Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Occupy Wall Street, London and Evereywhere Else
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 106 of 208 (643512)
12-07-2011 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by New Cat's Eye
12-07-2011 3:10 PM


Re: If you have any doubts or questions about the Occupy Movement - go visit one
Are you counting me?
Lol. I actually forgot about you, and you tend to be be either middle of the road or apathetic, both of which are hardly qualities of what would presently be considered a conservative. You may say you are one, but your "actions" (posts) say otherwise.
I asked a lot of questions.
And THAT, right there, is primarily why I left you out of the equation. How very un-conservative-like of you. (that sounds condescending, I think, but I assure you I do not mean it that way)
Er, wait, is this one of those 'if you're not with us you're against us' sorta things?
Not at all. You will notice that I sincerely asked AE what conservatives have against OWS and how it really differs from the TPers. Coyote and Buz were free to answer as well since, as he proved, AE is unwilling to have adult conversation or provide an actual answer.

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-07-2011 3:10 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 107 of 208 (643514)
12-07-2011 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Rahvin
12-07-2011 3:15 PM


Re: If you have any doubts or questions about the Occupy Movement - go visit one
But I think we have others, don't we?
I think there is a Euro member who doesn't post much that claims to be conservative. However, us Yanks would probably see him as moderate at worst.

"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Rahvin, posted 12-07-2011 3:15 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 108 of 208 (643537)
12-07-2011 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by New Cat's Eye
12-07-2011 3:10 PM


Re: If you have any doubts or questions about the Occupy Movement - go visit one
CS writes:
I'm not anti-OWS at all, let alone "very"...
I asked a lot of questions. And they got answered.
Given what you have heard - Are you now pro the Occupy movement?
If not what is it that you disagree with?
You are almost certainly one of the much fabled 99% so in what sense do you disagree with the Occupy aims?
I am genuinely interested to hear from a conservatively inclined but not entirely lunatic person such as yourself...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-07-2011 3:10 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-08-2011 10:17 AM Straggler has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 109 of 208 (643556)
12-08-2011 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by Straggler
12-07-2011 6:01 PM


hear from a conservatively inclined but not entirely lunatic person
Given what you have heard - Are you now pro the Occupy movement?
In what way? I'm not gonna occupy anywhere but my computer chair(s). I get what they're complaining about. I feel sorry for them.
But I don't feel like I'm one of them. I don't sympathize with their plight.
If not what is it that you disagree with?
We've set-up my life to avoid most of the problems I've heard from them. I don't owe on a student loan, I have a moderately salaried position with benefits, I bought a modest home that I don't have problems affording, I'm purposefully frugal and don't blow a lot of money, own a small amount of diversified investments. In a another post, crashfrog mentioned that "medium chill" thing. That's been me for a while.
You are almost certainly one of the much fabled 99% so in what sense do you disagree with the Occupy aims?
I'm with them in that I don't like that the banks got bailed out when it was their fault and they were fucking everybody (but I can understand that the bail out could have been necessary).
I do think that the guy who bought a really expensive house that he could barely afford because he thought the value would keep going up took a risk, himself, and is partially to blame for the problem. Too, the kid who owes $50,000 for an education that didn't prepare him for aquiring a job that he could pay back the loan with did something stupid, himself.
One of the biggest shocks for me when I grew up (that is, got out of college and into the 'real world') was realizing that nobody is going to hand you anything. I sorta (naively) figured that after I graduated that I would just get in the job line and be handed a position somewhere. But that never happened. I had to go and root through shit and claw my way into and carve out my position. I think that some of the protester still need to learn that lesson that the real world is tough, and it ain't pretty.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Straggler, posted 12-07-2011 6:01 PM Straggler has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by crashfrog, posted 12-08-2011 1:13 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 111 by RAZD, posted 12-09-2011 10:17 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(3)
Message 110 of 208 (643562)
12-08-2011 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by New Cat's Eye
12-08-2011 10:17 AM


