Occupy Wall Street: Support or Oppose? (OWS vs. Nativity)

[spurgistan]

The 23% opposed to OWS in this poll is an eerily close figure to the 19 percent of Americans who believe themselves to be in the top 1% of earners.

This sentence was brought to you by the word, "Percent."

[General Brock II]

The 23% opposed to OWS in this poll is an eerily close figure to the 19 percent of Americans who believe themselves to be in the top 1% of earners.

This sentence was brought to you by the word, "Percent."

I'm a student making a little over minimum wage... I voted against them. One can't make assumptions with percentages, but rather with percentiles, in a scenario like this.

And we obviously all are wealthy enough to spend good portions of time in the flipping forums instead of looking for a job.

Occupy Vancouver is closing down. Hurrah!

[GreecePwns]

Any reactions?

Before the General Assembly of Occupy Dallas,

Whereas the General Assembly of Occupy Dallas stands in support of Occupy Wall Street which started September 17, 2011 at Liberty Square in Manhattan’s Financial District. The movement has now spread across the country and is influencing the world. Occupy Dallas is a horizontally organized resistance movement to counteract the unprecedented consolidation of wealth and power in the world today. The Occupy movement does not have a hierarchy or a formalized structure. The Occupy movement represents those that feel disenfranchised from the current socioeconomic system because of policy passed by our political institutions and the actions of those in control of the unprecedented consolidation of wealth;

Whereas by consensus we view that for the first time in American history, current generations will not be as prosperous as preceding generations. This denial of the American Dream is at the heart of Occupy Movement.
Whereas by consensus we view that the social system has become tilted against us by:

1. Unfair treatment and discrimination against individuals based on Gender, Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, Race, National Origin, Physical Ability or any other factor that minimizes any person’s individual worth
2. The commoditization of individual privacy
3. Profit driven news sources with individual agendas
4. Narrow definitions of what constitutes a family;

Whereas by consensus we view that the Political system has become tilted against us by:

1. Widespread deregulation that has eliminated common sense regulations that have insured long term prosperity and protection from predatory business practices
2. A Tax code that is cumbersome and rife with loopholes and language that favors an economic minority at the expense of the majority of wage earners
3. A Supreme Court decision that has put into place the unprecedented concept of extending first amendment protections to political donations
4. Jeopardizing the future of social security through investiture and privatization schemes
5. By reducing funding to our education system our future generations are provided a lesser education that previous generations received because of increased class size and reduced resources
6. Because of decreasing funding individuals are saddled with higher student loan debt
7. A political system where even the most perfunctory tasks of government are partisan battles;

Whereas by consensus we view that the Economic system has become tilted against us by:

1. A general degradation of the employer and employee relationship namely
a. the practice referred to as “dead peasants” insurance policies where by companies profit from the death of individuals.
b. the elimination of traditional pension and retirement arrangements in favor of 401 (k) investment vehicles.
c. outsourcing of jobs
d. failing or eliminating paid sick leave
e. failing or eliminating paid maternity leave
f. relying on part-time workers rather than investing in full time employees
g. scheduling work hours to insure that employees cannot obtain offered benefits
h. failing to provide a livable wage
i. reducing and eliminating employer based health care coverage
1. Incredible income disparity between management and employees.
2. Active discouragement and intimidation of unionization of the workforce
3. Instituting illogical accounting practices
4. Engaging in unethical business practices that jeopardize the long term financial stability of the country
5. Viewing financial profit as more important than the individual worth of a people.

Then let it them be resolved by the General Assembly of Occupy Dallas through consensus on Date (___) that we call upon all people to engage in a General Strike on November 30th, 2011. We implore all people to:

1. Refrain from Buying or Selling any goods or services including but not limited to, any petroleum products, consumer goods or bank transactions; starting at 12:01 am to 11:59pm on November 30th, 2011.
2. Refrain from working for a wage starting at 12:01 am to 11:59pm on November 30th, 2011 excluding those individuals that provide emergency and necessary functions including but not limited to Police, Fire and Medical personnel.
3. Join or form local groups to peacefully protest against the above stated elements.

