Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Dear Occupy Movement - 500 Words

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 5, 2012, 12:15 a.m. EST by ScreenTheory (0)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I have watched video after video after video of various Occupy Movements online…and time and time again I’m stumped…what do you want?

During the Civil Rights Movement…there were sit ins…protests…all in the name of ending segregation…when the battle was won…everyone went home…so what has to happen for you all to go home?

From the research I’ve done online, I’ve found that your movement is directed against economic and social inequality…that you are helping our culture to define the 99% and 1%…that this movement has been described as a democratic awakening…one goal is to end the corrupt effect of money towards politics…that we should arrest those responsible for the 2008 crash…that we should form a commission to investigate and prosecute the corruption in politics…that we ought to have more and better jobs, offering a more equal distribution of income…but that ultimately the Occupy Movement has no clear, practical solution to any of this…and that many are worried that without one, your movement will fail.

I admire the American spirit in doing what you’re doing…but I worry that it could all be for nothing…which none of us want to see.

I have direction for you.

Dr. Ron Paul.

Do you want endless warfare and to be the police of the world? Ron Paul will bring all of our troops home as soon as the ships can get there - we just marched in, we can just march home. Our troops overwhelmingly support him in this.

The Federal Reserve has destroyed our economy with the irresponsible printing of money, thus helping the bankers get rich…causing the housing bubble and crash of 2008…and crippling our dollar, which has DESTROYED the middle class. This is why it seems everyone is either rich or poor these days. Ron Paul will end the Federal Reserve.

The cost of medical care has skyrocketed ever sense the government stepped in decades ago – thus enabling an element of greed throughout all practices and organizations, thus driving medical establishments of all types to be profit oriented instead of patient oriented. Health care costs were a fraction of what they are today before the Federal Government decided to intervene.

Our U.S. constitution is being ripped to shreds. Bush signed The Patriot Act, and just recently Obama elected not to veto the Indefinite Detention Act (thus enabling the President to use the U.S. Army to arrest and detain any U.S. Citizen for up to ten years, without reason and without bail) or the Internet Censorship Act (enabling government to censor anything they see fit from the internet). We are rapidly heading towards tyranny.

Everything you want done…Ron Paul can and WILL do once elected. Help us do this. America needs this, and the world needs our example.

We the people must utilize our freedom of speech to elect Dr. Paul, and restore our great nation to the beacon of liberty and prosperity that it once was.

We must end these wars…we must save our currency…we must save our middle class...we must save America.

6 Comments

6 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by Libertarianliving (149) 2 years ago

"""""that you are helping our culture to define the 99% and 1%"""""

What irritates me about their "movement" is that they are taking it upon themselves to "represent" EVERYONE in that lower 99%. That is why I do not like anything about them. Usually a group, movement, organization, etc. requires member to "sign on". These people are falsely representing me.... and many others in the "lowly 99%" that do not agree with them and especially do not want or need their "representation". It is like the KKK saying they represent 99% of white people or The Black Panthers portraying themselves as representing 99% of Black people. IT is WRONG!

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 2 years ago

I would be open to a public audit of the Fed, and if it shows significant dishonesty and irresponsibility I would be open to nationalizing it and handing its functions over to the US Treasury Department. As far as tariffs on imports go, that's the only way I can think of to begin the process of bringing jobs back to America and raising the wage of the average worker. If he's not going to work to address one of the major causes of long-term unemployment and wage losses then I fail to see how it's a good idea to vote for him.

I'd also like to see a great deal more clarification from Mr. Paul on which sets of regulations he considers outside the constitutional jurisdiction of the government and which ones he considers vital reforms that need to stay in place. Honestly, given his rhetoric on the matter I don't know what to believe and I don't want to believe he's one thing only to find out the hard way that he's another. I want the Patriot Act gone and the TSA dismantled, and I think he and I can agree on that. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley vote is a good sign but until I can square that with his rhetoric and get an actual platform from the man I'm not going to consider voting for him.