Re: hear from a conservatively inclined but not entirely lunatic person
I do think that the guy who bought a really expensive house that he could barely afford because he thought the value would keep going up took a risk, himself, and is partially to blame for the problem.
I don't entirely disagree, but I think the bulk of the blame has to go to the professional "experts" - including the guy who sold him the mortgage - that told him, over and over again, that he could afford it, that home prices would continue to increase, and who profited greatly because that homeowner did exactly what they told him to do.
The whole point of having a mortgage broker is that he's not supposed to be your adversary. You're supposed to be able to trust, somewhat, that he's not trying to screw you. A broker is a middleman who tries to negotiate between competing interests. The mortgage broker who has his own agenda - in opposition to yours - is a direct betrayal of what mortgage brokers are supposed to do. And a lot of those brokers did have their own agenda - pushing homeowners into higher interest rate loans than they deserved, larger loans than they could afford, and so on. (Real quick, CS - what's the largest mortgage you could afford with your current projected income? Could you even figure it out without several hours of going over your finances? I have to generate an Excel spreadsheet just to think about a car loan, and I've taken three semesters of calculus.)
Too, the kid who owes $50,000 for an education that didn't prepare him for aquiring a job that he could pay back the loan with did something stupid, himself.
Sure, but what if he thought he was preparing himself for a job? What about all the colleges who tell you that a BA comes with a significant wage premium, regardless of your major? What about all the professors who said that it doesn't matter what you study, because the point of a liberal arts education is to make you a better citizen and not a better employee? What about all the parents who told him that working at a McDonalds (or even being a plumber) is demeaning and unworthy of him, and are now telling him what an irresponsible douchebag he is because he won't take a job at McDonalds? Doesn't a culture that demeans trade and vocational school as being for... those people... share any of the blame?
I don't see how we can blame kids these days for doing exactly what we told all of them to do if they wanted a good job and security. It's our fault, not theirs, that we live in a world where it's just not enough, now, to have a good education.
One of the biggest shocks for me when I grew up (that is, got out of college and into the 'real world') was realizing that nobody is going to hand you anything.
Why do you think it was a shock? Because all the adults you grew up with were telling you that if you got with the program, followed the rules, you would get handed something - the chance to work, to do something that mattered, and to get some kind of security as a result so that you could raise kids and own a home without every day being a fight for mere survival. Weren't all those adults living in the "real world"? Isn't that exactly how it worked for them; they got the grades, got the degrees, got the job and the house and the yard? The question isn't whether or not "kids today" are going to wake up and see how that isn't true, anymore. I think pretty much everybody knows that isn't true anymore. The question is how we, and our parents, let it stop being true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-08-2011 10:17 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Jazzns, posted 12-09-2011 10:25 AM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 114 by Artemis Entreri, posted 12-09-2011 11:33 AM crashfrog has replied
 Message 116 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-09-2011 12:09 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 142 by Buzsaw, posted 12-10-2011 8:38 AM crashfrog has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 111 of 208 (643575)
12-09-2011 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by New Cat's Eye
12-08-2011 10:17 AM


