Forum Post: Why Should We
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 5, 2011, 2:13 a.m. EST by JeaLanka
(3)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
1) Our demands are legitimate, humane, backed by logic and statistics. They are relevant and significant. 2) We represent 99% of American residences. 3) So why should we stand out in the cold for weeks, why should we be pepper-sprayed and let the police handle us like animals with their orange mesh, why should we go to jail. 4) Let's get smart, let's not waste time in jail or walking around shivering. Let's figure out our objectives, get everyone in on the plan. 5) We need to canvass neighborhoods and get millions others involved. 6) We need to be an organization because this will be an ongoing process. 7) Not one action will resolve all of our grievances. We need a series of many actions in many different sectors.
Focus! It all boils down to getting big money out of politics. And don't be hoodwinked by anyone who tells you that Libertarians and Tea Partiers also share some of our concerns. They only want to gut the regulatory agencies that were designed to keep corporate greed in check in the first place. "Small Government" rhetoric just means no regulators to have to buy off. The corporations would save trillions in bribe money, while the rest of us rot because all our protections are gone.
btw, corporate greed could not exist if the so-called fair and righteous govt did not allow it. These regulatory agencies are either not doing their job or the structure is in such a way that it is self defeating. One of the best examples of that was Brooksly Born, former head of the CFTC, who got the shaft from the Clinton administration which was what opened the door for the current financial crisis. Clinton, a liberal mind you, kept the same economic staff from preceeding administrations. Why would a liberal democrat have so-called Free Market economists like Greenspan heading the FED? Makes no sense unless yo put in perspective. Plus, there would've been no need to regulate derivatives if the govt had not promised bailouts in the first place.
Bottom line, gov't intervention makes things worse, not better (in most cases).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwpL42CxJpE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJBeuR0xEP8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU
btw, bank robberies could not exist if the so-called fair and righteous police did not allow it. These policing agencies are either not doing their job or the structure is in such a way that it is self defeating. Plus, there would've been no need to create police if the govt had not promised law and order in the first place.
Look at meeee I'm a libertard!!!!
Bottom line, gov't intervention makes things worse, not better (in most cases).
http://www.spam-videos.com
http://www.I-put.com
http://www.in-every.com
http://www.post.com
Oh, so you're scared to watch the videos?
Did I ever say I wasn't for police? NOpe. You assumed...you made an ASS out of yourself.
Here's govt intervention at work: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnekzRuu8wo&feature=player_embedded
Oh, so regulatory agencies like the DEA would cease to exist if drugs were legalized? You need a Bin Laden to have a war on terror, right?
Jane, you're right, Libertarians are not for a "fair wage" because to force something on someone else is just as much a crime and does no good for the economy of small business owners who would have to lay people off or shut down because they can't afford the mandated increase in pay.
And by your own statement, you just said that regulators get "bought off" so basically, why do I as a taxpayer need to pay for regulatory services so they can double dip when the corporation buys them off on the back end? I hate to be a jerk but, you sound so stupid right now! hahaha
The main issue, the root issue, when you get past all the left/right rhetoric, is dollar devaluation created by the FED, or simply put, inflation. That and corporatism, not capitalism, corporatism! The rest is all just a smokescreen created by the very people who pretend to be your friends.
HA-HA, you libertarians were kicked out of the Tea Party!!
Also, you forgot to post links to your discredited trickle-down propaganda.
So, instead of making intelligent points you just sit there and blah blah blah
I can't help it. You guys are a joke. You pretend to be our friend, but the nanosecond someone like me touches one of your sacred cows, you start up with the same Glenn Beck routine that every other Bush-voting "libertarian" always whips out.
I dispatch your lame arguments so easily and quickly, because I've seen them hundreds of times before. You have been fooled into thinking you are a unique libertarian snowflake, but in a text-only format, all you "libertarians" might as well be the same guy.
I'm not a fan of Bush or Beck.
I don't claim to be inventing something new here. If it works, it works. The only difference now is that after 8 years of Bush and almost 4 years of Obama the American public is finally starting to see the light as evidenced by so many polls when Ron Paul is kicking all the Republican's in the tail by far and is even beating Obama. Keep having faith in your govt and when you wake up in 1984, which I hope never happens, you'll either be happy to believe whatever they tell you or you'll be the guy holding up four fingers telling people your actually holding up five.
George Orwell was a socialist.
That should tell you something.
You're right, action is key but...the right action and, more importantly, the right cause.
Most of the demands listed are backed by the wrong ideologies. Ideologies that got us in to this mess in the first place. It proposes that we can get everything we want - FREE, FREE, FREE! Well nothing is free, no matter if I pay for it, you pay for it, or the American taxpayer pays for it. Yes, I know, that may be a shock to you but, it is reality! You just haven't identified examples of it in your own life because you've probably been brainwashed by the socialist collectivists who tell you the rich don't pay enough in taxes, all the while they're telling you this, they too aren't paying taxes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=FOMI0ORGH44
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHU2sFZTwuo
The poor receive no benefit from society. They have no/shitty jobs, no healthcare, no political influence, and they die young and miserable.
