Occupy Wall Street

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by ryoder, Oct 5, 2011.

Loading...
  1. truckie270

    truckie270 New Member

    Just like the Democratic Party is comprised of different subgroups and interests, the Republican Party can no longer be grouped as a singular "group" - none of the current GOP candidates are very exciting in my view.

    I would like to hear someone articulate the OWS message as well. I understand people are pissed at a bunch of different things, but without some unification of message they are going to remembered as some people who were just angry (about what no one will be able to note exactly) and fade away.

    I do think that their anger is somewhat misplaced at WS to a degree. Much of what they are protesting (from what I can see) is facilitated by WS, but originates and is perpetuated on "K" Street by both political parties. Confiscating the entire wealth from the 1% would only keep the government afloat for a few months. Warren Buffet's entire fortune would keep the government afloat for about week-10 days.

    We can argue about the different places where we would like to see that money spent, but we should all be able to agree that current spending habits of the government are unsustainable given current conditions. Some would like to see additional revenue, but given their propensity to spend money there is no indication that spending would not just rise as additional taxes are collected. Some would like to see reduced spending, but there are legitimate needs out there that must be funded. There must be a balance somewhere, but I am unconvinced the current group of elected politicians (both sides of the aisle) are able to constructively get to that point.
     
  2. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    At least I will say there are some good things about these protesters and they have a grievance and they are trying to get "Some sort of message" out there. I respect what they are doing and I only respond to what I see and hear coming directly from the OWS'ers own mouths. I do not have to resort to making things up. I remember the snark and broad brushes you painted with in the Tea Party thread earlier. Liberals paint the T.E.A. party rallies as if their were put on by Leni Reifenstahl and lynchings were taking place on every corner. You said it was all white people. We showed you pictures proving it was not. You said it was all about racism and we showed it was not. The T.E.A. party had a unified message from the start and took action and had people ELECTED in an actual election for the people by the people to make changes they believed in. THAT is something we should all be celebating because its how the system is supposed to work.

    Now hear is the rub. I don't give a flying f*^k about the T.E.A. party. I had to start paying attention because of all the bleeting on TV about how racist and horrible it was that a bunch of people were protesting something. I paid their message no mind. None at all, I did not vote for any T.E.A party candidate in the last election either. Now there's some mad kids gathering and people (like Abner comparing it to the Civil Rights stuggle - talk about a loss of credibility) talk like its 1774 again.

    Now I'm forced to listen to snide remarks from liberals about how I don't like the OWS'ers. I never said I did not like them. As a matter of fact I have said I agree with some of their concerns. But I'll show you who I disagree with. I'll take their own words and show how they are hypocrites. I'll not call them racist because there are mostly white faces in the crowds. I won't call for police intervention even though there is a lot of crime happening that is not being reported.

    I don't agree with many things that liberals believe in. I certainly don't hate them and I don't view them as the enemy either. Quit your partisian bitching and put up some facts and even handed gievances to real issues and we can talk like adults. But if you just want to whine and say Repubes this and CONservative this....well your status as the smartest person on Dinfo is dropping sharply in a few people's eyes.
     
  3. Abner

    Abner Well-Known Member

    Yeah, my Bostonian father in law does the same. My brother is a pretty extreme to the right, but I have no idea what he calls himself these days and I don't want to bother asking him. :smile:

    I do not notice that sections of the family that are Republican no longer wish to be called Republicans. They also use the term conservative.

    Abner :smile:
     
  4. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    To be honest with you I think this is a result of GWB calling himself a Republican, which we know was not really the case. Conservative might be a better term. If GWB is considered a Republican than I want no part of that. I'm conservative on a lot of issues, but liberal on things like abortion and gay rights/marriage and a few others. So, and this is probably the case with most of us here, we usually do not categorize ourselves one way or the other. My views are not that myopic and probably neither are yours.
     
  5. truckie270

    truckie270 New Member

    Agreed. A majority of people I know who consider themselves to belong to the GOP do not think the politicians who have claimed the label over the past several years are truly aligned with party beliefs. GWB, McCain, et. Al. Are far from being classified as conservative.
     
  6. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator Staff Member

    If I had to label myself, it would be Independent, with Conservative and Libertarian leanings.
     
  7. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    [​IMG]
     
  8. friendorfoe

    friendorfoe Active Member

    I am probably far more libertarian than conservative these days. Today, conservative generally means "we should cut back on spending, taxing, build a stronger military and oh yeah, gay people are bad". I find myself leaning towards the idea that government should have a specific, narrowly defined role and otherwise stay the hell out of our business beyond that...

    I am (you may curiously note) against abortion however because I do feel that the federal government should protect your civil rights (a function I'm sure we all agree on) and I view a fetus as a "baby" and therefore a person. Maybe that particular belief is more conservative than libertarian.
     
  9. rmm0484

    rmm0484 Member

    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 28, 2011
  10. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    A comic is the message? Steve I'm not sure if you are joking or not. This comic says "They do not know what they are protesting" and then there are a bunch posters in the comic. Which are they protesting again? This is still not a unified message, IMHO.

    From left to right here goes:

    1. "The 1% broke it now fix it" Broke what? The economy? Wall Street? Public Trust? 401K's? I did not hear anyone complaining when their 401K was doubling every couple of years and the DOW was approaching 14,000. This was needs to be flushed out a bit more before we can agree/disagree.

    2. "Wall Street Looted Public Trust" Wall Street tries to make money. If they could make money trading marbles that is what they would do. A lot of people benefit from the money that is made on Wall Street. That being said, yes the public trust of Wall Street is probably at an all time low. The recession/depression did a lot of damage. Agreed.