[jimboston]

Any reactions?

Before the General Assembly of Occupy Dallas,

Whereas the General Assembly of Occupy Dallas stands in support of Occupy Wall Street which started September 17, 2011 at Liberty Square in Manhattan’s Financial District. The movement has now spread across the country and is influencing the world. Occupy Dallas is a horizontally organized resistance movement to counteract the unprecedented consolidation of wealth and power in the world today. The Occupy movement does not have a hierarchy or a formalized structure. The Occupy movement represents those that feel disenfranchised from the current socioeconomic system because of policy passed by our political institutions and the actions of those in control of the unprecedented consolidation of wealth;

Whereas by consensus we view that for the first time in American history, current generations will not be as prosperous as preceding generations. This denial of the American Dream is at the heart of Occupy Movement.
Whereas by consensus we view that the social system has become tilted against us by:

1. Unfair treatment and discrimination against individuals based on Gender, Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, Race, National Origin, Physical Ability or any other factor that minimizes any person’s individual worth
2. The commoditization of individual privacy
3. Profit driven news sources with individual agendas
4. Narrow definitions of what constitutes a family;

Whereas by consensus we view that the Political system has become tilted against us by:

1. Widespread deregulation that has eliminated common sense regulations that have insured long term prosperity and protection from predatory business practices
2. A Tax code that is cumbersome and rife with loopholes and language that favors an economic minority at the expense of the majority of wage earners
3. A Supreme Court decision that has put into place the unprecedented concept of extending first amendment protections to political donations
4. Jeopardizing the future of social security through investiture and privatization schemes
5. By reducing funding to our education system our future generations are provided a lesser education that previous generations received because of increased class size and reduced resources
6. Because of decreasing funding individuals are saddled with higher student loan debt
7. A political system where even the most perfunctory tasks of government are partisan battles;

Whereas by consensus we view that the Economic system has become tilted against us by:

1. A general degradation of the employer and employee relationship namely
a. the practice referred to as “dead peasants” insurance policies where by companies profit from the death of individuals.
b. the elimination of traditional pension and retirement arrangements in favor of 401 (k) investment vehicles.
c. outsourcing of jobs
d. failing or eliminating paid sick leave
e. failing or eliminating paid maternity leave
f. relying on part-time workers rather than investing in full time employees
g. scheduling work hours to insure that employees cannot obtain offered benefits
h. failing to provide a livable wage
i. reducing and eliminating employer based health care coverage
1. Incredible income disparity between management and employees.
2. Active discouragement and intimidation of unionization of the workforce
3. Instituting illogical accounting practices
4. Engaging in unethical business practices that jeopardize the long term financial stability of the country
5. Viewing financial profit as more important than the individual worth of a people.

Then let it them be resolved by the General Assembly of Occupy Dallas through consensus on Date (___) that we call upon all people to engage in a General Strike on November 30th, 2011. We implore all people to:

1. Refrain from Buying or Selling any goods or services including but not limited to, any petroleum products, consumer goods or bank transactions; starting at 12:01 am to 11:59pm on November 30th, 2011.
2. Refrain from working for a wage starting at 12:01 am to 11:59pm on November 30th, 2011 excluding those individuals that provide emergency and necessary functions including but not limited to Police, Fire and Medical personnel.
3. Join or form local groups to peacefully protest against the above stated elements.

A few thoughts...

* If they were serious they would call for this General Strike on Nov. 25th... the Day after Thanksgiving... Black Friday. Let's see how many people refrain from buying or selling goods and service on that day!

* I fully support their statement number 1... where they state that things are biased and shouldn't be based on race or sex. So this group is clearly opposed to all Affirmative Action programs... right!?

* It's interesting that they think the tax code favors the elite and not the wage earners. I wonder if they realize that some percentage higher than 50% of the working population of this country pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX? I wonder what percentage of Occupiers have actually ever paid a Federal Income Tax???? That would be an interesting statistic. I theorize it's fewer than 25%.