Re: hear from a conservatively inclined but not entirely lunatic person
Hi Catholic Scientist
In what way? I'm not gonna occupy anywhere but my computer chair(s). I get what they're complaining about. I feel sorry for them.
Would you put up a sign on your lawn that supports OWS? A bumper sticker on your car?
But I don't feel like I'm one of them. I don't sympathize with their plight.
But you admit you are one of the 99%, yes?
We've set-up my life to avoid most of the problems I've heard from them. I don't owe on a student loan, I have a moderately salaried position with benefits, I bought a modest home that I don't have problems affording, I'm purposefully frugal and don't blow a lot of money, own a small amount of diversified investments. In a another post, crashfrog mentioned that "medium chill" thing. That's been me for a while.
We also have no loans or debts of any kind, we are in the middle of renovating our fourth house, bought with the cash from selling our third house, I have a small business that, so far, covers expenses and benefits, we're frugal and do not buy frivolous things, my car is 10 years old, my computers are several years old, and we have investments that will ensure a retirement life of comfort.
And we are 100% for the OWS protest and approach to resolving social and financial injustice.
Not because we would benefit directly from it, but because society as a whole would benefit from it.
Do you think it is just for a CEO to "earn" over a million dollars a year, while their lowest paid employee's annual salary is below the poverty line?
I'm with them in that I don't like that the banks got bailed out when it was their fault and they were fucking everybody (but I can understand that the bail out could have been necessary).
My opinion is that much better would have been to bail out the people.
Note that IF the people had been able to pay their mortgages that the whole financial "crisis" would not have occurred (ie - IF trickle-down HAD worked, people would have gotten the raises that would have allowed them to pay their mortgages).
I do think that the guy who bought a really expensive house that he could barely afford because he thought the value would keep going up took a risk, himself, and is partially to blame for the problem.
If it is a primary residence, they should have gotten some help -- they could have been given an interest free loan from the government (due when the house is sold, adjusted for inflation). This would have been an investment in America, rather than an investment in bank profits.
If it is a secondary residence, then it is an investment, and should be treated as such.
I do think that the guy who bought a really expensive house that he could barely afford because he thought the value would keep going up took a risk, himself, and is partially to blame for the problem.
Why? The bank approved the loan. The problem is not that he bought the house but that the bank approved an overextended mortgage. The mortgage broker is supposed to check and ensure that the person would be capable of paying the mortgage. If they haven't done that, then they have made a bad investment. This is why the banks should NOT have been bailed out.
Is an investment in real estate different from an investment in stocks and bonds? You either have the money to pay for them or you don't. If you make an investment, you either make money if the value goes up, or you lose money if the value goes down.
When you get a loan, that is someone making an investment in you. If they make a bad investment, then they are also to blame, and they should bear their share of the loss.
Consider a person who makes an investment in a second home (not primary residence) by paying cash -- they make a profit/loss when they sell it.
Now consider a partnership that makes an investment in real estate -- they make a profit/loss when they sell it. The partnership shares the profit or the loss.
A mortgage on the other hand, is an unequal partnership, where one partner, the mortgage company, makes a profit whether the house value increases or decreases, as long as the mortgagee makes payments. They only lose when the mortgage is not paid. If they have made a bad investment, then they need to bear the loss. This is why the banks should NOT have been bailed out: it is not capitalism if they never lose.
Too, the kid who owes $50,000 for an education that didn't prepare him for aquiring a job that he could pay back the loan with did something stupid, himself.
When you get a loan, that is someone making an investment in you. If they make a bad investment, then they are to blame.
Personally, I feel that an investment in education will pay off in the long run, whether it results in lucrative employment or not, but that this is more of a social program than a money investment issue. I would support an extension of government paid education for those who want to pursue higher education.
I would take senior year out of high school and then add an optional three year program that would terminate with an associates degree, fully paid for those who want to take it.
This would also replace freshman year and universities, so that a Bachelor's Degree would only take three years instead of four and the kids would be better prepared than they are currently from most high schools.
One of the biggest shocks for me when I grew up (that is, got out of college and into the 'real world') was realizing that nobody is going to hand you anything. I sorta (naively) figured that after I graduated that I would just get in the job line and be handed a position somewhere. But that never happened. I had to go and root through shit and claw my way into and carve out my position. I think that some of the protester still need to learn that lesson that the real world is tough, and it ain't pretty.
I don't expect any handouts. I do expect a level playing field.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-08-2011 10:17 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Artemis Entreri, posted 12-09-2011 11:43 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 119 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-09-2011 12:27 PM RAZD has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3912 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 112 of 208 (643577)
12-09-2011 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by crashfrog
12-08-2011 1:13 PM


Crash for congress?
The question is how we, and our parents, let it stop being true.
POTM dude. Where the hell do we get this idiotic notion that every man for himself is some kind of noble sentiment?
Oh yea, Ayn Rand....
Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.

BUT if objects for gratitude and admiration are our desire, do they not present themselves every hour to our eyes? Do we not see a fair creation prepared to receive us the instant we are born --a world furnished to our hands, that cost us nothing? Is it we that light up the sun; that pour down the rain; and fill the earth with abundance? Whether we sleep or wake, the vast machinery of the universe still goes on. Are these things, and the blessings they indicate in future, nothing to, us? Can our gross feelings be excited by no other subjects than tragedy and suicide? Or is the gloomy pride of man become so intolerable, that nothing can flatter it but a sacrifice of the Creator? --Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by crashfrog, posted 12-08-2011 1:13 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 113 of 208 (643585)
12-09-2011 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Artemis Entreri
12-06-2011 9:59 AM


