Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The more issues we embrace, the more people will be alienated

Posted 2 years ago on April 7, 2012, 12:08 a.m. EST by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

To me there are two main objectives in the Occupy movement. First, return Democracy back to the people. Second, reduce the great disparity in wealth. I would guess 90% of the people would support these. Even many Reps, and Dems.

Next add Free health care, protection of the planet, student loan debt, replacing capitalism, plus dozens of other grievances. As each new grievance is added, one or more of them will be objectionable to some. More and more people will withdraw support until eventually our 90% approval drops to 20%.

The point is simple. The more grievances we have, the less chance we have of passing the critical ones. If the people fail to get control of our democratic process, we won't have the ability to later decide whether to pass the less critical ones.

21 Comments

21 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by iamausername (119) 2 years ago

if money and corporate interest get out of the government decision-making process, the people will have an actual impact in their government, and then whatever the people want should start to happen, because that's sort of how democracy is supposed to work.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Well, if we don't have a habitable planet, everything else is for nothing, if people are saddled with debt, reducing wealth disparity becomes less likely, and if we return democracy back to a population who's sick (and can't afford medical treatment to get well), what's the point? :)

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

What would be your choice for the essential first step?

[-] 3 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Money out of politics e.g. Sanders Amendment, Abramoff's ideas, etc., but that doesn't mean the other stuff can't be pursued at the same time. Ultimately, more democracy is the best medicine, which of course isn't likely to happen until the corrupting influence of money in politics is addressed.

[-] 1 points by elf3 (2693) 2 years ago

Finally someone else gets it - Thank You Thank You Thank You jrhirsch!!!!!!!! Agree Agree Agree

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 2 years ago

Maybe "Sustainability" would be a good word that would encompass everything. Boil our overall message down to that one word. A sustainable society would not elevate some people so high above other people to even have such a terrible income disparity. Clean healthy food, water, shelter, and healthcare should all be a given under it. The UN already supports sustainable development, so we would have strength in numbers. I know that would drive conspiracy theorists crazy, but the overall system seems to be changing towards that regardless, so we will not necessarily be rocking the boat.

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/

[-] 1 points by jojo (16) 2 years ago

But, jr, what if reducing the 'great disparity in wealth' requires fighting racism, sexism, religion, anti-immigrant legislation, etc? It's all one issue.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

All of the issues you stated are related to groupism, each person acting in union with the group they are told they belong to. When people remove the many lenses of bias that society has placed in front of their eyes, then they will treat each other as brothers.

This same groupism applies to the rich and poor as well . The rich are taught they deserve more than others. The CEO's of Goldman Sachs and B of A and others are part of a group that may never realize that they are human beings like everyone else, equally valuable. If we expect economic equality to be given us by a change of heart of these people who see themselves as our masters, we will never see change.

So we fight the flames of injustice for now, even though they are not the source of the fire, we are burned badly, and are in need of healing now!

[-] 1 points by iamausername (119) 2 years ago

well, i think the scope of demands should be lowered somewhat, if not because it alienates people, but because the real points this movement is trying to make are lost in a bunch of smaller, less fundamental demands.

[-] 1 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

If more Cons get into our various forms of government they will privatize everything, outlaw civil rights (except gun-tote'n and RW propaganda), ban unions, and drill oil wells through every uterus in the country, working or not!

Let's vote like many newbie Dems didn't do in 2010 and keep the Cons from making things worse again. Get out the Vote!!

There is no state of the union that more Cons can't make worse!

Unite and Win! Unite and Win! 2010 Never EVER Again!!

Register and Vote! Register and Vote! "We the 1%" NOT What They Wrote!!

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

That;s right we can not have freedom to own things Why only the state can own things and they will choose who they want to let use the things they own. Lets do way with private ownership. Great plan there. This is why Medical treatment controlled by the state is Good. In the end the cost will have the state choose who really needs the treatment.

[-] 1 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

Medical treatment controlled by an insurance company (middle man) responsible only to make money rather than government control responsible only to the people is better? What's wrong with you? Do you work for an insurance company? Look at ever other modern country in the world, they have public healthcare and are glad they don't live here. Especially when they see the easy access anyone has to guns to shoot people, and do.

