Occupy Wall Street Protests

Not necessarily.

See The French Revolution. I'm no expert on the topic but from the limited knowledge I do have, it seems there was little more organization to it other than just killin fools.

It does seem it was effective in removing the monarchy however.

foolishness! We all know the reality of it all.

Group I support > all wackos present at any gatherings represent nothing

Group I do not support > all wackos present are an exact representation of everyone present or associated.

Ex. Muslims, people who reject vaccines, tea party, OWS, animal rights, NRA member etc etc.

It's the same both ways.

In my sole opinion, the state has no responsibility to answer to the specific demands of increasing welfare programs.I believe in the equality of opportunity, but most certainly not the equality of results. Equality of opportunity demands only certain things.

Expand education programs, yes. Increase benefits to those disabled or suffering from physical impairments and unable to work, sure. Support our veterans in any way possible - they've already given more to us than we can return. But to raise the minimum wage to such unfathomable figures? To provide students with more handouts to reduce the cost of college tuition, enough of which we already do? To extend unemployment benefits? No. To forcefully centralize all healthcare, destroying thousands of jobs, and alienating the capitalist structure? {No Thanks}. Barring exceptions where we must provide for someone who has been injured or disabled, the state owes you nothing. It owes your young children a quality education; it does not owe them a college tuition, in any capacity. It owes you clean, well maintained roads; it does not owe you a solution to our energy crisis. The state owes you short-term unemployment benefits while you get back on your feet (Read: Short-term); it does not owe you a solution to poverty.

And, most relevant to this controversy, the state owes you the knowledge that it is overseeing the ethical practices of corporate America; it does not owe you a portion of those profits. It should be the state's place to ensure that such businesses are in line with modern ethics of sales practice, but by no means should they be robbed of their additional profits. There are some out there who would strip the rich of their wealth; for those who have attained such fortune without direct IRS violations, they have earned it. To redistribute their funds by means of excessive taxation, simply because of your skewed perception of social justice, is simply not what should occur in a capitalist market. I'm all too sorry to hear that folks lately have forgotten that we live in such a model of economic structure.

Sorry, Sai. The French Revolution is a bad example. The intentions were pure in the beginning, but after Maximilien Robespierre gained control of the Committee of Public Safety there were a lot more heads rolling than should have been necessary. If you really want to see the dirty start with the assassination of Jean-Paul Marat and keep going.

EDIT: I don't understand why everyone cites the French Revolution.

/rolls eyes

the world could be better if everyone forgets capitalism......

I'm not trying to say we should emulate TFR or anything like that.

Just that it became an event without a clear endgame and that it did bring about changes. That is all.

NP. Not exactly your comment that made me a tad testy. It's just the fact that people always equate today's problems to problems before the French Revolution, and I'm just getting tired of people making ill-informed jokes about the circumstances. "Remember what happened to Marie Antoinette!", "The French had it right!", etc. are just very very unnerving considering people don't know what followed the initial round-up and purge.

It's not you.

Wow alot here to go through. I think most would agree with equality of opportunity, but I think we can all agree that we are no where near that. Yea it demands certain things, of which basically none are being met.



Support those you listed / check

Minimum wage is inconsequential. Raise it = inflation. It really just hurts the middle class, so it's not an idea that would be taken seriously.
The next two are yes. We should provide free or near to free education up to the level that is required to safely find a job once the education process is complete. A high school diploma used to be enough, but since that is no longer sufficient we need to provide higher education as well. College tuition is insane and goes counter to your belief of equal opportunity. And yes to the unemployment benes as well. W/o going off on a tangent here, the gov was well aware of the BS the banks and lenders were pulling and did nothing to stop it, in fact they basically mandated it. They helped create this mess, so they have to be responsible to those who can no longer work b/c of their idiocy.


If their job is to oversee ethics, then they have failed completely. Which is the whole point of the OWS.