Is this the America you want to live in? that you want for your children?
Hi Artemis Entreri,
just a parting shot.
It is easy to cherry pick photos to suit your biases. I can post a peaceful picture of an Occupy protest for every one of your Tea Party photos. so pictures on their own prove nothing.
Obviously, from your links, you are taking this propaganda from a biased source rather than doing your own homework.
Nice list of the aggressive tactics of police against Occupy Protesters. Curiously they do not show any wrong behavior by the protesters, just by the police.
Unarmed protester/s
vs
Police with riot gear, "weaponized" tear gas, bludgeoning tools, blockades
Now let's look at an actual example of an actual protester and the LA police:
quote:
My Occupy LA Arrest
by Patrick Meighan
I was arrested at about 1 a.m. Wednesday morning with 291 other people at Occupy LA. I was sitting in City Hall Park with a pillow, a blanket, and a copy of Thich Nhat Hanh’s Being Peace when 1,400 heavily-armed LAPD officers in paramilitary SWAT gear streamed in. I was in a group of about 50 peaceful protestors who sat Indian-style, arms interlocked, around a tent (the symbolic image of the Occupy movement). The LAPD officers encircled us, weapons drawn, while we chanted We Are Peaceful and We Are Nonviolent and Join Us.
As we sat there, encircled, a separate team of LAPD officers used knives to slice open every personal tent in the park. They forcibly removed anyone sleeping inside, and then yanked out and destroyed any personal property inside those tents, scattering the contents across the park. They then did the same with the communal property of the Occupy LA movement. For example, I watched as the LAPD destroyed a pop-up canopy tent that, until that moment, had been serving as Occupy LA’s First Aid and Wellness tent, in which volunteer health professionals gave free medical care to absolutely anyone who requested it. As it happens, my family had personally contributed that exact canopy tent to Occupy LA, at a cost of several hundred of my family’s dollars. As I watched, the LAPD sliced that canopy tent to shreds, broke the telescoping poles into pieces and scattered the detritus across the park. Note that these were the objects described in subsequent mainstream press reports as 30 tons of garbage that was abandoned by Occupy LA: personal property forcibly stolen from us, destroyed in front of our eyes and then left for maintenance workers to dispose of while we were sent to prison.
When the LAPD finally began arresting those of us interlocked around the symbolic tent, we were all ordered by the LAPD to unlink from each other (in order to facilitate the arrests). Each seated, nonviolent protester beside me who refused to cooperate by unlinking his arms had the following done to him: an LAPD officer would forcibly extend the protestor’s legs, grab his left foot, twist it all the way around and then stomp his boot on the insole, pinning the protestor’s left foot to the pavement, twisted backwards. Then the LAPD officer would grab the protestor’s right foot and twist it all the way the other direction until the non-violent protestor, in incredible agony, would shriek in pain and unlink from his neighbor.
It was horrible to watch, and apparently designed to terrorize the rest of us. At least I was sufficiently terrorized. I unlinked my arms voluntarily and informed the LAPD officers that I would go peacefully and cooperatively. I stood as instructed, and then I had my arms wrenched behind my back, and an officer hyperextended my wrists into my inner arms. It was super violent, it hurt really really bad, and he was doing it on purpose. When I involuntarily recoiled from the pain, the LAPD officer threw me face-first to the pavement. He had my hands behind my back, so I landed right on my face. The officer dropped with his knee on my back and ground my face into the pavement. It really, really hurt and my face started bleeding and I was very scared. I begged for mercy and I promised that I was honestly not resisting and would not resist.
My hands were then zipcuffed very tightly behind my back, where they turned blue. I am now suffering nerve damage in my right thumb and palm.
I was put on a paddywagon with other nonviolent protestors and taken to a parking garage in Parker Center. They forced us to kneel on the hard pavement of that parking garage for seven straight hours with our hands still tightly zipcuffed behind our backs. Some began to pass out. One man rolled to the ground and vomited for a long, long time before falling unconscious. The LAPD officers watched and did nothing.
At 9 a.m. we were finally taken from the pavement into the station to be processed. The charge was sitting in the park after the police said not to. It’s a misdemeanor. Almost always, for a misdemeanor, the police just give you a ticket and let you go. It costs you a couple hundred dollars. Apparently, that’s what happened with most every other misdemeanor arrest in LA that day.
With us Occupy LA protestors, however, they set bail at $5,000 and booked us into jail. Almost none of the protesters could afford to bail themselves out. I’m lucky and I could afford it, except the LAPD spent all day refusing to actually *accept* the bail they set. If you were an accused murderer or a rapist in LAPD custody that day, you could bail yourself right out and be back on the street, no problem. But if you were a nonviolent Occupy LA protestor with bail money in hand, you were held long into the following morning, with absolutely no access to a lawyer.
I spent most of my day and night crammed into an eight-man jail cell, along with sixteen other Occupy LA protesters. My sleeping spot was on the floor next to the toilet.
Finally, at 2:30 the next morning, after twenty-five hours in custody, I was released on bail. But there were at least 200 Occupy LA protestors who couldn’t afford the bail. The LAPD chose to keep those peaceful, non-violent protesters in prison for two full days the absolute legal maximum that the LAPD is allowed to detain someone on misdemeanor charges.
As a reminder, Antonio Villaraigosa has referred to all of this as the LAPD’s finest hour.
So that’s what happened to the 292 women and men were arrested last Wednesday. ...
More here.
Now I don't know about you, but I have a little trouble reading that account without getting very angry at the police behavior.
This is the kind of brutal police behavior we see in the (arab etc) dictatorships on the other side of the world, not the kind of behavior we expect to see in America.
This is not the kind of America I want to live in, nor is it the kind of America I wish for my children.
Do you support this kind of police behavior?
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Artemis Entreri, posted 12-06-2011 9:59 AM Artemis Entreri has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Artemis Entreri, posted 12-09-2011 12:09 PM RAZD has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4229 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 114 of 208 (643588)
12-09-2011 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by crashfrog
12-08-2011 1:13 PM


