I
I Wear Pants
Posts: 16,223
Dec 1, 2011 1:45am
And until the do so unjustly there really isn't a problem with it. Getting rid of a tyrannical dictator for a non-tyrannical military rule= net benefit. I'd be shocked if it didn't move towards more democratic governance after a period of time.majorspark;995996 wrote:Lets see... They are unelected and can rule by decree. I might have something here.
Glory Days
Posts: 7,809
Dec 1, 2011 7:50am
9 rep points for you!majorspark;995780 wrote:My comment was tongue and cheeek.
Reguarding protesting. Grabbing some signs and yelling hey hey ho ho "xyz" has got to go on the street corner does nothing. A protest is a political act. It needs solid leadership, it should have a clear message, it must win popular support, and most importantly it must be able create a funtioning political body to actively change or replace the current government.
The OWS movement has fallen flat on its face. Any protest is going to attract malcontents but the lack of leadership and solid backing allowed the lowest of the low to be the face of the movement. Choosing "occupy" as a term to define the movement was idiotic. It has a negative connotation. It implies force and is the antithesis of liberty.
OWS blames the media. You overcome the media and appeal to the people. You mention the Middle East. They were competing against state run media and internet/cellphone blackouts. But in the end protesting and running amok in the streets did not cut it. It took more.
Tunisia - The protest movement gained enough popular and political support to get change in government
Libya - Popular support was split. They had oil and a legitimate political body took shape and they gained the support of NATO. Even so it still took a bloody civil war.
Egypt - Who knows? Replace a dictator with a military council? The protest movement in Egypt has yet create a powerful political body to bring about a real change in their government.
Bahrain - At this point. Fail
Syria - Quasi civil war. The protesters have only been able to get localized support and some army defections from those areas.
simply bitching doesnt fix anything. you actually need to take action. OWS isnt taking any action to change anything....correction, they seem to be breaking the law quite often making it harder for the working people they claim to represent to do their jobs and run their businesses.
believer
Posts: 8,153
Dec 2, 2011 4:23am
Over 30 years ago Milton Friedman educated Phil Donahue on capitalism:
[video]http://dauckster.posterous.com/a-31-year-old-video-clip-absolutely-worth-you[/video]
[video]http://dauckster.posterous.com/a-31-year-old-video-clip-absolutely-worth-you[/video]
J
jmog
Posts: 6,567
Dec 2, 2011 9:46am
1. Debt ceiling increase was not just a routine obvious yes vote. Whether one agrees with them or not at least some spending cuts resulted from the debt ceiling debate. This was because of the Tea Party movement.I Wear Pants;995653 wrote:Yes. What have they changed besides the letter next to some (a lot) of people's names in Congress? I have not been impacted by the Tea Party in my day to day. Also true of OWS right now I guess though.
2. A house of congress actually passed a Constitutional admendment to force balanced budgets over time. This was due to the Tea Party.
You can agree or disagree with their side but you can't deny that the Tea Party was the major influence in both of those congressional actions.
I
I Wear Pants
Posts: 16,223
Dec 2, 2011 9:13pm
FIFYjmog;997643 wrote:1. Lowered US credit rating.
2. A house of congress actually passed a Constitutional admendment to force balanced budgets over time. This was due to the Tea Party.
You can agree or disagree with their side but you can't deny that the Tea Party was the major influence in both of those congressional actions.
G
gut
Posts: 15,058
Dec 2, 2011 9:18pm
The lower credit rating was hinted at long before the Tea Party "took hostages" and was ultimately the result of unsustainable deficits and an inability of Congress to make any meaningful spending cuts at all.
fish82
Posts: 4,111
Dec 2, 2011 9:28pm
It depends on how you handle it. If you stand up and yell "I have pepper spray," then your actions (more than the item itself) will likely get you in trouble. If you politely and quietly say to the flight attendant, "Oops, I have pepper spray in my carry-on," then they might ask you to produce and turn it over, but other than that, you wouldn't be charged with anything.I Wear Pants;995277 wrote:Bad example since a knife is a weapon and they will just confiscate it.
Allow me to change the scenario to "say I have pepper spray on a plane" I bet I would be charged with it. Much like I would for having a knife on a plane.