* I think they need to hire a proof-reader or something.
Re: Statement 1A in the third section.... "a. the practice referred to as “dead peasants” insurance policies where by companies profit from the death of individuals."
-> I don't know what this practice is... it sounds bad... if they could actually describe it properly maybe I could decide if I should be for or against it....
Re: Statements 1D, 1E, and 1F... "failing"... I believe they meant to use the word "falling"
-> Another example where they need a proof-reader. I'm sure there are more.

* This statement "4. Narrow definitions of what constitutes a family"
-> Now couldn't one argue that ANY definition of what constitutes a "family" is going to be considered "narrow" by some people? Hasn't the definition that is currently accepted by the majority of people in this country something that has been in existence since pre-history? BTW... what does this issue (which is really a religious issue) have to do with equality and equal opportunity in an economic sense? Aren't they likely to alienate many religious people who would otherwise sympathize with them because of this???

*Why do they talk about "decreased" funding for education... primary and student loan (college) funding??? This may be true for the past year or two... but over the past 20 years funding for both area has increased dramatically. Their facts are simply wrong here.

OK... that's enough.

Send them all home to mommy and daddy now.

[BigBallinStalin]

Sounds rather statist.

"We're against current political problem, man!"

So what do you intend to do about?

"EXPAND THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE!! IT"S OUR ONLY HOPE IN THE FACE OF CAPITALISM!!!"

<poker face>

[Army of GOD]

[Army of GOD]

Sounds rather statist.

"We're against current political problem, man!"

So what do you intend to do about?

"EXPAND THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE!! IT"S OUR ONLY HOPE IN THE FACE OF CAPITALISM!!!"

<poker face>

Just imagine how many people in OWS voted in office Obama and other Democrats too.

[Iliad]

image

You son, need to learn about demographics.

Regardless the sentiment is still meaningless, as simply because there are bigger problems elsewhere doesn't mean you don't have problems. Believe it or not you can protest and highlight issues within your society without being rendered meaningless, rather the opposite. The civil rights mvoement wasn't invalidated because of apartheid and even worse conditions elsewhere, the oush for gay marriage and other rights for their ommunity isn't rendered without meaning because of the intolerance of others. Each country has a duty to its citizens foremost.

[PLAYER57832]

*Why do they talk about "decreased" funding for education... primary and student loan (college) funding??? This may be true for the past year or two... but over the past 20 years funding for both area has increased dramatically. Their facts are simply wrong here.
.

Not in PA, that is for sure. Also, aid has not kept up with rising costs. I wonder where you got your data?

[kentington]

I see what you did there...

I am amused.

[Night Strike]

*Why do they talk about "decreased" funding for education... primary and student loan (college) funding??? This may be true for the past year or two... but over the past 20 years funding for both area has increased dramatically. Their facts are simply wrong here.
.

Not in PA, that is for sure. Also, aid has not kept up with rising costs. I wonder where you got your data?

Maybe if the public unions weren't getting such radically large guaranteed pensions and not having to contribute anything (or barely something), costs wouldn't continue rising so drastically.

[BigBallinStalin]

image

You son, need to learn about demographics.

Regardless the sentiment is still meaningless, as simply because there are bigger problems elsewhere doesn't mean you don't have problems. Believe it or not you can protest and highlight issues within your society without being rendered meaningless, rather the opposite. The civil rights mvoement wasn't invalidated because of apartheid and even worse conditions elsewhere, the oush for gay marriage and other rights for their ommunity isn't rendered without meaning because of the intolerance of others. Each country has a duty to its citizens foremost.

Still, it's a fun comparison.

[AndyDufresne]

*Why do they talk about "decreased" funding for education... primary and student loan (college) funding??? This may be true for the past year or two... but over the past 20 years funding for both area has increased dramatically. Their facts are simply wrong here.
.

Not in PA, that is for sure. Also, aid has not kept up with rising costs. I wonder where you got your data?

Maybe if the public unions weren't getting such radically large guaranteed pensions and not having to contribute anything (or barely something), costs wouldn't continue rising so drastically.

