is that most of those companies failed of their own volition.

 

[Karma Kramer]

You trying to get back the number one posting position?

To answer your question, no I am not Herman Cain.

I am happ you finally agree that criminality by the squatters was wrong though.

I'm gonna pm a mod and see if they agree with me that you are trolling at this point. You keep dodging my question (4th time now) and you do it in such a way , that you don't promote a healthy discussion. You have 400+ posts in this thread and yet all you do is repeat the same talking points over and over, spamming up the thread, instead of being civil and respectful.

 

[Karma Kramer]

That Fox news bash/liberal media crap has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.

You are making the argument that internet news sources, by posting a graph that explicit says it doesn't consider the internet a news source, is not independent news. Intellectually dishonest but this is a OWS thread....

Burden of proof falls on you to prove that smaller publishers having more avenues to disseminate news is better for us. Something people tend to forget when talking about this subjects is that most of those companies failed of their volition.

My point is media outlets openly mold the news to fit an agenda. This should be all the proof you need that minimal competition and influence in the media is bad... this is true for any services or markets.

How would independent news organizations compete with CNN, nytimes, Fox News, etc? Do you really think independent news is actively being used by a majority of the population?

 

[kame-sennin]

You trying to get back the number one posting position?

To answer your question, no I am not Herman Cain.

I am happ you finally agree that criminality by the squatters was wrong though.

It seems a bit rude that you won't answer his question regarding which crime - squatting or financial malfeasance - is more heinous.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

It seems a bit rude that you won't answer his question regarding which crime - squatting or financial malfeasance - is more heinous.

Oh that question, I was wondering why he kept going on about me being Herman Cain. Both are heinous, it's like saying is it better to be raped and toturued or murdered.

I'm gonna pm a mod and see if they agree with me that you are trolling at this point. You keep dodging my question (4th time now) and you do it in such a way , that you don't promote a healthy discussion. You have 400+ posts in this thread and yet all you do is repeat the same talking points over and over, spamming up the thread, instead of being civil and respectful.

Funny that two posters here posted that they actually didn't mind me being around and one saying it helped prevent the thread from being a circle jerk, did you miss that?

 

[Evlar]

Less wordy.

 

[kame-sennin]

Oh that question, I was wondering why he kept going on about me being Herman Cain. Both are heinous, it's like saying is it better to be raped and toturued or murdered.

Thanks for answering the question. I find it odd that you think the crime of public squatting is anywhere near as "heinous" as the financial fraud that led to the financial crisis - the destruction of billions of dollars and the livelihoods of millions of Americans. Actually, I find it more than odd. If I'm being perfectly honest, I find it a bit unnerving.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Thanks for answering the question. I find it odd that you think the crime of public squatting is anywhere near as "heinous" as the financial fraud that led to the financial crisis - the destruction of billions of dollars and the livelihoods of millions of Americans.

A crime is a crime, otherwise you get into that whole Polanski trap. The basic fact I both things are crimes, you can't deny that.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Thanks for answering the question. I find it odd that you think the crime of public squatting is anywhere near as "heinous" as the financial fraud that led to the financial crisis - the destruction of billions of dollars and the livelihoods of millions of Americans. Actually, I find it more than odd. If I'm being perfectly honest, I find it a bit unnerving.

Its ridiculous.

He must be a troll.

 

[daycru]

Thanks for answering the question. I find it odd that you think the crime of public squatting is anywhere near as "heinous" as the financial fraud that led to the financial crisis - the destruction of billions of dollars and the livelihoods of millions of Americans. Actually, I find it more than odd. I find it a bit unnerving.

If you guys would stop replying to that guy maybe he'd go away.

Jaywalking is a crime.
Murder is a crime.

They're the same!!~!!!~!!!

He's either got an authoritarian fetish or is trolling. Night and day. Leave him be.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Its ridiculous.

He must be a troll.

I guess a mod didn't grant your attempt to stifle speech on the board.

Look both things are crimes.

I ask you which was worse financial crimes or a man recently convicted in New York ofmudering three women?