Re: hear from a conservatively inclined but not entirely lunatic person
Artemis Entreri writes:
I'll still lurk, mainly to laugh at the nonsense, but I'll be repsectful and not post anymore, I know there are some fools who are serious about OWS, and I'll leave them to their own discussion.
Alright I can’t help it. I am a renigger. I just cant lurk and give people cheers/jeers, its not in my makeup.
crash writes:
I think the bulk of the blame has to go to the professional "experts" - including the guy who sold him the mortgage - that told him, over and over again, that he could afford it, that home prices would continue to increase, and who profited greatly because that homeowner did exactly what they told him to do.
Its your money and ultimately your responsibility. To say the bulk of the blame goes on some one who sold you on something that didn’t work is both immature and irresponsible. This irresponsible mindset that you are owed a fair shake, and its not really your fault, but the financial experts is why we are in this mess. Basically a bunch of dumbasses listened to some charlatans, and now they want us to join their dumbass group by admitting we are all in the 99% group. Sorry but I come correct, and I aint part of the 99% because I got my shit together.
The whole point of having a mortgage broker is that he's not supposed to be your adversary. You're supposed to be able to trust, somewhat, that he's not trying to screw you. A broker is a middleman who tries to negotiate between competing interests. The mortgage broker who has his own agenda - in opposition to yours - is a direct betrayal of what mortgage brokers are supposed to do. And a lot of those brokers did have their own agenda - pushing homeowners into higher interest rate loans than they deserved, larger loans than they could afford, and so on.
More of the same. Blah blah blah, its not your fault, you are not responsible for your own money, its everyone else’s fault.
Here’s an idea, grow the fuck up. Check yourself before you wreck yourself, and be responsible.
Sure, but what if he thought he was preparing himself for a job? What about all the colleges who tell you that a BA comes with a significant wage premium, regardless of your major? What about all the professors who said that it doesn't matter what you study, because the point of a liberal arts education is to make you a better citizen and not a better employee? What about all the parents who told him that working at a McDonalds (or even being a plumber) is demeaning and unworthy of him, and are now telling him what an irresponsible douchebag he is because he won't take a job at McDonalds? Doesn't a culture that demeans trade and vocational school as being for... those people... share any of the blame?
No. It’s your life, and your problems. You can’t blame everything on others, sometimes you get bad advice, deal with it. The way you describe it, America is a culture of whiny bitches.
Edited by Artemis Entreri, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by crashfrog, posted 12-08-2011 1:13 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Son, posted 12-09-2011 12:22 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied
 Message 121 by Rahvin, posted 12-09-2011 12:42 PM Artemis Entreri has replied
 Message 139 by crashfrog, posted 12-09-2011 4:58 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4229 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 115 of 208 (643589)
12-09-2011 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by RAZD
12-09-2011 10:17 AM


Re: hear from a conservatively inclined but not entirely lunatic person
Would you put up a sign on your lawn that supports OWS? A bumper sticker on your car?
Never. Nope.
But you admit you are one of the 99%, yes?
Nope. To sit back and not strive to be a one percenter is the same as giving up in my book. The actual percentage of the 99% is probably somewhere around 10%, IMO.
And we are 100% for the OWS protest and approach to resolving social and financial injustice.
Not because we would benefit directly from it, but because society as a whole would benefit from it.
Oh you are sooooooo altruistic. I am sooooo impressed.
LOL
Do you think it is just for a CEO to "earn" over a million dollars a year, while their lowest paid employee's annual salary is below the poverty line?
Not sure. I cannot think of any examples, so is this a hypothetical question?
Note that IF the people had been able to pay their mortgages that the whole financial "crisis" would not have occurred (ie - IF trickle-down HAD worked, people would have gotten the raises that would have allowed them to pay their mortgages).
Or if people were just responsible, and not so retarded, then they would have purchased things that they could afford, instead of taking a risk, failing and then blaming everyone else.
This is why the banks should NOT have been bailed out.
I finally agree with you.
I don't expect any handouts. I do expect a level playing field.
That is just it. The playing is not and never was level.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by RAZD, posted 12-09-2011 10:17 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by RAZD, posted 12-09-2011 12:29 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 116 of 208 (643592)
12-09-2011 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by crashfrog
12-08-2011 1:13 PM