It would be nice to if unions weren't needed, but history as proved you can't trust some businesses to adequately provide for their workers.


--Andy

[Aradhus]

Sounds rather statist.

When you use that word, is it an implied insult? Like if I say "I'm a statist" I'm just describing a particuar set of ideas I hold, but if you say "You're a statist!" tagged along with that word is also "so you're stupid, and you smell"?

[Night Strike]

*Why do they talk about "decreased" funding for education... primary and student loan (college) funding??? This may be true for the past year or two... but over the past 20 years funding for both area has increased dramatically. Their facts are simply wrong here.
.

Not in PA, that is for sure. Also, aid has not kept up with rising costs. I wonder where you got your data?

Maybe if the public unions weren't getting such radically large guaranteed pensions and not having to contribute anything (or barely something), costs wouldn't continue rising so drastically.

It would be nice to if unions weren't needed, but history as proved you can't trust some businesses to adequately provide for their workers.


--Andy

Some of the founders of the union-movement in getting unions into businesses realized that having public sector employees form a union would end up being a disaster for the country. Public sector unions get to bribe candidates with their support/votes and then get to directly negotiate what benefits they will receive on the job. That's called a quid pro quo, which is illegal, and public sector unions do it on a daily basis.

[Army of GOD]

image

You son, need to learn about demographics.

Regardless the sentiment is still meaningless, as simply because there are bigger problems elsewhere doesn't mean you don't have problems. Believe it or not you can protest and highlight issues within your society without being rendered meaningless, rather the opposite. The civil rights mvoement wasn't invalidated because of apartheid and even worse conditions elsewhere, the oush for gay marriage and other rights for their ommunity isn't rendered without meaning because of the intolerance of others. Each country has a duty to its citizens foremost.

Hahahaha ugh. If you want to protect yourself from your own hypocrisy, fine, I guess you can come up with excuses. If OWS was given the things they ask for, they still wouldn't give a shit about the millions starving throughout the world.

OWS and company is no less greedy than Wall Street itself. The only difference is that Wall Street actually has the money for the greed to be seen.

The concept of countries and communities is completely artificial and is just in place to support those in power. If OWS truly cared about the poor and starving everywhere, they would do more than sitting around and waving their fingers.

[Lootifer]

image

You son, need to learn about demographics.

Regardless the sentiment is still meaningless, as simply because there are bigger problems elsewhere doesn't mean you don't have problems. Believe it or not you can protest and highlight issues within your society without being rendered meaningless, rather the opposite. The civil rights mvoement wasn't invalidated because of apartheid and even worse conditions elsewhere, the oush for gay marriage and other rights for their ommunity isn't rendered without meaning because of the intolerance of others. Each country has a duty to its citizens foremost.

Hahahaha ugh. If you want to protect yourself from your own hypocrisy, fine, I guess you can come up with excuses. If OWS was given the things they ask for, they still wouldn't give a shit about the millions starving throughout the world.

OWS and company is no less greedy than Wall Street itself. The only difference is that Wall Street actually has the money for the greed to be seen.

The concept of countries and communities is completely artificial and is just in place to support those in power. If OWS truly cared about the poor and starving everywhere, they would do more than sitting around and waving their fingers.

Playing the devils advocate here (cause I mostly agree with you); what could they do?

[BigBallinStalin]

Sounds rather statist.

When you use that word, is it an implied insult? Like if I say "I'm a statist" I'm just describing a particuar set of ideas I hold, but if you say "You're a statist!" tagged along with that word is also "so you're stupid, and you smell"?

"Statist" is a descriptive term with acidic undertones because I usually apply to people who brainlessly appeal to the state to solve problems in which the state shouldn't be more embedded.

Seeing that they're against the status quo, and that the state is heavily involved in maintaining the status quo, it's amusing that they're appealing to the national government to solve a problem which the national government is perpetuating.

[Aradhus]

Sounds rather statist.

When you use that word, is it an implied insult? Like if I say "I'm a statist" I'm just describing a particuar set of ideas I hold, but if you say "You're a statist!" tagged along with that word is also "so you're stupid, and you smell"?