 

[Johnny]

Personally I don't think it is a business's corporate responsibility to cater to any of that list. If labor is cheap and plentiful, it is not the business's responsibility to somehow fix that. For it to survive in a competitive environment (all realize that labor can be had cheap at this point in time), they must react. As for customers' disapproval, if people walk through the door, something is going right. The corporation does not exist for the welfare of the masses; it represents a collection of assets and debt that individuals contributed and reaped the benefits from. It is idealistic but unrealistic to claim the corporation should do more for this country; to expect the greedy rich, satiated by greater wealth, to charitably provide to the jealous masses is foolish.

The government has the responsibilities you list. It is the government that is responsible for deciding what is good and appropriate for the country. It is the government that should apply carbon taxes or set limitations for pollution. It is the government that should enforce standards of quality and safety, prevent abuse of corporate power (i.e. monopolies), and shun lobbyist money. It is the government that can allocate tax dollars towards the infrastructure and business environment that lets those corporations operate. It is the government's responsibility to determine what is a fair share for the corporation to give back to the country as a cost of using said business environment and infrastructure. It is the government that can spur GDP growth and cause drops in unemployment through appropriate fiscal policy and strengthening of the people's institutions and agencies. It is the government that sets the rules for these corporations to play by.

The reason why this is government's responsibility is because we are shareholders of the government of this country by birthright. Others have come here and decided to become shareholders in this country. One life gets you one share here. Your elected officials are your board of directors. We have allowed our board to be corrupted. Corporations have bent the rules, breaking our capitalist society and replacing it with regulations friendly to particular corporations and particular industries. We did not realize these were harming us as we began to confuse policies that help capitalism with policies that help industries and corporations. Corporatism is not Capitalism. What is good for Verizon or Exxon Mobil is not inherently good for the people of this country. Why is that? Because it never was either of those company's responsibility to tend to any nation's people. It is the nation's responsibility to tend to the people, and the people forgot this fact, becoming apathetic to the corruption of our political system.

If a corporation can thrive in an environment in which we dictate the rules, they should be commended and the shareholders should have the right to do with its profits as they please. However, we have not required they play by rules we deem reasonable.

Very well said.

 

[Evlar]

Very well said.

You think so? Why on earth should anyone celebrate that a corporation survives, unless they're invested?

 

[remnant]

My point is media outlets openly mold the news to fit an agenda. This should be all the proof you need that minimal competition and influence in the media is bad... this is true for any services or markets.

Which is why not including internet sources is a dishonest move. Smaller, less profitable outlets with very small outreach like newspapers and radio stations have died or been sold, but they are slowly being replaced by other smaller news outlet.

Wasn't OWS started by a small website/magazine called Adbusters?

How would independent news organizations compete with CNN, nytimes, Fox News, etc? Do you really think independent news is actively being used by a majority of the population?

Have you been looking at the state of news lately? All of them have been performing worse, losing out to smaller competitors on the internet. Why do you think outlets like CNN try to co-opt social media and internet news all the time? if we consider news outlets as a station that spreads information, than yeah i would say they have been doing fine.

It seems counter productive at least to me to make the argument that news and information is not free when this is probably the most free time in history when it comes to communication, especially that of news.

 

[Karma Kramer]

I guess a mod didn't grant your attempt to stifle speech on the board.

I didn't pm one yet. I have this page saved as my "insurance file"... if you continue, you might be hearing from them.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

You think so? Why on earth should anyone celebrate that a corporation survives, unless they're invested?

Ask apple fans, or Sony fans, et al.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I didn't pm one yet. I have this page saved as my "insurance file"... if you continue, you might be hearing from them.

I think your suffering from delusions of grandeur at this point.

Trying to threaten me is pretty funny though. lol

 

[Karma Kramer]

I think your suffering from delusions of grandeur at this point.

Trying to threaten me is pretty funny though. lol

I care about this thread and I objectively have no problem with civil discussions and disagreements, but you are playing games sir and spamming it up with nonsense.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I care about this thread and I objectively have no problem with civil discussions and disagreements, but you are playing games sir and spamming it up with nonsense.

You sir are a loon who thinks he can threaten me with his "insurance file", that said you are providing sow good humor.

 

[Karma Kramer]

You sir are a loon who thinks he can threaten me with his "insurance file", that said you are providing sow good humor.

Think what you want. I find it funny instead of disputing your trolling you are just trolling more by calling me a loon.

My last response in regards to this, you keep making these traps to distract people from the real issues and its working for now...