His comments on the EPA scare the shit out of me; Essentially most of eastern North Carolina stinks to high heaven because of hundreds of millions of gallons of pig crap from factory farms is being let to marinate in open-air lagoons and/or sprayed into the air as an aerosol. It's actually gotten to the point of ruining something like nine or ten waterways and causing China-esque air quality problems. What really takes the cake, though, is the leaky nuclear waste dump in Andrews County, Texas that happens to be sitting on the aquifer that provides drinking water to seven different states. This is the kind of crap the EPA belongs fighting, and eliminating the one agency that wants to clean up the environment is an enormous step in the wrong direction.

On top of that his talk of flat taxes and imposition of the gold standard makes me profoundly uncomfortable. A flat tax is by its very nature a regressive tax, and in order to bring in the same revenue as the current system it would have to take the difference out of the hides of the people who can afford it the least. He also wants to tax capital gains (essentially money created without any actual work being done to earn it) at a lower rate than regular income, which is just plain incentivization of laziness on the top end. As far as the gold standard is concerned, the first thing you learn in economics 101 is that credit needs to be relaxed rather than tightened to deal with a recession, and moving to a gold standard would pretty much strangle credit at the time when that would hurt us the most. Once again, bad policy.

On top of this, many of the positions that Ron PauI's supporters attribute to him are not necessarily accurate. He is not actually for the legalization of drugs in any real sense; he simply doesn't want the federal government to be responsible for it and could care less if the states decide to go to even greater lengths to try to stamp out drugs than the DEA currently is. He may want the federal government out of your life, but that's not the same as wanting people to live free of all government interference (which is what he's touted as claiming).

Besides, the man's apparently a young-earth creationist. That pretty much tears it for me. I don't care what else he is, if he deliberately shuts his eyes to basic science (whether it's to pander to the religious right or, even worse, if that's an accurate reflection of where he stands) there's no way in hell I'm going to trust him with the country. If the man decides that continually verified truth doesn't matter because it conflicts with his beliefs then on some level something has gone very wrong.

Bringing the troops home is fine and dandy, but we're already well on our way to doing that; there's a very good chance that pretty much all troops will be out of Iraq by the end of December 2011, and we're going to have all of our combat people out of Afghanistan by sometime in 2014. So far, I see a man who's gotten one, maybe two things right (his no votes on Gramm-Leach-Bliley and S.1867, and his desire to put the Fed under a microscope). However, those two things are pretty small when you consider the number of things he seems to be promising to get wrong as president.

Given all that, why do you still push us to vote for him? Do you disagree with the facts below, and if so where do you claim I've gone wrong? Do you want to see a chunk taken out of the Pentagon's budget so badly you're willing to do it at such a high cost to the rest of the country? Or do you believe that we should support him because neither establishment Democrats nor establishment Republicans can stand him and you want to make those two groups squirm no matter what happens to you or the people?

[-] 2 points by Libertarianliving (149) 2 years ago

""""This is the kind of crap the EPA belongs fighting, and eliminating the one agency that wants to clean up the environment is an enormous step in the wrong direction"""""

Absolutely correct. But they stick their noses into far too many things to justify their existence and their size and powers.

"""""He may want the federal government out of your life, but that's not the same as wanting people to live free of all government interference (which is what he's touted as claiming)."""""

But at least it is a start in the "War On The War On Drugs". The war against our own people for choosing what to do with our own minds and bodies. There is power in numbers. And state governments have far fewer numbers than the almighty federal government and it's dictatorial powers to tell us what is "good for us", to "protect us from ourselves", and what our "values" should be.

"""""even worse, if that's an accurate reflection of where he stands) there's no way in hell I'm going to trust him with the country. If the man decides that continually verified truth doesn't matter because it conflicts with his beliefs then on some level something has gone very wrong."""""

I couldn't agree with you anymore on that.

[-] 0 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

without backing from congress and the house he won't be able to do anything, so in effect more empty promises from another politician. oh, and what about his stance on the environment or abortion or minorities or gay rights? mr. p is not all he's cracked up to be, he's just another windy politician