Okay. I wasn't completely sure that I wanted to open up this can of worms, but here we go. I was thinking of rapping on the door of the subject of immigration. We're talking about equality now, so...

/takes a deep breath before plunging in

Here's an example of inequality. My mother is an immigrant, but not the "right" kind of immigrant for my family to receive any type of perks that other immigrant populations in the States get. My mother is basically now an indefinite ex-pat, considering that Europe is free-falling too.

My parents pay taxes for two countries because of my mother's assets in Germany. They have paid for her visas since my father moved her to the US in 1978 after their marriage. My mother has worked as an RN in the states until she received her masters and is now teaching PRNs/LVNs in Dallas, and has worked here legally since she came here.

Now, can someone tell me why illegal immigrants deserve our tax money? Can people see why something like this could piss me off?

My parents immigrated from korea and germany. One adopted by US military and raised in texas/california the other raised in korea and moved to cali before highschool. both got their citizenship, paid taxes. Got college education and pooped me out few years after they got married. Now since my dad is white and my mom asian I can't file for minority status for loans and stuff cuz of my white last name. and currently my family and I are in a pickle paying for the ever increasing tuition for college. so wtf.

but being "nice" and all and giving immigrants a chance at college is cool and all, but I'd rather just deport them and use tax $$ on improving things here instead

/high fives Volkom

I want to add that my mother is not a citizen, but has received voter registration cards since 1996. Think about that. She's legally not allowed to vote in the US, but still gets them in the mail whenever elections roll around.

Just skimming the thread but personally found this to be hilarious (and true) and in contrast uprisings from the other side of the political spectrum are portrayed as patriotic, the embodiment of all that is good about America. I say "uprisings" because, of course, the Tea Party did nothing significant to change the status quo. I would argue the influence of money in the wake of Citizens United had a greater impact on the political landscape than the Tea Party ever will.

Historically the party in power is punished for hard times by the voters, irregardless of whether or not it was their fault. The Republicans were bound to have a major victory in 2010 whether or not the corporate funded Tea Party was ever established. It exacerbated the Dems' losses but the consensus going into the race was that they would lose. Though it is worth noting in some cases the presence of the Tea Party in some 2010 races actually caused the Dems to retain or acquire seats that otherwise would have been closely contested races when the Republican nominee in a general election was a fringe candidate like Christine O'Donnell.

When a movement (seemingly) genuinely poses a threat to the status quo it is ignored until it is so widely acknowledged that the only other means of going on the defensive is to cast it in a negative light. The contrasts to the Tea Party in general are actually something that I would personally refrain from if I were in a discussion on the movement from the side of the protesters. It's pretty insulting to compare Occupy to the Tea Party, the reasons why being obvious to anyone whose idea of a home isn't a rock on their head and who is without a mental disability.

I personally find the demonizing of the Occupy movement hilarious, especially when Glenn Beck tries to scare millionaires/billionaires into not leaving their home. Occupiers are going to drag you into the street and kill you! xD

irregardless isn't a word.

edit: but i get what you mean

Actually it is, it just isn't any different than the word regardless. It's to provide emphasis.

From the most highly rated definition from urban dictionary (yes i know)


and from that, i guess I'm a pompous, rude *** xD

Don't worry. According to that, I'm one too.

/comfort

Im not a fan of the Dream Act because it attempts to solve a small part of a huge problem yet to be addressed.

The dictionary is not a static rulebook. There have been many reputable dictionaries that have accepted the word "irregardless" - usually with a note to see "regardless". Does that mean it's not a word though?

Etymology 101: Words can change in both meaning and form over time. For instance, slang words are still words. And I can assure you that if 80% of America used words like "ya'll" and "ain't" they would be accepted dictionary words, no longer with the side-note of 'slang'.

If languages never evolved we'd all still be speaking the root languages, but that's just it.. languages do change over time.

The only time a word doesn't accomplish its goal of being a word is when you can't understand what the speaker/typist is trying to convey. And I'm more than positive you were aware of what Trucido was trying to say when he said "irregardless".