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Think what you want. I find it funny instead of disputing your trolling you are just trolling more by calling me a loon.

My last response in regards to this, you keep making these traps to distract people from the real issues and its working for now...

You better add that to the insurance file. You also need to grow up and accept that people don't always discuss whats on message or the issue for you.

 

[kame-sennin]

A crime is a crime, otherwise you get into that whole Polanski trap. The basic fact I both things are crimes, you can't deny that.

I can't and I won't. They Occupy movement is an act of civil disobedience and I encourage it. Some laws aught to be broken. And no, a crime is not a crime. As a lawyer you should know that. Don't they call it "bad law"? Further, it's quite plane that there is a varying level of severity when it comes to crime. Misdemeanors are not felonies.

If you guys would stop replying to that guy maybe he'd go away.

Jaywalking is a crime.
Murder is a crime.

They're the same!!~!!!~!!!

He's either got an authoritarian fetish or is trolling. Night and day. Leave him be.

That would only work if it was unanimous, which would be impossible on a message board. The mods have decided that either Manos is not trolling, or that they are willing to tolerate his trolling in this thread. That's their call. You can't stop him from posting in this thread and there's no way to stop everyone from giving him ammunition, so you might as well go with the flow. Also, as I've mentioned before, this thread would be down on the fifth page of the OT most days if it weren't for Manos.

 

[Jenga]

you guys need to chill

you know you're mad when any dissenting opinion is "trolling"

you are no worse than china

 

[Karma Kramer]

you guys need to chill

you know you're mad when any dissenting opinion is "trolling"

you are no worse than china

Its not an opinion. It is law. Manos is denying this because if he admitted the criminality of wall street is/was worse than average americans sleeping in tents at parks, his entire position in this thread would lose a lot of its credibility.

 

[Evlar]

I don't think he's trolling, exactly... or at least, not really trolling the topic per se. I think he's simply trying to pad his post count. That's it. Literally nothing else. I think the frequency of his double posts, in particular, bear me out on this.

Consequently, this is why ignoring him would do no good. He'll sit in here and talk to himself. He DOES sit in here and talk to himself.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I can't and I won't. They Occupy movement is an act of civil disobedience and I encourage it. Some laws aught to be broken. And no, a crime is not a crime. As a lawyer you should know that. Don't they call it "bad law"? Further, it's quite plane that there is a varying level of severity when it comes to crime. Misdemeanors are not felonies.

Civil disobedience doesn't change a crime from still being a crime though.

That would only work if it was unanimous, which would be impossible on a message board. The mods have decided that either Manos is not trolling, or that they are willing to tolerate his trolling in this thread. That's their call. You can't stop him from posting in this thread and there's no way to stop everyone from giving him ammunition, so you might as well go with the flow. Also, as I've mentioned before, this thread would be down on the fifth page of the OT most days if it weren't for Manos.

I appreciate your view on that. I may not argree with a person, but I won't ever chase them out of a thread or even try.

 

[fortified_concept]

Both are heinous, it's like saying is it better to be raped and toturued or murdered.

I... I have no words, you're a joke, there's no reason for anyone to be arguing with you anymore.

 

[travisbickle]

Personally I don't think it is a business's corporate responsibility to cater to any of that list. If labor is cheap and plentiful, it is not the business's responsibility to somehow fix that. For it to survive in a competitive environment (all realize that labor can be had cheap at this point in time), they must react. As for customers' disapproval, if people walk through the door, something is going right. The corporation does not exist for the welfare of the masses; it represents a collection of assets and debt that individuals contributed and reaped the benefits from. It is idealistic but unrealistic to claim the corporation should do more for this country; to expect the greedy rich, satiated by greater wealth, to charitably provide to the jealous masses is foolish.

The government has the responsibilities you list. It is the government that is responsible for deciding what is good and appropriate for the country. It is the government that should apply carbon taxes or set limitations for pollution. It is the government that should enforce standards of quality and safety, prevent abuse of corporate power (i.e. monopolies), and shun lobbyist money. It is the government that can allocate tax dollars towards the infrastructure and business environment that lets those corporations operate. It is the government's responsibility to determine what is a fair share for the corporation to give back to the country as a cost of using said business environment and infrastructure. It is the government that can spur GDP growth and cause drops in unemployment through appropriate fiscal policy and strengthening of the people's institutions and agencies. It is the government that sets the rules for these corporations to play by.