    3. "End Corporate Personhood" This is essentially campaign finance reform, and I agree that this needs to be changed. This question of Corporate Personhood has been around for over a hundred years. It will take a lot to fix this. I'm against coroporations funding political campaigns. I agree with OWS'ers on this one if that is what this sign means? Obama accepted over $3 Million dollars from Wall Street.

    4. Can't read what this demand is. It just looks like Occupy? What? Mom's Basement?

    5. "Bring Back Glass-Steagall Act" I'm not sure on this one, when Bill Clinton signed the repeal into law in 1999 many people thought it helped the economy. We had a pretty good little ride for a while. While not exaclty naming it Glass Steagall I think the Dodd-Frank Act signed by Obama this year (or was it last year) will go help with regulating big banks.

    6. "The Bank Stole My Home" This is, of course, illegal and whomever had their domicile stolen from whatever bank can use any number of avenues to have the stolen property returned. The bank that stole this persons home will probably cease to exist once this explosive story gets out. I'm waiting to hear the resolution on this one.

    7. "Banks Got Bailed Out We Got Sold Out". I agree with the protesters that the banks should not have been bailed out. I'm glad a lot of the banks have repayed the money with interest back to the government.

    8. "Put Bankers on Trial" All of them? Which ones? When we catch them doing illegal things we prosecute them. When they are close to the line we even move the line a bit to catch more of them.

    9. "Wall Street Bail Outs is Socialism for the Wealthy" Yes it is. Do we like Socialism or not? I'm for some Socialism but not to the extent that most Liberals are. Some is OK, too much will destroy the country. Socialism for the banks was bad.

    10. "Government for the People by the People" Is this a grievance? This is actually what we have. And we are getting what we deserve.

    11. "Wall Street Greed Trashed World Economy" Wall Street is the reason there is a world economy. It trashed it and is building it up again. It will fall down and come back up again. Greed is only good when a Socialist wants something someone else earned.

    12. "Facisim is the merger of Corporate and Government Power" Is this a grievance? We're quoting a 3rd rate dictator? Here's another one, also from Musolini: "Socialism is a fraud, a comedy, a phantom, a blackmail"

    13. "Health Care" Yes? No? Free? I agree that it needs to be changed. Compromise would be nice. I don't think as many people as Liberals imagine are for the current system and I don't think they are for the Obama changes either. Shitty place to be in.

    14. "Peace" You first.

    15. "Jobs" The unemployment rate for college educated people is 4%. The world does not owe you a living. What talents and skills do you have to offer in exchange for someone elses money?

    16. "We Wont Pay for your Crisis" Don't worry you probably didn't pay for it. If you are part of the 40% or so of the people who do not pay FICA, then you did not pay for the crisis. We, as in us taxpayers, are not going to fund your crisis either.

    17. "Stop Corporate Control of Government" Elect someone who cannot be bought.

    18. "Peace" Grow up.

    19. "Get $ Out of Politics" No shit. Agreed. Now why are you not protesting DC?

    20. "We are the 99%". The inconsistency of this whole 99% and 1% thing has been covered numerous times. Is it a grievance or what?

    21. "End Corporate Welfare". I'm not sure what this means. But we should probably cut welfare across the board.

    Agree on some, but not on most of them. They still act like a bunch of dipshits and say some pretty repulsive things. But again, good for them for standing up for their feelings and occupying a place 24/7 while regular people work. I appreciate that they are looking out for me to.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 28, 2011
  11. truckie270

    truckie270 New Member

    Nicely done Devil Dog.
     
  12. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator Staff Member

    +1

    Agreed.
     
  13. friendorfoe

    friendorfoe Active Member

    This does not surprise me

    I have to say Bruce, this does.
     
  14. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    Nice job, Cory! That's what I was waiting for :wink:

    By the way, I'm not a liberal (nor conservative, moderate, independent, etc.) just an observer who likes to play devil's advocate at times. I know I've said that about a thousand times on this board, but sometimes I get the feeling like nobody believes me :confused: I took a hard shot at liberalism in a thread just the other day, and in fact, had a few harsh words for the protesters the other week. Not that I remember which threads they were in, but they are there, floating around in cyberspace.
     
  15. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    The part I bolded describes me as well. Although I will admit that I am more right leaning than left leaning. As if you could not tell. So no problem on that one as I've been known to throw some virtual grenades from time to time.

    One of these days I'll tell you about my "discussion" with someone about abortion. I am pro-choice of course but I think I made some heads explode when I asked if they would support the abortion of a Gay fetus (assuming that we can identify a Gay gene and can find that gene by 20 weeks gestation). It was fun and the only reason I did was I feeling a little frosty.

    So you got me a bit riled up with your question....good on you...and well played sir!

    Take care,
     
  16. Jonathan Whatley

    Jonathan Whatley Well-Known Member

  17. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    LOL, I didn't read that far down the first time. Nobody believes I'm the smartest person on DegreeInfo. At least, nobody who has ever read any of my posts. I'm sure there are plenty of people who don't even bother to read past my username anymore.
     
  18. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

  19. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator Staff Member

    Hi Cory - We may be in agreement but from opposite perspectives. I just sprinted through the Saybrook website and as far as I could tell, their endorsement of OWS has extended no further than a press release. There's no evidence on the website that the university has actually done anything to support OWS other than saying "We support..." Empty words? Where's the beef?
     
  20. 03310151

    03310151 Active Member

    Ahh, just more snark that's all.
     

Share This Page