Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Occupy ____________

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 12>
Author
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 3:46pm
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:


The only way to get rid of the "1%" 


As has been demonstrated, this is not the goal of the majority, nor the plurality. 





"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 3:53pm
So, tell me, how is **edited**ing about 1% owning 99%, and wanting the wealth spread (via 'livable wages', erase of consumer debt, etc etc), NOT trying to get rid of the 1%?



Edited by Linus - 11 October 2011 at 4:00pm

Back to Top
Gatyr View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Strike 1 - Begging for strikes

Joined: 06 July 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Status: Offline
Points: 10299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gatyr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 3:56pm
Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:


The only way to get rid of the "1%" 

As has been demonstrated, this is not the goal of the majority, nor the plurality. 

Word. Even the people ("the people" here indicating a sizable group of some political significance) agitating against capitalism are not advocating a systematic overhaul of the U.S. economic institutions.
Back to Top
oldpbnoob View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not old, Not noob. May be Dave's grandma

Joined: 04 February 2008
Location: Yankee Stadium
Status: Offline
Points: 5676
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldpbnoob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 3:57pm
Originally posted by Gatyr Gatyr wrote:

Originally posted by oldpbnoob oldpbnoob wrote:

I think it also destroys competition. As smaller companies can't compete they go out of business. It also makes it difficult for small companies to survive if they cannot meet the national demands of being able to supply the mega stores. Another thing that goes out of the window is quality. Cheap prices + lower qualtiy = opening the door for garbage from China. People want more for less, they don't care if it breaks in 1/4 of the time. It's part of the hypocrisy of the America. People want to complain about low wages, but they patronize stores the underpay their employees in order to satisfy their demand for cheap crap. If the occupy ______er's want to talk about greed, maybe they should look at the invidividuals whose greed to have more for less.

I understand the point you are driving at, but you are sounding a lot like the discontented occupiers.

Besides, you're basically describing the capitalist progression. Don't like it? Support your local socialist movement

(:
So monopoly is the end result of capitalism?
"When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter.
Back to Top
Gatyr View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Strike 1 - Begging for strikes

Joined: 06 July 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Status: Offline
Points: 10299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gatyr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:00pm
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

No, it quite is their goal, and I don't get how you can state otherwise.

They don't think 1% should have the majority of wealth. If you spread the wealth, guess what? There is no longer a 1%, is there?

So, the problem isn't that there is a class of people with more wealth than others; it's the disparity between the classes and the means by which that wealth is accumulated. An inordinate amount of wealth in the hands of a few is not conducive to democracy as we would like to practice it in this country because a concentration of wealth is almost always followed by a concentration of power. When the concentration of power is followed by the exercise of power that increases the concentration of wealth, and a cycle is born, there is a fundamental problem within that democratic state.
Originally posted by oldpbnoob oldpbnoob wrote:

So monopoly is the end result of capitalism?

Not necessarily, but it is certainly an acceptable result in a purely free-market capitalist economy, don't you think?


Edited by Gatyr - 11 October 2011 at 4:04pm
Back to Top
Darur View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Stare directly into my avatar...

Joined: 03 May 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9174
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Darur Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:00pm
Sounds like college kids doing what college kids do.

And I miss Austin
Real Men play Tuba

PH33R TEH 1337 Dwarf!
DONT CLICK ME!!1
Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:01pm
Originally posted by Gatyr Gatyr wrote:


Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

No, it quite is their goal, and I don't get how you can state otherwise.

They don't think 1% should have the majority of wealth. If you spread the wealth, guess what? There is no longer a 1%, is there?
So, the problem isn't that there is a class of people with more wealth than others; it's the disparity between the classes and the means by which that wealth is accumulated.
They're trying to get rid of the idea of the "1% owning everything", are they not?

Edited by Linus - 11 October 2011 at 4:02pm

Back to Top
choopie911 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Commie Canuck

Joined: 01 June 2003
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 30745
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote choopie911 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:04pm
While they don't like the idea of the 1%, they're trying to lessen the gap between the 1% and the 99%.   Seriously, why is the automatic idiot reaction to be "OMG COMMUNIZM@I#@H!!!!"