No benefits = no taxes = fair
The rich have the military to "open markets" for them. They have police to protect their stuff from the poor. Whenever they want, they can speak to and/or bribe all of the decision-makers in government. They enjoy everything that society has to offer while bitching about the "unworthy" sometimes grabbing scraps without "earning" them.
Most of the benefits = most of the taxes = fair
WOW! You're totally indoctrinated.
No jobs? No healthcare? Have you worked in healthcare? Obviously, you've not been to a hospital in a while. Have you worked in the police department? Some would consider the $100k made by a cop or firefighter as being lower middle class...and they get great benefits too!
Why should there be political influence? Thats not fair.
If you've ever been to a California community college, you will find that the poorest people pay nothing to go to school and get priority registration based on their incomes while the majority pay their way in full.
What do you define as poor? as rich? Would you say Michael Moore is poor or rich? Did he do it through taking more taxes from people or did he do it by providing a product or service that other people desired?
You see, all this talk about taxes and how they will benefit the underpriviledged is a lie from the very elites who claim to be on your side. Its a ploy. Did you know that when the California State University system began, it was intended to be free college education for students? Yes, that's right. CA tax dollars were supposed to guarantee a free college education. Now, it costs about $2,000 a semester, not including books.
So, you see, the root problem is deeper than the OWS would have you believe. The solution simpler. For all of history, there has and will continue to be poor people but thats not to say that someone poor cannot rise to prosperity. That is why people come to America...freedom, opportunity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwpL42CxJpE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJBeuR0xEP8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho&ob=av3e
I knew I could out you as a libertarian Tea Party exile!
Just because you losers got kicked out of the Tea Party doesn't mean you get to come take over our movement.
Anyways, to answer your point, yes, I believe that the poor should have influence over the government. I believe that one person should have one vote and all votes should carry the same weight. Crazy, huh? Now get ready to have your mind REALLY blown - I think that the top-1% of the super rich should only have 1% influence over government decisions. Crazy communism, I know!! Right now, however, votes are meaningless, and the rich buy and sell politicians like heads of cattle.
I'm sorry that your state is so screwed up. I don't live there, so I can't comment on the specifics of your claims. I do know, however, that you guys have been under Republican governors for most of the last 30-years, so maybe you should take up your problems with those guys who always are saying that government doesn't work - and then proving it when you're dumb enough to elect them!
Oh, and if you think that the poor are healthy and $100,000 a year plus bennies is "lower middle class", then obviously you haven't spent much time around the poor. Pull your head out of that worn copy of Atlas Shrugged and take a drive around your city.
btw, I love how you dodge my points...very intelligent
probably don't have the guts to watch the video links either
Come on, dude. Those stupid videos were made before you were even born, probably.
They were watched by Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, who tried their best to implement Friedman-style economics in America, resulting in the collapse of our industrial base and the rise of the big banks and finance houses that "libertarians" claim to hate.
Hell, "neo-con" Ronald Reagan himself PERSONALLY APPEARED IN THE INTRO FOR ONE OF THE VIDEOS YOU POSTED!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XMsh2ntNKU
btw, that is a cool link. Yeah, Reagan had some issues. My personal belief is that he had the right ideas but, he was screwed by the Bush family. As you probably know, Bush Sr. was head of CIA and then out of nowhere they forced him on Reagan. From what I know, Reagan didn't want him but, I guess that is where dirty politics comes in. Plus, I think maybe that is why they tried to asasinate Reagan, so Bush could take over. I think JFK got killed for doing the right thing. Military-industrial complex.
"They tried to assassinate Reagan, so Bush could take over"
No, you don't sound anything like Glenn Beck!! (sarcasm)
Beck was a neo-Con but over the last few years has been stealing all his material from a guy named Alex Jones.
Like I said, I'm not a Beck fan.
Oh, please share more of your extensive knowledge of right-wing conspiracy theory trivia with me!!
Nope. I'm done casting pearls before swine.
Well, now thats much better. You're sounding academic at least.
Just because those videos are old doesn't mean they don't apply. In fact, they've never been more relevant. If you recall, it was under Clinton that the Glass-Steagull Act was repealed. However, we are where we are because of the New Deal. That is what got us here.
You have to sort the information, not just blanket label things. This video is updated and actually interviews one of the same guys who was in Michael Moore's videos named William K. Black, former senior regulator during the Savings and Loan crisis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU
I don't want to take over your movement because it is flawed from the get-go!