The reason why this is government's responsibility is because we are shareholders of the government of this country by birthright. Others have come here and decided to become shareholders in this country. One life gets you one share here. Your elected officials are your board of directors. We have allowed our board to be corrupted. Corporations have bent the rules, breaking our capitalist society and replacing it with regulations friendly to particular corporations and particular industries. We did not realize these were harming us as we began to confuse policies that help capitalism with policies that help industries and corporations. Corporatism is not Capitalism. What is good for Verizon or Exxon Mobil is not inherently good for the people of this country. Why is that? Because it never was either of those company's responsibility to tend to any nation's people. It is the nation's responsibility to tend to the people, and the people forgot this fact, becoming apathetic to the corruption of our political system.

If a corporation can thrive in an environment in which we dictate the rules, they should be commended and the shareholders should have the right to do with its profits as they please. However, we have not required they play by rules we deem reasonable.

The bolded is very disingenuous, who is we?

Is we everyone except the corporations? And everyone who wrote about, protested, and disagreed with the policies put in place?

Who is the nation? again is it everyone except the corporations, and people working within the corporations?

Wait a minute, who is "the people"? Again, everyone except the people who work at the top of corporations.

 

[Johnny]

You think so? Why on earth should anyone celebrate that a corporation survives, unless they're invested?

That's a strange, leading question, and I think you missed the point Mii was trying to make. Corporations aren't to be worshipped or scorned, they're nothing more than instruments used to (hopefully) generate profits for their members. It's up to any healthy, Democratic government, with the aid of labour unions and the like, to create ground rules for these corporations by way anti-monopoly legislation, environmental and labour standards etc.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Is this not worthy of protest?

Holy shit! George Carlin wasn't kidding...

I... I have no words, you're a joke, there's no reason for anyone to be arguing with you anymore.

I'm surprised why he hasn't been banned yet.

He went from pushing liberal buttons to trolling to flatout trolling to trying to hard to just being really annoying.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I don't think he's trolling, exactly... or at least, not really trolling the topic per se. I think he's simply trying to pad his post count. That's it. Literally nothing else. I think the frequency of his double posts, in particular, bear me out on this.

Consequently, this is why ignoring him would do no good. He'll sit in here and talk to himself.

Why would I though? it's not like we get post count tags or such.

Double posts come from issues posting multiple quotes on my mobile, because copy and pasting is a bitch and occasionally my thinking a new poster would have occurred between me starting a post on actually posting it.

I... I have no words, you're a joke, there's no reason for anyone to be arguing with you anymore.

Coming from the main who supported the London Riots. Lol

He went from pushing liberal buttons to trolling to flatout trolling to trying to hard to just being really annoying.

Once again you're upset at me because I wouldn't do your podcast again.

 

[kame-sennin]

Civil disobedience doesn't change a crime from still being a crime though.

Just for clarity's sake, I agree. Civil disobedience is a crime. I just think it's morally justified in certain instances, like OWS.

I appreciate your view on that. I may not argree with a person, but I won't ever chase them out of a thread or even try.

Frankly, I don't think all argument is constructive. I personally don't care for rhetorical styles meant to cause frustration and anger in others, which I think you fall into from time to time. It's particularly upsetting because you seem more than capable of engaging in an intelligent and respectful debate.

 

[Cyan]

1% of the posters in this thread have 99% of the posts. :/

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Just for clarity's sake, I agree. Civil disobedience is a crime. I just think it's morally justified in certain instances, like OWS.

Fair enough, I disagree on it being justified in this case though.

Frankly, I don't think all argument is constructive. I personally don't care for rhetorical styles meant to cause frustration and anger in others, which I think you fall into from time to time. It's particularly upsetting because you seem more than capable of engaging in an intelligent and respectful debate.

You have to deal with what you feel are both the good and the bad in political discourse even from the same person, it's just the nature of individuals and how we feel about their message and tactics, and generally it can change from time to time.

1% of the posters in this thread have 99% of the posts. :/

"You"re still doing that"

 

[rohlfinator]

It seems counter productive at least to me to make the argument that news and information is not free when this is probably the most free time in history when it comes to communication, especially that of news.