There is no state of the union that more Cons can't make worse!

Unite and Win! Unite and Win! 2010 Never EVER Again!!

Register and Vote! Register and Vote! "We the 1%" NOT What They Wrote!!

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

Just when did the government get responsible? I does not matter if the middle man is the insurance company of the Government. Both say if you get the coverage. I have better trust in private then Government. And that does not say much.

By the way, why the hate on guns?? Private ownership of guns is almost in every nation.

[-] 1 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

No, it says you are misinformed. The Private Sector is all about making profit, our Government is about serving We The People.

Single-Payer Health Care Has A Buddy in Louisiana

Apr 2

Posted by Lamar Parmentel

It appears single-payer health care (you know, REAL socialist policies, not imagined ones) has a fan in Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell. While observing the Supreme Court case initiated by Louisiana and 25 other states over the Affordable Care Act’s constitutionality, Buddy had the decency to share his support for single-payer health care (i.e. socialist health care, like Medicare):

According to one Republican attorney general in the lawsuit against the health care individual mandate, the problem with Obamacare is that it’s not a government takeover of health care.

ThinkProgress spoke with Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday. Caldwell opposes Obamacare and the individual mandate, but for a different reason than most of his fellow litigants: it props up the private health insurance industry. “Insurance companies are the absolute worst people to handle this kind of business,” he declared. “I trust the government more than insurance companies.” Caldwell went on to endorse the idea of a single-payer health care system, saying it’d “be a whole lot better” than Obamacare:

KEYES: You don’t think the subsidies for low-income people are going to be helpful?

CALDWELL: No, no. The worst thing you can do is give it to an insurance company. I want to make my point. All insurance companies are controlled in their particular state. If you have a hurricane come up the east coast, the first one that’s going to leave you when they gotta pay too many claims is an insurance company. Insurance companies are the absolute worst people to handle this kind of business. I trust the government more than insurance companies. If the government wants to put forth a policy where they will pay for everything and you won’t have to go through an insurance policy, that’d be a whole lot better.

[Could not have said it better myself.] http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n9BTQow2t-I

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

The Private sector is not all about making profit that this why you have a .... none for profit private company's. Our government is not meant to serve we the people has you claim by controlling everything, but it is to let we the people the power to control and enrich our selves with out the government interfering unless what we are doing hurts others. What you wants is an all powerful government. that is what the founding fathers warned us about.

If the cost just to see the doctor was not so high or a visit to the ER was not months or two of work or a basic check out, then we would not need Insurance. The government has so far as i know never really lowers the price of anything that it does. It always needs more money to just keep doing the poor job it does now and you want to give them more control???

[-] 1 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

This is a bad recitation of lame, false and old RW talking points. Post it on Drudge.

[-] -2 points by Dell (-168) 2 years ago

your are an extreme minority of lunatic children. That's all. Dont delude yourselves.

[-] 2 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

How authoritarian of you. Does your big strong and greedy Big Insurance Industry keep you safe and warm???

Public Roads Public Fire Department Public Healthcare Public Education Public Libaries Public Services

Time to join the rest of the modern world, and shed our greed-driven handicap: Healthcare as a business with a profit-taking middleman, instead of a Public Service!!!

Unite and Win! Unite and Win! 2010 Never EVER Again!!

[-] -1 points by Dell (-168) 2 years ago

hahahaha - doesnt even deserve a response. good day .

[-] 1 points by doitagain (234) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

printing process wouldnt have change anything. Get rid of the Fed reserve would give us big times trouble. Virtual money market will collapse. Nothing can stop corporate business. Only aliens from outaspace can stop the machines like in Hollywood movies. I dont think i sober enough to even do right spelling. i just tired and i need to get some sleep.

[-] 1 points by TheMisfit (48) 2 years ago

Spot on. I was in full agreement with OWS when the message was to get money out of politics, but now it has become a hotbed of left wing pet causes and is probably closer to 5% rather than 20% when it comes to full support.

[Removed]

[Removed]