I haven't read into the Dream Act but from the perspective of someone who has no desire to go into debate using fabricated numbers (this includes the rebuttals to this post, if you have numbers from a government site then by all means. I don't care for numbers from sites with partisan objectives.) wouldn't the cost of helping educate immigrants to make them beneficial to our country be equal or less than the cost of repeatedly deporting people who left their countries of origin for a reason that did NOT change because the ICE found them?

Without going into discussion about money; what are the pros and cons of leaving undocumented immigrants uneducated vs educated in the minds of those of you with an opinion of this bill?

(Also is there going to be any discussion of the content of my other post other than my admittedly vain attempts to sound like I have a large vocabulary?)

We might be on the same wave-length, but I'm not positive.



Irregardless of what ya'll say, I ain't going to use any of those words!

yeah good example of unrestricted capitalism, not really that much different today as the banks already control and print our money.

As for the tea partier earlier stating that nobody is entitled to anything, the Founding Fathers would like a word with you, you who your kind seems to so love your "rights" forget about the right to life. Last I checked you need food, and shelter to live, just saying.

if she married your dad who is a citizen she should have became one, not sure on it though as I never had to look into it.

No. She wanted to keep her German citizenship, so no.

I think you missed the point completely. My mother is one example of many ex-patriots in this country. Volkom's parents are both immigrants with US citizenship. Neither Volkom, I, nor many others have received hand-outs the way another portion of the population does because of our ancestry. Say it with me now...That's discrimination, or affirmative action if you feel like softening the blow.

If we're talking real-deal equality that means the government should not be responsible for wiping everyone's ***.

I agree that it's kind of silly to compare the two movements, and sad that we still see it compared all the time in the media.

At first, I wondered why Occupy Wall Street wasn't making demands, why it wasn't pushing for some unified goal.. but maybe that's not what they want to do at all. As a group, maybe stating simple goals will only serve to divide the people. Maybe this movement is solely about numbers: masses of people who are dissatisfied with current governmental, banking, and corporate issues.

I mean, if they stated a goal like "down with capitalism" or goals like what I'd posted on page one, there's no way I'd consider getting involved. But if they're just looking for people who are tired of all the dirty, behind the scenes deals, maybe I will decide to join them. They have certainly piqued my curiosity.

And just think, if you and a couple of your friends said, "Hey, I'll go and check this out for a couple weeks", you could start to show some real numbers involved in this movement. So much so that they couldn't be ignored like they're trying to do(as you've said). So much so, that the negative spin they're trying to portray would be ignored in full by the people and friends/family of the people involved in it. That's when real change would happen.

by should I meant be able to, not that she SHOULD do it because it's the most awesomely awesome thing EVAR.

(few movies would make it seem otherwise but you get the idea, American propaganda etc)

I don't have a problem with the DREAM act from what I know of it, however that's just the surface, probably some detail in it that's a bad idea but hey whatever.

As for something I saw earlier about somebody saying how to repair the country.

Find a way we can start performing surgery without the patient bleeding out on the table and we'll start, until then we'll just keep slowly dying.

Pretty much how it looks.

Zahrah: I'm for equal rights, entirely, that also means to put an end to special treatment to certain groups.

That being said I also find the ADA to be *** (as apparently Penn and Teller do as well)

NP. I just get rowdy on this subject.

EDIT: Okay. Seriously going to bed. Goodnight all!

well the oldest journeyman in a company could retire as soon as his trainee is finished with his education.
actually people have to work dead a** long and that's one reason why it is so difficult for the younger generation to find a job.

Bolded, I guess I don't get this as at least one of your parents is an immigrant. MAybe I'm missing something though.

His parents didn't enter the country illegally from what I read and those are the immigrants he wants deported. My dad is an immigrant here in Sweden and I kinda feel the same way. I wouldn't want illegals using a lot of our money when Sweden was hit hard too.