I
I Wear Pants
Posts: 16,223
Dec 2, 2011 9:35pm
I thought it was funny first off. Secondly, fuck the credit rating agencies.gut;998514 wrote:The lower credit rating was hinted at long before the Tea Party "took hostages" and was ultimately the result of unsustainable deficits and an inability of Congress to make any meaningful spending cuts at all.
J
jmog
Posts: 6,567
Dec 4, 2011 11:35am
I Wear Pants;998508 wrote:FIFY
You didn't fix crap. It was stated by the credit agency that the rating was lowered because they didn't cut enough spending. If the Tea Party wasn't there then no spending would have been cut at all.
You were just upset that you were proven wrong. The Tea Party HAS had an impact on our government.
Cleveland Buck
Posts: 5,126
Dec 4, 2011 2:51pm
The rating agencies are a joke. We are AA+ as though it is likely we could ever hope to pay back our creditors.
I
I Wear Pants
Posts: 16,223
Dec 7, 2011 11:28pm
Didn't read the post above yours I see.jmog;1000404 wrote:You didn't fix crap. It was stated by the credit agency that the rating was lowered because they didn't cut enough spending. If the Tea Party wasn't there then no spending would have been cut at all.
You were just upset that you were proven wrong. The Tea Party HAS had an impact on our government.
Glory Days
Posts: 7,809
Dec 8, 2011 4:34pm
Clearly this is a peaceful protest about Wall Street...
[video=youtube;hhPdH3wE0_Y][/video]
[video=youtube;hhPdH3wE0_Y][/video]
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
Dec 9, 2011 8:33am
But, but, but... they were pepper sprayed!Glory Days;1007548 wrote:Clearly this is a peaceful protest about Wall Street...
[video=youtube;hhPdH3wE0_Y][/video]
fish82
Posts: 4,111
Dec 9, 2011 8:46am
Well well....what have we here? Loves me some context. 
Shoulda given the little bastards some voltage...that woulda scattered 'em.
Shoulda given the little bastards some voltage...that woulda scattered 'em.
B
Bigdogg
Posts: 1,429
Dec 9, 2011 9:17am
You talk pretty tough, but if shit really did happen around you, you be the first one hiding under a table.fish82;1008720 wrote:Well well....what have we here? Loves me some context.
Shoulda given the little bastards some voltage...that woulda scattered 'em.
fish82
Posts: 4,111
Dec 9, 2011 11:00am
LOL...I'm in too good a mood to fuck with you today, Sparky. Why don't you go physically threaten someone? That should make you feel all better.Bigdogg;1008755 wrote:You talk pretty tough, but if **** really did happen around you, you be the first one hiding under a table.
BGFalcons82
Posts: 2,173
Dec 10, 2011 12:19pm
This article does a nice job of surmising a capitalist's viewpoint to the OWS crowd - http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100119741/memo-to-the-occupy-protesters-here-are-ten-things-we-evil-capitalists-really-think/
Some highlights:
Some highlights:
Free-marketeers resent the bank bailouts. This might seem obvious: we are, after all, opposed to state subsidies and nationalisations. Yet it often surprises commentators, who mistake our support for open competition and free trade for a belief in plutocracy. There is a world of difference between being pro-market and being pro-business. Sometimes, the two positions happen to coincide; often they don’t.
If you want the rich to pay more, create a flatter and simpler tax system... Mainly, though, it is a question of bringing the tax rate down to a level where evasion becomes pointless. As Art Laffer keeps telling anyone who’ll listen, it works every time. Between 1980 and 2007, the US cut taxes at all income levels. Result? The top one per cent went from paying 19.5 per cent of all taxes to 40 per cent.
I added the bolding for emphasis.Capitalism, with all its imperfections, is the fairest scheme yet tried. In a system based on property rights and free contract, people succeed by providing an honest service to others. Bill Gates became rich by enriching hundreds of millions of us: I am typing these words using one of his programmes. He gained from the exchange (adding fractionally to his net worth), and so did I (adding to my convenience). In a state-run system, by contrast, third parties get to hand out the goodies.
I
I Wear Pants
Posts: 16,223
Dec 10, 2011 1:32pm
Oh my god! Protesters were sitting on the ground making it so that the police were trapped, trapped I say! They cannot step over the protesters as surely those violent bastards would harm them....Glory Days;1007548 wrote:Clearly this is a peaceful protest about Wall Street...
[video=youtube;hhPdH3wE0_Y][/video]
Oh wait, yes they could step over the protesters like the pepper spray man did and nothing happened because these people were peaceful.