The reality is that there are still a huge number of Americans (probably a fairly large majority) who get their news primarily from TV, radio, and newspapers, and until that changes it's important that we maintain the quality of those sources.

And counting on the internet to be our bastion of free news seems a little bit naive to me, when internet freedoms are being attacked with increasing regularity.

 

[kame-sennin]

Chris Hedges after the Zuccotti park raid:

This Is What Revolution Looks Like

Welcome to the revolution. Our elites have exposed their hand. They have nothing to offer. They can destroy but they cannot build. They can repress but they cannot lead. They can steal but they cannot share. They can talk but they cannot speak. They are as dead and useless to us as the water-soaked books, tents, sleeping bags, suitcases, food boxes and clothes that were tossed by sanitation workers Tuesday morning into garbage trucks in New York City. They have no ideas, no plans and no vision for the future.

Our decaying corporate regime has strutted in Portland, Oakland and New York with their baton-wielding cops into a fool’s paradise. They think they can clean up “the mess”—always employing the language of personal hygiene and public security—by making us disappear. They think we will all go home and accept their corporate nation, a nation where crime and government policy have become indistinguishable, where nothing in America, including the ordinary citizen, is deemed by those in power worth protecting or preserving, where corporate oligarchs awash in hundreds of millions of dollars are permitted to loot and pillage the last shreds of collective wealth, human capital and natural resources, a nation where the poor do not eat and workers do not work, a nation where the sick die and children go hungry, a nation where the consent of the governed and the voice of the people is a cruel joke.

Get back into your cages, they are telling us. Return to watching the lies, absurdities, trivia and celebrity gossip we feed you in 24-hour cycles on television. Invest your emotional energy in the vast system of popular entertainment. Run up your credit card debt. Pay your loans. Be thankful for the scraps we toss. Chant back to us our phrases about democracy, greatness and freedom. Vote in our rigged political theater. Send your young men and women to fight and die in useless, unwinnable wars that provide corporations with huge profits. Stand by mutely as our bipartisan congressional supercommittee, either through consensus or cynical dysfunction, plunges you into a society without basic social services including unemployment benefits. Pay for the crimes of Wall Street.

The rogues’ gallery of Wall Street crooks, such as Lloyd Blankfein at Goldman Sachs, Howard Milstein at New York Private Bank & Trust, the media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, the Koch brothers and Jamie Dimon at JPMorgan Chase & Co., no doubt think it’s over. They think it is back to the business of harvesting what is left of America to swell their personal and corporate fortunes. But they no longer have any concept of what is happening around them. They are as mystified and clueless about these uprisings as the courtiers at Versailles or in the Forbidden City who never understood until the very end that their world was collapsing. The billionaire mayor of New York, enriched by a deregulated Wall Street, is unable to grasp why people would spend two months sleeping in an open park and marching on banks. He says he understands that the Occupy protests are “cathartic” and “entertaining,” as if demonstrating against the pain of being homeless and unemployed is a form of therapy or diversion, but that it is time to let the adults handle the affairs of state. Democratic and Republican mayors, along with their parties, have sold us out. But for them this is the beginning of the end.

The historian Crane Brinton in his book “Anatomy of a Revolution” laid out the common route to revolution. The preconditions for successful revolution, Brinton argued, are discontent that affects nearly all social classes, widespread feelings of entrapment and despair, unfulfilled expectations, a unified solidarity in opposition to a tiny power elite, a refusal by scholars and thinkers to continue to defend the actions of the ruling class, an inability of government to respond to the basic needs of citizens, a steady loss of will within the power elite itself and defections from the inner circle, a crippling isolation that leaves the power elite without any allies or outside support and, finally, a financial crisis. Our corporate elite, as far as Brinton was concerned, has amply fulfilled these preconditions. But it is Brinton’s next observation that is most worth remembering. Revolutions always begin, he wrote, by making impossible demands that if the government met would mean the end of the old configurations of power. The second stage, the one we have entered now, is the unsuccessful attempt by the power elite to quell the unrest and discontent through physical acts of repression.