Re: hear from a conservatively inclined but not entirely lunatic person
I don't entirely disagree, but I think the bulk of the blame has to go to the professional "experts" -
I tend to ascribe more to personal responsibility than getting duped by a pro.
including the guy who sold him the mortgage - that told him, over and over again, that he could afford it, that home prices would continue to increase, and who profited greatly because that homeowner did exactly what they told him to do.
Well that right there, that the guy is selling me something, tells me that I can't fully trust him.
The whole point of having a mortgage broker is that he's not supposed to be your adversary. You're supposed to be able to trust, somewhat, that he's not trying to screw you. A broker is a middleman who tries to negotiate between competing interests. The mortgage broker who has his own agenda - in opposition to yours - is a direct betrayal of what mortgage brokers are supposed to do. And a lot of those brokers did have their own agenda - pushing homeowners into higher interest rate loans than they deserved, larger loans than they could afford, and so on.
It was different for me. I didn't consult a morgage borker to determine how much I could afford. I went to a lender and they approved me for a certain maximum amount and then we determined how much different amounts would cost me per month, and then it was up to me to determine how much I was capable/willing to spend each month and that determined how much I was going to borrow. Then I went and found a house within that amount. I didn't talk to the morgage broker until the very end when it came to determining what the exact rate on the loan amount I picked would be.
Sure, but what if he thought he was preparing himself for a job? What about all the colleges who tell you that a BA comes with a significant wage premium, regardless of your major? What about all the professors who said that it doesn't matter what you study, because the point of a liberal arts education is to make you a better citizen and not a better employee?
It became apparent to me when I was looking at different colleges, that they were trying to sell their schooling to me. Every place had a similiar pitch of how great they were and how awesome I'd be if I went there. Again, if someone's trying to sell you something, you can't just take their word for everything.
I guess you could blame the seller for selling to people, but I just don't have a lot of sympathy for the position: "I got sold on this and they tricked me into buying it" I'm sorry the ShamWow wasn't as absorbant as you were lead to believe, but that's just sales. Sure, you can't outright lie and there should be some accountability to the sellers, but there's personal resposibility of the buyer too. And I realize you said you don't totally disagree with that, but you do seem to want to blame the seller more than I do.
What about all the parents who told him that working at a McDonalds (or even being a plumber) is demeaning and unworthy of him, and are now telling him what an irresponsible douchebag he is because he won't take a job at McDonalds? Doesn't a culture that demeans trade and vocational school as being for... those people... share any of the blame?
I suppose, but again it was different for me. One of my best friends knew right away that he wasn't gonna make it through college so he went to welding school and now has a good job. Nobody disrespects him at all for that. In fact, I respect him more for that. Definately more than other friends who just partied instead of educating themselves and now have children on welfare and cry about how bad they have it. They reaped what they sowed.
I don't see how we can blame kids these days for doing exactly what we told all of them to do if they wanted a good job and security. It's our fault, not theirs, that we live in a world where it's just not enough, now, to have a good education.
I consider myself more on the victim side than the side with the fault, but I get what you're saying.
Why do you think it was a shock? Because all the adults you grew up with were telling you that if you got with the program, followed the rules, you would get handed something - the chance to work, to do something that mattered, and to get some kind of security as a result so that you could raise kids and own a home without every day being a fight for mere survival. Weren't all those adults living in the "real world"? Isn't that exactly how it worked for them; they got the grades, got the degrees, got the job and the house and the yard? The question isn't whether or not "kids today" are going to wake up and see how that isn't true, anymore. I think pretty much everybody knows that isn't true anymore. The question is how we, and our parents, let it stop being true.
And I don't know the answer to that question... Its a good one tho and the right one to be asking.
I think that the conservative parents think they're being reactive to the liberals who are trying to spread their hard-won earnings to all 'those other people' who took the easy route or didn't have enough personal responsibility. Them tightening up only fuels the flames and causes more pressure from the other side and I think its all just snowballed into this mess.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by crashfrog, posted 12-08-2011 1:13 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4229 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 117 of 208 (643593)
12-09-2011 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by RAZD
12-09-2011 11:24 AM