It's just stupid, and you look stupid when you claim that is what people want. I'd like to think you're smarter than that Linus.
Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:05pm
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

They're trying to get rid of the idea of the "1% owning everything", are they not?

Some, not all. The numbers have been posted in this thread. 

It's the same as stating that the goal of the Tea Party was to "get rid of Obama." 

Change =! rid. 
"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:06pm
Originally posted by oldpbnoob oldpbnoob wrote:


So monopoly is the end result of capitalism?

It's the end-goal.

Hardly achievable, but an end-goal none-the-less. 


"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
Gatyr View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Strike 1 - Begging for strikes

Joined: 06 July 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Status: Offline
Points: 10299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gatyr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:08pm
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

They're trying to get rid of the idea of the "1% owning everything", are they not?

I just edited my previous post to make things more clear about what I perceive the problem to be, so I'll refer you to that.

But diminishing the income and wealth disparity between the top 1% and the bottom 80% does not necessarily involve stopping the top 1% of all of their wealth in order to distribute amongst everyone else. Going from having 80% of the wealth to having, say, 40% of the wealth (which is an example, not an actual goal, just so we're clear) is not seizing and distributing all of their wealth so that there is no more top 1%.
Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:08pm
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

So, tell me, how is **edited**ing about 1% owning 99%, and wanting the wealth spread (via 'livable wages', erase of consumer debt, etc etc), NOT trying to get rid of the 1%?

You're going to have to explain your point in English please. 
"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
rednekk98 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Dead man...

Joined: 02 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8925
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rednekk98 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:09pm
The protestors seem largely inarticulate and/or ignorant. I do agree that corporations are able to throw their capital around and achieve disporportionate influence in Gov't. The problem is that you really can't label the protestors political and economic objectives because they haven't even figured it out yet. I have a problem with the removal or a fee/tax for stock trades which was and should be a few cents for ever share but would net a lot of revenue because of the sheer trading volume, and might even slow down the occasional rampant and senseless  fluctuations of the market due to everyone using the same or similar programs to buy and sell stocks, since they have a tendency to snowball. The big issues continue to be our national debt, the continuation of the Bush tax cuts, which were designed to be temporary but have proven politically impossible to get rid of, war and other spending, and the credit crisis and bubble economy that has stagnated hiring and growth. I also have a problem with the Gov't continuing to extend unemployment benefits since the job market is so abysmal, and not give people more time to start repayment on student loans when recent grads are likely underemployed or unemployed. It's politicians caring for their current voter base (boomers and the soon-to-retire) at the expense of the future (the millenial generation who's going to have to pick up the tab). I'd like to be able to get a decent job that will enable me to repay my modest student loans rather than working jobs that I could do with a GED that pay crap. Our generation was brought up being told that a college education was essential due to deindustrialization, at the same time college costs were skyrocketing and the job market was getting crappier. On an unrelated note, I can't afford groceries until Friday and spent the better part of the morning attempting to kill a pheasant that entered my yard while I was waiting for a call for work.
Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:13pm
Originally posted by rednekk98 rednekk98 wrote:

The protestors seem largely inarticulate and/or ignorant.

Also poorly dressed, if I may add another honest critique. 


"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:29pm
Originally posted by Gatyr Gatyr wrote:

But diminishing the income and wealth disparity between the top 1% and the bottom 80% does not necessarily involve stopping the top 1% of all of their wealth in order to distribute amongst everyone else. Going from having 80% of the wealth to having, say, 40% of the wealth (which is an example, not an actual goal, just so we're clear) is not seizing and distributing all of their wealth so that there is no more top 1%.


But there will always be a top 1%. If, say, they go from 80% to 40%, the argument would than be "1% of the country owns 40% of the wealth!!!"


Granted, I'm one of the first to say that just because something will always exist doesn't mean we should just quite, but still.