I have seen my share of revolts, insurgencies and revolutions, from the guerrilla conflicts in the 1980s in Central America to the civil wars in Algeria, the Sudan and Yemen, to the Palestinian uprising to the revolutions in East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Romania as well as the wars in the former Yugoslavia. George Orwell wrote that all tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but that once the fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force. We have now entered the era of naked force. The vast million-person bureaucracy of the internal security and surveillance state will not be used to stop terrorism but to try and stop us.

Despotic regimes in the end collapse internally. Once the foot soldiers who are ordered to carry out acts of repression, such as the clearing of parks or arresting or even shooting demonstrators, no longer obey orders, the old regime swiftly crumbles. When the aging East German dictator Erich Honecker was unable to get paratroopers to fire on protesting crowds in Leipzig, the regime was finished. The same refusal to employ violence doomed the communist governments in Prague and Bucharest. I watched in December 1989 as the army general that the dictator Nicolae Ceausescu had depended on to crush protests condemned him to death on Christmas Day. Tunisia’s Ben Ali and Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak lost power once they could no longer count on the security forces to fire into crowds.

The process of defection among the ruling class and security forces is slow and often imperceptible. These defections are advanced through a rigid adherence to nonviolence, a refusal to respond to police provocation and a verbal respect for the blue-uniformed police, no matter how awful they can be while wading into a crowd and using batons as battering rams against human bodies. The resignations of Oakland Mayor Jean Quan’s deputy, Sharon Cornu, and the mayor’s legal adviser and longtime friend, Dan Siegel, in protest over the clearing of the Oakland encampment are some of the first cracks in the edifice. “Support Occupy Oakland, not the 1% and its government facilitators,” Siegel tweeted after his resignation.

There were times when I entered the ring as a boxer and knew, as did the spectators, that I was woefully mismatched. Ringers, experienced boxers in need of a tuneup or a little practice, would go to the clubs where semi-pros fought, lie about their long professional fight records, and toy with us. Those fights became about something other than winning. They became about dignity and self-respect. You fought to say something about who you were as a human being. These bouts were punishing, physically brutal and demoralizing. You would get knocked down and stagger back up. You would reel backward from a blow that felt like a cement block. You would taste the saltiness of your blood on your lips. Your vision would blur. Your ribs, the back of your neck and your abdomen would ache. Your legs would feel like lead. But the longer you held on, the more the crowd in the club turned in your favor. No one, even you, thought you could win. But then, every once in a while, the ringer would get overconfident. He would get careless. He would become a victim of his own hubris. And you would find deep within yourself some new burst of energy, some untapped strength and, with the fury of the dispossessed, bring him down. I have not put on a pair of boxing gloves for 30 years. But I felt this twinge of euphoria again in my stomach this morning, this utter certainty that the impossible is possible, this realization that the mighty will fall.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/this_is_what_revolution_looks_like_20111115/

 

[MidgarBlowedUp]

Personally I don't think it is a business's corporate responsibility to cater to any of that list. If labor is cheap and plentiful, it is not the business's responsibility to somehow fix that. For it to survive in a competitive environment (all realize that labor can be had cheap at this point in time), they must react. As for customers' disapproval, if people walk through the door, something is going right. The corporation does not exist for the welfare of the masses; it represents a collection of assets and debt that individuals contributed and reaped the benefits from. It is idealistic but unrealistic to claim the corporation should do more for this country; to expect the greedy rich, satiated by greater wealth, to charitably provide to the jealous masses is foolish.

The government has the responsibilities you list. It is the government that is responsible for deciding what is good and appropriate for the country. It is the government that should apply carbon taxes or set limitations for pollution. It is the government that should enforce standards of quality and safety, prevent abuse of corporate power (i.e. monopolies), and shun lobbyist money. It is the government that can allocate tax dollars towards the infrastructure and business environment that lets those corporations operate. It is the government's responsibility to determine what is a fair share for the corporation to give back to the country as a cost of using said business environment and infrastructure. It is the government that can spur GDP growth and cause drops in unemployment through appropriate fiscal policy and strengthening of the people's institutions and agencies. It is the government that sets the rules for these corporations to play by.