And the police calling themselves "peace officers" is hilarious.
I
I Wear Pants
Posts: 16,223
Dec 10, 2011 1:36pm
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204630904577056490023451980.html?KEYWORDS=cloud+computingBGFalcons82;1009912 wrote:This article does a nice job of surmising a capitalist's viewpoint to the OWS crowd - http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100119741/memo-to-the-occupy-protesters-here-are-ten-things-we-evil-capitalists-really-think/
Some highlights:
I added the bolding for emphasis.
There are alternative viewpoints to everything.
And again, OWS isn't really an anti-free market movement but an anti-unrestricted free market movement and anti-greed movement.
Cleveland Buck
Posts: 5,126
Dec 10, 2011 2:23pm
There is no such thing as an "unrestricted free market". The free market restricts itself better than any government could. Of course, any people that think they have seen a free market in their lifetimes are just plain ignorant to the meaning of the term.
Subsidies, bailouts, socialized mortgage lending, socialized medicine, wage controls, price fixing of interest rates, endless regulations, and floods of counterfeit money and credit are the antithesis of the free market. They should be protesting unrestricted government, because that is what we have and have had for 100 years.
Subsidies, bailouts, socialized mortgage lending, socialized medicine, wage controls, price fixing of interest rates, endless regulations, and floods of counterfeit money and credit are the antithesis of the free market. They should be protesting unrestricted government, because that is what we have and have had for 100 years.
I
I Wear Pants
Posts: 16,223
Dec 10, 2011 2:47pm
A perfect free market could never work because the theoretical free market is based upon people making rational decisions. Which doesn't fucking happen.Cleveland Buck;1010029 wrote:There is no such thing as an "unrestricted free market". The free market restricts itself better than any government could. Of course, any people that think they have seen a free market in their lifetimes are just plain ignorant to the meaning of the term.
Subsidies, bailouts, socialized mortgage lending, socialized medicine, wage controls, price fixing of interest rates, endless regulations, and floods of counterfeit money and credit are the antithesis of the free market. They should be protesting unrestricted government, because that is what we have and have had for 100 years.
I
I Wear Pants
Posts: 16,223
Dec 10, 2011 2:49pm
They are protesting the bail outs and shit? How do you guys miss all that? OWS is not "yay government!".
Subsidies and bailouts are definitely bad as are promoting bad loans. At the same time not regulating banks and allowing them to pull the shit they have in the past decade is also bad. Why do people always think you have to be either pro-gubmint or pro-no regulations fucking ever? There is a damned middle ground.
Subsidies and bailouts are definitely bad as are promoting bad loans. At the same time not regulating banks and allowing them to pull the shit they have in the past decade is also bad. Why do people always think you have to be either pro-gubmint or pro-no regulations fucking ever? There is a damned middle ground.
G
gut
Posts: 15,058
Dec 10, 2011 4:08pm
This clueless morons think they are in China protesting govt oppression or something. They are LUCKY this isn't China or would have gotten a lot worse than hosed down with a condiment.Glory Days;1007548 wrote:Clearly this is a peaceful protest about Wall Street...
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Dec 10, 2011 4:25pm
After watching this video, I'm 100% convinced these police acted in the correct way. These students need to read the laws that are on the books and stopping pretending they are above them.Glory Days;1007548 wrote:Clearly this is a peaceful protest about Wall Street...
[video=youtube;hhPdH3wE0_Y][/video]
Glory Days
Posts: 7,809
Dec 10, 2011 4:56pm
oh my god, the protestors simply just couldnt move out of the way and be reasonable people! please tell me the purpose of them surrounding the police like that?I Wear Pants;1009965 wrote:Oh my god! Protesters were sitting on the ground making it so that the police were trapped, trapped I say! They cannot step over the protesters as surely those violent bastards would harm them....
Oh wait, yes they could step over the protesters like the pepper spray man did and nothing happened because these people were peaceful.
And the police calling themselves "peace officers" is hilarious.
and you forgot about the people the police arrested. remember, you wanted arrests made, they did. its not as easy to step over people when you are cuffed and off balance a little. thats all you need, the cops trying to lift some handcuffed student over the protestors and getting hurt, then you would have more bullshit.
and peace officer isnt just what police call themselves, its the legal defintion (per the ORC) that defines all law enforcement officers such as sheriff and police etc.