Re: Is this the America you want to live in? that you want for your children?
It is easy to cherry pick photos to suit your biases. I can post a peaceful picture of an Occupy protest for every one of your Tea Party photos. so pictures on their own prove nothing.
Never said they did, I just found it amusing.
Obviously, from your links, you are taking this propaganda from a biased source rather than doing your own homework.
Obviously you are on that OWS kool-aid. I just took those from a google image search (I had no crazy motive other than making a joke). I am not in the tea party or the flea party. The media double standard on both groups is funny, and prompted me to post them, I find the OWS thing silly, and was shocked that so many intelligent people on here support it. In my first couple posts I was just being an ass, im done with that now.
Nice list of the aggressive tactics of police against Occupy Protesters. Curiously they do not show any wrong behavior by the protesters, just by the police.
Unarmed protester/s
vs
Police with riot gear, "weaponized" tear gas, bludgeoning tools, blockades
I guess you didn’t look at all the pictures. Still that was pages ago, and I’m off that, so whatever man.
Y’all should totally be armed at your protests, the police aint stupid, well they aint that stupid. Basically act like a peasant, get treated like one.
Now I don't know about you, but I have a little trouble reading that account without getting very angry at the police behavior.
Don’t get it twisted, I dislike the police very much. But sitting in on city hall, after you are asked to leave, sounds like a crime. Resisting arrest, sounds like a crime. I also noticed some errors in the large quote, but it is not important.
This is the kind of brutal police behavior we see in the (arab etc) dictatorships on the other side of the world, not the kind of behavior we expect to see in America.
Really? How many protesters were shot? How many died? How many were locked up and NEVER seen again?
Oh yeah, NONE. Only the truly ignorant would compare getting arrested in the US to getting arrested in an Arab dictatorship.
This is not the kind of America I want to live in, nor is it the kind of America I wish for my children.
Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
Do you support this kind of police behavior?
Arresting people who openly and defiantly break the law in front of the police. I think I probably do support police who do their job.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by RAZD, posted 12-09-2011 11:24 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by RAZD, posted 12-09-2011 1:17 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied
 Message 128 by hooah212002, posted 12-09-2011 3:09 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied

  
Son
Member (Idle past 3830 days)
Posts: 346
From: France,Paris
Joined: 03-11-2009


Message 118 of 208 (643597)
12-09-2011 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Artemis Entreri
12-09-2011 11:33 AM


Re: hear from a conservatively inclined but not entirely lunatic person
Yes you are responsible for your own money. But if you are sold poisonous food through deceit, you have a right to complain about it. What the OWS is asking is that the same applies when people sell toxic financial products through lies and deceit. Capitalism should be about selling the better product at the more competitive price, not about who's the best at cheating others out of their money. Think about it, if financial products were known to be untrustworthy and everyone is trying to rip off the other, there would be no (or a very reduced) financial market and the global economy would shrink greatly, that's why there should be laws against this sort of behaviour and that they should be enforced the same way it already is for material products (i'm not only talking about the mortgages and student loans but also about shorting the products you advertise to your clients or the MF fiasco).
Of course, when a bad loan is made while both parties had the same informations, both should eat the consequences (meaning no bailouts for either of them).
The essence of an healthy economy is one that is trustworthy, otherwise, exchanges become reduced and the economy goes down the drain. It seems you're advocating that everyone should be looking after himself, but imagine if there were no laws to control the products you buy, since there will always be a number of domains you can verify, would you be able to live well if you can't trust that your next doctor won't rip you off? your next food seller? your next car seller? How would you make competitivity work when you can't compare the products because of the opacity of the system?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Artemis Entreri, posted 12-09-2011 11:33 AM Artemis Entreri has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 119 of 208 (643598)
12-09-2011 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by RAZD
12-09-2011 10:17 AM