The reason why this is government's responsibility is because we are shareholders of the government of this country by birthright. Others have come here and decided to become shareholders in this country. One life gets you one share here. Your elected officials are your board of directors. We have allowed our board to be corrupted. Corporations have bent the rules, breaking our capitalist society and replacing it with regulations friendly to particular corporations and particular industries. We did not realize these were harming us as we began to confuse policies that help capitalism with policies that help industries and corporations. Corporatism is not Capitalism. What is good for Verizon or Exxon Mobil is not inherently good for the people of this country. Why is that? Because it never was either of those company's responsibility to tend to any nation's people. It is the nation's responsibility to tend to the people, and the people forgot this fact, becoming apathetic to the corruption of our political system.

If a corporation can thrive in an environment in which we dictate the rules, they should be commended and the shareholders should have the right to do with its profits as they please. However, we have not required they play by rules we deem reasonable.

You see the corporations use the lobbyists and the republicans and the media to run the country in their favor, therefore; the corporations ARE the government.

THAT'S THE JOKE!

 

[remnant]

The reality is that there are still a huge number of Americans (probably a fairly large majority) who get their news primarily from TV, radio, and newspapers, and until that changes it's important that we maintain the quality of those sources.

There was a time in this country when 90% of the news came from newspapers, then it declined. Following that was the radio, then it declined. Following that was cinema reels. Then that altogether died when television arrived.

and very soon it will largely be the internet. Judging the quality of a industry solely by the number of corporations, not even competitors but corporations is not an accurate means to judge it's quality.

And counting on the internet to be our bastion of free news seems a little bit naive to me, when internet freedoms are being attacked with increasing regularity.

That seems more of a case of the government overstepping it bounds and regulating something to much. Not something I'm hearing many in the OWS movement arguing against.

 

[maharg]

There was a time in this country when 90% of the news came from newspapers, then it declined. Following that was the radio, then it declined. Following that was cinema reels. Then that altogether died when television arrived.

and very soon it will largely be the internet. Judging the quality of a industry solely by the number of corporations, not even competitors but corporations is not an accurate means to judge it's quality.

How much of that 'internet' news source isn't actually run by an established conglomerate news source that also runs the TV stations, though? I don't think it's at all reasonable to suggest that even a large minority of people in the US get the bulk of their news from anywhere but one of the major news outlets, whether that's online or on TV.

 

[Karma Kramer]

Keith Olbermann on Bloomberg : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoG9PmdGaT8&feature=player_embedded#

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

Keith Olbermann on Bloomberg : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoG9PmdGaT8&feature=player_embedded#

i'm not a fan of the dude but this was damned good

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Hmm I guess threatening violence on video isn't a good idea.

So happy I don't live in Brooklyn and have to deal with these people on the subway today. Hopefully they keep out of Penn Station.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/17/us/new-york-occupy/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

New York (CNN) -- Occupy Wall Street protesters called for a national day of action and celebration on Thursday to mark the start of the movement two months ago.
A "Shut Down Wall Street" breakfast is scheduled for Thursday morning in a downtown park, just before the opening bell of the New York Stock Exchange, according to the group's website.
In the afternoon, demonstrators plan to spread their message at 16 subway hubs throughout the city's five boroughs, the website says.
Occupiers take over San Francisco bank Jones: 'You can't evict an idea' Following Occupy Wall Street protesters
Occupy Wall Street protesters say they want Thursday to be a day of non-violent protests, although it comes a day after a demonstrator was arrested for making violent threats.
Nkrumah Tinsley, 29, was arrested for making terrorist threats and aggravated harassment on Wednesday evening in Zuccotti Park, where the movement was based, New York City police said.
Occupy roundup: Movement marks 2 months
Tinsley is seen in a YouTube video making threats toward a department store. "In a few days, you're going to see what a Molotov cocktail can do to Macy's," he said.
In another part of the video, Tinsley threatens to burn New York City to the ground on Thursday.
Wednesday's arrest is Tinsley's second in as many months. He was arrested on October 26 for assaulting a police officer.
About 200 Occupy Wall Street demonstrators were arrested on Wednesday, police said.

 

[Joe]

Manos I'm fairly certain you can't handle NYC regardless of who or what might be in your presence.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Manos I'm fairly certain you can't handle NYC regardless of who or what might be in your presence.

Lol yeah sure. Lived there for a year and been working there for far longer.

 

[Joe]

Livestreaming http://www.ustream.tv/theother99

 

[Joe]

Aerial view http://www.ustream.tv/cbsnews

 

[travisbickle]

What area are the police blocking the protesters from?