Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: I'll begin to believe you when you put 100 paupers and/or homeless people

Posted 2 years ago on March 10, 2012, 1:48 p.m. EST by JesusDemocrat (193)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

in congress and the whitehouse

and they remain uncorrupt

You know, the kind of people that most of you would never break bread with, help or associate with.... indigent and dirt poor

50% of such types in DC would be a more reasonable balance, no?

15 Comments

15 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by shooz (18022) 2 years ago

Um, Jesus??

That's your job. So get outta here and get busy.

Who would have thunk, you of all people would be that lazy.

[-] 0 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

I think the point is not about the rich or the poor, but about the middle class. That is what America was originally about, a great mass of people that was not rich, but they did tend to own their own homes. That is, they were a propertied class, and they often owned their own businesses as well, meaning they owned the means of production.

The revolt against Wall Street is intended to bring back that middle class of people who have jobs that are good enough to enable them to own their homes, or who have their own businesses.

If there is anybody we should be concerned about getting into office, it is those who are proponents of the middle class.

[-] 0 points by JesusDemocrat (193) 2 years ago

Really, middle class starts at 160K yearly income, are you middle class? Do you know what percentage of persons make less than 160K in the USA?

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Why do you pick 160k? I would define a middle class income as one that would allow a person to own a home, so the number could be different in different areas.

[-] 0 points by JesusDemocrat (193) 2 years ago

A person making 35K has no business running anything. 98% of all Americans believe this even though they wish they didn't.

That's why they only vote for rich people and have no qualms with all of them getting much wealthier beyond their compensation while in office, by any and all means possible.

Americans do not respect or admire anyone not wealthy, regardless how well they know wealthy people look out for only themselves. It's human nature.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

I said that we should be concerned about getting people into office who are "proponents" of the middle class. I didn't say we should elect middle class people.

And besides, being Jesus, you always told us to help the poor, and I believe that means helping them to become middle class.

I think it makes sense for certain upper classes to be on the side of the middle class, since middle class people are important customers for upper classes.

I wouldn't exclude middle class people from positions in government though either, if they can prove that they can do the job.

[-] -1 points by SatanDemocrat (-24) 2 years ago

All voting will vote for rich caulk suckers. None of you would vote for anyone that wasn't.

[-] -1 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

They'll just babble about how Kucinich lived in a car blah blah. My question to you two: indigent and dirt poor are inherently honest because?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago
[-] -3 points by JesusDemocrat (193) 2 years ago

Democracy has never existed when paupers did not rule instead of men of wealth.

Oh no, I'm not saying they are inherently honest as our current lovely system has corrupted nearly all who go to DC.

However, these idiots keep voting in rich cock suckers at every election A poor person cannot hardly get on the ballot and that should tell those in the majority (those not wealthy) that this government will never serve them.

[-] -3 points by SatanRepublican (136) 2 years ago

That is exactly what I thought. You all love rich bastards regardless of the empty rhetoric.

Nary a one of you would vote for a poor person.

[-] 2 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

I agree with you here. Why would you vote a poor person in to run the nation? How about this. random draw every 4 years. you have to serve in congress. Do your time. and in the end you are put on trial for what you did or did not do.

[-] -3 points by JesusDemocrat (193) 2 years ago

Why wouldn't you and why would anyone think the rich bastards are going to look out for anyone but themselves?

Random draw and bring back hangings for treason!

However, I think reverting back to common law for the land, with a quorum majority ruling about what's right, and plain English for any government writings would be necessary, and it has been much needed for years.

[-] 2 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

So you did not answer my why vote for a poor person huh? Only the rich have the time and the money or the connections to people with money to play politics. The poor have none of these.

When was the last time treason was used here in America? also if that law was enforced it would help i think. Plain English for the government writings? is that not raciest.? what about plain Spanish, or plain Chinese, or plain German. The left does not want to make English the standard here in America. joking over. I agree that the lawyerese needs to be taken out But then most of the lawmakers are lawyers.

[-] -1 points by SatanRepublican (136) 2 years ago

Democracy has never existed when paupers did not rule instead of men of wealth.

Oh no, I'm not saying they are inherently honest as our current lovely system has corrupted man nearly all who go to DC.

However, these idiots keep voting in rich cock suckers at every election A poor person cannot hardly get on the ballot and that should tell those in the majority (those not wealthy) that this government will never serve them.