Re: hear from a conservatively inclined but not entirely lunatic person
Would you put up a sign on your lawn that supports OWS? A bumper sticker on your car?
No (more because of those particular methods than any dislike for OWS).
But you admit you are one of the 99%, yes?
Sure.
And we are 100% for the OWS protest and approach to resolving social and financial injustice.
Not because we would benefit directly from it, but because society as a whole would benefit from it.
I tend to focus my efforts on my friends and family directly. I don't trust "society as a whole".
Do you think it is just for a CEO to "earn" over a million dollars a year, while their lowest paid employee's annual salary is below the poverty line?
I think it can be. Sure, the floors need to be cleaned, but a CEO who brings in 10 million dollars in new revenue is worth the million he got to do that.
My opinion is that much better would have been to bail out the people.
That's how I lean, but I've seen good arguments for needing to bail out the banks too.
Note that IF the people had been able to pay their mortgages that the whole financial "crisis" would not have occurred
Yeah, I just don't know about that.
Why? The bank approved the loan.
The amount my bank approved to loan me was more than I was comfortable borrowing. I took less than was approved on purpose because I didn't want to risk being unable to afford it.
The problem is not that he bought the house but that the bank approved an overextended mortgage. The mortgage broker is supposed to check and ensure that the person would be capable of paying the mortgage. If they haven't done that, then they have made a bad investment. This is why the banks should NOT have been bailed out.
There's still the personal responsibility of the borrower tho. A car-salesman is gonna tell you that you should buy the Corvette, is it his fault if you do?
A mortgage on the other hand, is an unequal partnership, where one partner, the mortgage company, makes a profit whether the house value increases or decreases, as long as the mortgagee makes payments.
Well yeah, its their money that you are using to buy something for yourself.
When you get a loan, that is someone making an investment in you. If they make a bad investment, then they are to blame.
I dunno, if you enter a contract that says you're gonna pay back a particular amount every month, and they're betting on you fullfilling that contract, then when you don't/can't then that is your fault for violating the contract.
Personally, I feel that an investment in education will pay off in the long run, whether it results in lucrative employment or not, but that this is more of a social program than a money investment issue. I would support an extension of government paid education for those who want to pursue higher education.
I would take senior year out of high school and then add an optional three year program that would terminate with an associates degree, fully paid for those who want to take it.
This would also replace freshman year and universities, so that a Bachelor's Degree would only take three years instead of four and the kids would be better prepared than they are currently from most high schools.
That's cool.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by RAZD, posted 12-09-2011 10:17 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Rahvin, posted 12-09-2011 12:47 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 201 by RAZD, posted 01-14-2012 7:26 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 120 of 208 (643599)
12-09-2011 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Artemis Entreri
12-09-2011 11:43 AM


really?
Hi Artemis Entreri
Not sure. I cannot think of any examples, so is this a hypothetical question?
Unfortunately, for you, your ignorance of the examples does not mean they don't exist.
Try the Wallmart top executives vs employees:
HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost
quote:
The CEO of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. received a pay package in 2010 worth $18.7 million, ...
Mike Duke, 61, received a base salary of about $1.2 million and a performance-based bonus of nearly $3.9 million for the fiscal year that ended Jan. 31.
Over a million in annual salary without the "bonus" payoffs.
versus Wallmart employees:
http://www.campusprogress.org/...art_doesnt_want_you_to_know
quote:
In 2001, the average pay of a Wal-Mart worker was $8.23 per hour, more than two dollars less per hour than the average supermarket employee wage of $10.35 per hour. Furthermore, Wal-Mart associates only average 32 hours a week, causing many employees to be classified as part-time, thus restricting their access to health care and other benefits exclusively earmarked for full-timers. In fact, Wal-Mart wages are so low that the average Wal-Mart worker’s annual salary in 2001 was almost $1,000 below the federal poverty line of $14,630 for a family of three.
Poverty level wages are bad enough. But Wal-Mart apparently feels that not paying wages at all is even better for its bottom line. As of December 2002, 39 class action lawsuits in 30 states were filed against Wal-Mart claiming tens of millions of dollars in back pay owed to hundreds of thousands employees. These lawsuits included instances of Wal-Mart forcing employees to work through breaks, forcing employees to work off the clock, and even deleting hours from employees’ time sheets without their knowledge. According a former Wal-Mart manager in Alabama and Mississippi, Wal-Mart’s central office threatened to write up managers who didn’t reduce labor costs and this led to managers leaning on assistant managers to falsify time sheets and force employees to work without pay.
So now that this is no longer a hypothetical question ... I repeat:
Do you think it is just for a CEO to "earn" over a million dollars a year, while their lowest paid employee's annual salary is below the poverty line?
Or if people were just responsible, and not so retarded, then they would have purchased things that they could afford, instead of taking a risk, failing and then blaming everyone else.
How do you know they weren't responsible? How do you know they were "so retarded" in their purchases? It's easy to pin labels on them so you can convince yourself that they are to blame.
If a person wants to buy a home, and they go around to all the mortgage companies and NOT ONE turns them down, are they not being responsible in their approach to buying a home?
That is just it. The playing is not and never was level.
Just because it isn't level doesn't make it right does it?
So should we work to make it more level or less level?
Oh you are sooooooo altruistic. I am sooooo impressed.
LOL
and then there is this:
Page Not Found
quote:
We the People of the United States, in Order c, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
That's pretty altruistic too. Curiously, I note that "because society as a whole would benefit from it" is promoting the general welfare.
Curiously, the goals of the Occupy Movement are in line with the constitution ... " ... to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity ... " ... don't you agree?
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Artemis Entreri, posted 12-09-2011 11:43 AM Artemis Entreri has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Artemis Entreri, posted 12-09-2011 12:51 PM RAZD has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024