You seem to enjoy defying the laws of nature. There is a reason why the wealthy have influence...BECAUSE THEY'VE DONE SOMETHING WITH THEIR LIVES! John Kerry married into the Heinz family, not the POOR family! He might act like the poor man's buddy, but he wouldn't trade places with one. If the top 1% should only have 1% influence that is still way more than you will ever have, not to mention that if you want to restrict influence to the amount of money made than you should also restrict taxation and make it equal. Instead of super taxing the rich to pay for the poor, why not just have a flat tax...10% across the board for everyone? You believe taxes are needed to pay for others when what those others really need are jobs (provided by the wealthy sometimes), not handouts. Fact is, most jobs are created by small business owners, not the super wealthy.
You seem to have me confused with Republicans. The majority of "Republicans" are not true conservatives, they're just "neo-cons". I voted for Tom McClintock, someone with a track record but, you know how dumb Californians are...they like to vote for movie stars. Either way, they voted in a Republican, on special election mind you, to oust a Democrat, Grey Davis (former state controller) who had destroyed the economy and taken massive amounts of special interest money (Arnold did the same but worse). See, all of this comes from corporatism, not capitalism, CORPORATISM.
I've spent time around the poor and worked in the healthcare system. I've been on the streets, worked with homeless and illegal immigrants, etc. but the average poor person is in CA is someone who lives paycheck to paycheck working two jobs or has both the wife and husband working to be able to afford a house. Most even have benefits but, that doesn't do nearly enough to cover inflation.
So, you see, the problem is not taxes, it is inflation! INFLATION! DOLLAR DEVALUATION! That is, and will continue to be the problem until a correction is made and so far I've not heard much from OWS about that. Only from the libertarian posters on this site. If you wanna fix things that is the place to start. Major in the majors.
By the way, communism doesn't work. If you think it does, go live in North Korea and blog about it! Go, quickly. Hurry along now!
LOL, you claim that the rich are rich because they "earned it", and your first example is of a guy who is rich because he married someone who was born into money! You Libertards are a hoot! You must be drunk posting!! :D
You Libertarians call every Republican except Ron Paul a "neo-con", but you always go and vote for 'em, anyways! What's up with that?
Sorry, you claimed, earlier, that someone who earns $100,000 a year plus bennies is "lower middle class". I don't believe for a second that you've ever been around any really poor people. Intellectual dishonesty from a libertarian.. Say it isn't so!!
I explained way earlier why its fair that the rich should pay more tax than the poor. More benefits = more taxes = fair.
By the way, libertarianism doesn't work. If you think it does, go live in Somalia and blog about it! Go, quickly. Hurry along now!
Yeah, a perfect example of a liberal who married into someone else's success! Just like liberals who prefer socialism, a way of feeding off the wealthy's efforts by taxing them to death. One day, you'll wake up and see all the jobs in China and India because the US was too difficult to do business with because of people like you. Not to mention that your buddies Al Gore and Bill Clinton shipped off a massive amount of jobs with NAFTA. Of course, I dont expect an intelligent response from you because you probably don't even know anything about it.
Yeah, see you assume again because you have no argument...when you're all out of ammo you simply say, I don't want to fight with you...those aren't guns you're holding...they must be toy guns...I don't believe you know any poor people.
More overhead = more risk = more to lose
You risk little so you stand to lose little. You're like a guy who wants to never train, then show up to the meet and be on the same team as the guy who qualifies for the olympics, and then when he wins the gold medal you want him to give you some of his gold medal. Pathetic.
Hey well, at least the Somali's were able to destroy two mulit-million dollar helicopters and give our highly trained special forces a fight they'll never forget! Imagine if they actually got organized. You're comparing apples to oranges.
"Taxing them to death"! You sound like Newt Gingrich!!
Honestly, my goal in provoking you was to show everyone that you were no friend to OWS giving "helpful impartial advice". Rather, you are just another moronic Repuke ditto-head trying to sabotage the movement. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!! Unlike your boy Bush, I can now return to base camp, secure in victory!!
Now wipe away the tears and go turn on Fox News. It'll make you feel better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnekzRuu8wo&feature=player_embedded
See, there you go again. I don't watch Fox news. Gave that up a while ago. You keep making assumptions about me. Labeling me. Saying I don't know any poor people. You're a funny guy. Its okay if you want to go back to base camp because you're battle weary.
But seriously, all you did was open yourself up to me providing more information. People will read and decide for themselves.
BTW, I'm not for Newt Gingrich either, he's a globalist neocon.
My boy is not Bush, my boy is Ron Paul, a libertarian who voted AGAINST the war and who has not bought in to the lies of 9-11 and Iraq. He's a man who liberals can tolerate but, Republicans can't and yet he is still a Republican. That says something right there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py8cXlLyX18
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUYDt7kC3Z0
"(Ron Paul) He's a man who liberals can tolerate but, Republicans can't and yet he is still a Republican. That says something right there."
Yeah, it says that he's a craven political opportunist who is too much of a coward to risk running as a libertarian. You guys DO have your own party, remember?
True but, like I said people are just starting to wake up. There are still a lot of brainwashed conservatives out there. Trust me, I'm frustrated by their ignorance.
Thanks