"Statist" is a descriptive term with acidic undertones because I usually apply to people who brainlessly appeal to the state to solve problems in which the state shouldn't be more embedded.

Seeing that they're against the status quo, and that the state is heavily involved in maintaining the status quo, it's amusing that they're appealing to the national government to solve a problem which the national government is perpetuating.

Shoore, but if government action is causing problem A, government action would be needed to fix problem A. Agree, statist?

[BigBallinStalin]

Sounds rather statist.

When you use that word, is it an implied insult? Like if I say "I'm a statist" I'm just describing a particuar set of ideas I hold, but if you say "You're a statist!" tagged along with that word is also "so you're stupid, and you smell"?

"Statist" is a descriptive term with acidic undertones because I usually apply to people who brainlessly appeal to the state to solve problems in which the state shouldn't be more embedded.

Seeing that they're against the status quo, and that the state is heavily involved in maintaining the status quo, it's amusing that they're appealing to the national government to solve a problem which the national government is perpetuating.

Shoore, but if government action is causing problem A, government action would be needed to fix problem A. Agree, statist?

Haha, that's good, but this is the problem with being brief. The statist to which I refer aren't seeking means to reduce the state's scope of authority. Their demands wouldn't fix the source of the problem; they would just enlarge the state by demanding more government regulation. To me, that's being "statist."

An "anti-statist" goal would be reducing the state's scope of authority, which goes against political and bureaucratic incentives. Merely creating those kinds of changes through the state isn't necessarily being statist, nor can such changes have to be implemented through the state. There's peaceful means like ideas from a book.

So, it depends on the tone of the message.

[Aradhus]

Sounds rather statist.

When you use that word, is it an implied insult? Like if I say "I'm a statist" I'm just describing a particuar set of ideas I hold, but if you say "You're a statist!" tagged along with that word is also "so you're stupid, and you smell"?

"Statist" is a descriptive term with acidic undertones because I usually apply to people who brainlessly appeal to the state to solve problems in which the state shouldn't be more embedded.

Seeing that they're against the status quo, and that the state is heavily involved in maintaining the status quo, it's amusing that they're appealing to the national government to solve a problem which the national government is perpetuating.

Shoore, but if government action is causing problem A, government action would be needed to fix problem A. Agree, statist?

Haha, that's good,

Mommy, BBs is being sarcastic to me again.

[BigBallinStalin]

[AAFitz]

*Why do they talk about "decreased" funding for education... primary and student loan (college) funding??? This may be true for the past year or two... but over the past 20 years funding for both area has increased dramatically. Their facts are simply wrong here.
.

Not in PA, that is for sure. Also, aid has not kept up with rising costs. I wonder where you got your data?

Maybe if the public unions weren't getting such radically large guaranteed pensions and not having to contribute anything (or barely something), costs wouldn't continue rising so drastically.

It would be nice to if unions weren't needed, but history as proved you can't trust some businesses to adequately provide for their workers.


--Andy

Some of the founders of the union-movement in getting unions into businesses realized that having public sector employees form a union would end up being a disaster for the country. Public sector unions get to bribe candidates with their support/votes and then get to directly negotiate what benefits they will receive on the job. That's called a quid pro quo, which is illegal, and public sector unions do it on a daily basis.

So its illegal for groups to give money to bribe candidates with their support/votes? Would corporations donating money to candidates for support/votes not be the exact same thing?

[GreecePwns]

Corporations get to bribe candidates with their support/money/future employment and then get to directly write up bills which benefit them. That's called a quid pro quo, which is illegal, and corporations do it on a daily basis.

It goes both ways, and both should be stopped.

[Night Strike]

Corporations get to bribe candidates with their support/money/future employment and then get to directly write up bills which benefit them. That's called a quid pro quo, which is illegal, and corporations do it on a daily basis.

It goes both ways, and both should be stopped.

Fine by me.

However, it's much worse with unions. In exactly no other industry do you get to put your boss into power and then directly negotiate what you will get paid from him.