Let's be honest here. The median income in the US is what, $45,000? You can still live rather comfortable off of that type of income. I don't care if Warren Buffet has billions of dollars, as it has no bearing on my day to day life if he made another 10% that month or not. The only way it would have any influence on me is if goes directly in to or from, my pocket.



Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

Change =! rid. 
Semantics. Changing your government is getting rid of how it currently is. Changing your clothes is getting rid of what you were wearing.

Edited by Linus - 11 October 2011 at 4:29pm

Back to Top
oldpbnoob View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not old, Not noob. May be Dave's grandma

Joined: 04 February 2008
Location: Yankee Stadium
Status: Offline
Points: 5676
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldpbnoob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:42pm
Originally posted by Gatyr Gatyr wrote:

Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

[QUOTE=oldpbnoob]So monopoly is the end result of capitalism?

Not necessarily, but it is certainly an acceptable result in a purely free-market capitalist economy, don't you think?
Possible, but not acceptable IMO.
"When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter.
Back to Top
rednekk98 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Dead man...

Joined: 02 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8925
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rednekk98 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:44pm
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

Originally posted by Gatyr Gatyr wrote:

But diminishing the income and wealth disparity between the top 1% and the bottom 80% does not necessarily involve stopping the top 1% of all of their wealth in order to distribute amongst everyone else. Going from having 80% of the wealth to having, say, 40% of the wealth (which is an example, not an actual goal, just so we're clear) is not seizing and distributing all of their wealth so that there is no more top 1%.






Let's be honest here. The median income in the US is what, $45,000? You can still live rather comfortable off of that type of income. I don't care if Warren Buffet has billions of dollars, as it has no bearing on my day to day life if he made another 10% that month or not. The only way it would have any influence on me is if goes directly in to or from, my pocket. This is the crux of it. However, the traders we are talking about are getting rich from gambling with things like your mortgage, student loans, and 401k and paying themselves huge bonuses(considerably higher than other industrialized capitalist countries) regardless of how good of a job they do, which is what seems to be inflaming the mob. Gov't should place limits on exactly how reckless/stupid traders can be with other people's money, and even modest regulation can go a long way towards this end. Corporations use their influence on both sides of the aisle to keep this from happening. Gov't gives incentives to allow your 401k to be played with in the market by way of hefty tax penalties for taking it out. Student loans are about the only thing that won't go away if you file for bankruptcy protection.



Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

Change =! rid. 
Semantics. Changing your government is getting rid of how it currently is. Changing your clothes is getting rid of what you were wearing.
Back to Top
Reb Cpl View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
2010 Worst Luck award winner

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 14004
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Reb Cpl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:48pm
I think the whole thing is misdirected.
Wall St? really? Why not take it to where it all began, with the government's handing out of a butt-ton of money without any strings that dictate that it goes back into the System rather than into the coffers of the banks.

If they want to make noise, I think they're pointed in the wrong direction.


Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:48pm
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

But there will always be a top 1%. If, say, they go from 80% to 40%, the argument would than be "1% of the country owns 40% of the wealth!!!"

Statistics based on research show otherwise:
 
 
Statistics show there is a threshold people would be satisfied with. To say there will be perpetual dissatisfaction is something you'll need to back up.
 
Quote The median income in the US is what, $45,000? You can still live rather comfortable off of that type of income.
 
Show your work, please.

Quote Semantics.
 
Words are important.
 
Quote Changing your government is getting rid of how it currently is.
 
Incorrect. Change =! rid. In this situation, people want a deviation, or more regulation, from current operations. According to the numbers provided, they don't want to get rid of capitalism. Some do, most don't.
 
Quote Changing your clothes is getting rid of what you were wearing.
 
The clothes are still there, however. Just not on you. And you still have on clothes.
"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 October 2011 at 4:50pm
Originally posted by Reb Cpl Reb Cpl wrote:

Why not take it to where it all began, with the government's handing out of a butt-ton of money without any strings that dictate that it goes back into the System rather than into the coffers of the banks.

If they want to make noise, I think they're pointed in the wrong direction.
 
This is an extraordinarily good point.
 
"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.248 seconds.