This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Occupy Wall Street

1171820222333

Comments

  • I'm actually impressed that the OWS movement has not died yet. There's a lot of confusion, counter-productivity, and mixed messages, but the passion and commitment are there. I think the only thing lacking is some consistent, charismatic leadership.
    Hungry Joe, you know now what you must do.

  • edited November 2011
    I'm actually impressed that the OWS movement has not died yet. There's a lot of confusion, counter-productivity, and mixed messages, but the passion and commitment are there. I think the only thing lacking is some consistent, charismatic leadership.
    Hungry Joe, you know now what you must do.

    Hmmmm . . . 90% tax brackets imposed at the point of a Kalashnikov . . . Viva le revolucion!

    I'd have to re-grow my beard, start wearing olive drab BDUs, and write a messianic autobiography designed to promote a cult of personality. It could work.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • I'd have to re-grow my beard, start wearing olive drab BDUs, and write a messianic autobiography designed to promote a cult of personality. It could work.
    ¡El Padrino José, libertador de los EEUU! ¡Viva José el Hambriento! ¡Viva la revolución!

  • I'm cross-posting this in two threads because I can.



    This video illustrates everything we are about. There is the message of the video itself, contrasting the music with the footage to make a statement about the police brutality and the occupy movement. But on the higher level, it shows how our generation combines, remixes, and redistributes copyrighted materials into new works of art as our primary method of artistic expression. Our political speech itself takes the form of breaking copyright law.

    The battle against the 1% as well as the battle against copyright are all part of the same thing. Our Internet generation functions as per the Internet, in a distributed and cooperative structure. The fundamental battle that is occurring is the old generation fighting to maintain its centralized hierarchical control structures in the face of our generations' distributed culture.

    We can't lose if we are patient. The old people will eventually all die. We just have to fight hard enough to prevent the world from burning until our day arrives. But at that time, my greatest hope is that not only will we solve the problems of our generation, but that we will be the first to recognize, respect, and also resolve the problems of the next generation so that they do not have to wait until we die. Thus breaking the cycle of human history that has repeated for millenia.
  • edited November 2011
    We can't lose if we are patient. The old people will eventually all die
    Funny enough....
    Among respondents who do not use a home telephone (28% of registered voters), and who were contacted by SurveyUSA on their cell phone or other electronic device, Obama leads [Romney] by 22 points.
    It isn't perfect, but there is correlation of younger people being more likely to be cellphone exclusive and the poll results could be emblematic of the younger generation being far more left leaning.
    Post edited by Purebloodgaijin on
  • There is the message of the video itself, contrasting the music with the footage to make a statement about the police brutality and the occupy movement.
    Why is the "don't taze me bro" video funny to people, but this is brutality to them?
  • There is the message of the video itself, contrasting the music with the footage to make a statement about the police brutality and the occupy movement.
    Why is the "don't taze me bro" video funny to people, but this is brutality to them?
    Because the 'don't taze me bro' kid was doing something entirely different and screaming lunatic questions at a candidate who was trying to give a speech.

  • edited November 2011
    There is the message of the video itself, contrasting the music with the footage to make a statement about the police brutality and the occupy movement.
    Why is the "don't taze me bro" video funny to people, but this is brutality to them?
    Because the 'don't taze me bro' kid was doing something entirely different and screaming lunatic questions at a candidate who was trying to give a speech.

    So he deserved to get tazed multiple times while several officers were already holding him down? That is ok but if a protester jumps a police barricade and they are arrested it's brutality?
    Post edited by highdefinition on
  • There is the message of the video itself, contrasting the music with the footage to make a statement about the police brutality and the occupy movement.
    Why is the "don't taze me bro" video funny to people, but this is brutality to them?
    Because the 'don't taze me bro' kid was doing something entirely different and screaming lunatic questions at a candidate who was trying to give a speech.

    So he deserved to get tazed multiple times while several officers were already holding him down? That is ok but if a protester jumps a police barricade and they are arrested it's brutality?
    He didn't need to be tazed, but he did need to be forcibly removed. The tazing was police brutality. It was also funny.
  • edited November 2011
    As usual, I can't help but wonder at Steve's tone of apologia re the extremely rich. As has been pointed out, Gates, Zuckerberg, et al. are hardly Horatio Alger/Thomas Edison bootstrap fellows. Reading between the lines of Steve's defense of these people, one gets the distinct impression that he implicitly believes that core myth that causes red state types to vote against their own self interest - that one day, maybe he will be in the top 1%. He even speculated a couple of pages back that he thinks he's nearly there now.

    I wish you well Steve, but you'll never get there. You'll never personally benefit from the bizarre republican tax schemes designed to enrich the already-too-rich. It's not a personal failing. None of us here are ever going to be there.
    Joe, I was actually excited to see you post in here, thought you might be feeling a bit better. Then you had to go and post about things you think I'm saying rather than what I am saying.

    I'm not sure why you think offering up examples of non-inherited wealth among the world's wealthiest people counts as an apologia but, I'm not a lawyer. If someone says, "Everyone who is rich inherited their wealth" and I offer up names of rich people who did not inherit their wealth I am not apologizing for anything. What I am doing is pointing out that their original statement is wrong. Nothing more, nothing less.

    There is a problem in this thread where the term "one percenter" and "worlds richest/Forbes list" are being used interchagebly. While the members of the Forbes list are one percenters (at least the American ones) the one percenters are not all members of the Forbes list. Please understand this people because when you confuse these two terms you come off sounding like a dumb ass.

    On a personal level I am in the top 5% of income earners (thank you Irene, mandatory overtime and 12 hour days) at least for this year. Next year I'll still be somewhere in the top 10%. I don't expect to ever make it into the top 1%. Not because it's not possible but because I am comfortable at my current income level and have no desire to work harder for more than I currently have.

    As some of you may recall I used to be knee deep into a lot of shady Internet money making crap. For a while I was making thousands of dollars extra a month but, at the end of the day, it wasn't worth the time and energy required to maintain that income stream. Do you have any idea how much work is involved going from a nobody to an influential social media personality? A lot of money was made by the top diggers on Digg a few years back and I enjoyed some of that money but, it wasn't worth the time investment.

    I don't apologize for the wealthy.

    With all that said what does scare me is that even though I am in the top 5% of income earners on a total dollar basis I am closer to the bottom 1% than the top 1%. That is crazy. It's like climbing a flight of one hundred stairs and the first 70 or so stairs are nicely laid out yet, once you get up higher the risers start to grow taller and taller until you hit a riser that is taller than all of the stairs you have already climbed!

    I don't begrudge a rich man his money but I am bothered by rich folks who do not use their wealth to make the world a better place. Philanthropy should be the norm not the exception. I want to see more Bill Gates and less Steve Jobs.

    As for the tax code, I agree. The code is fucked up and I certainly do not agree with the weird idea of privatizing profits while socializing losses that we saw on steroids with TARP. That's not capitalism.

    So yeah, I'm not likely to enter the 1% and I don't defend the rich. Rather than try and read between the lines just read what I have written. Oh yeah, stop confusing 1% with super rich.
    Post edited by HMTKSteve on
  • The tazing was police brutality.
    No, it really wasn't. Beating him unconscious with clubs is police brutality.

    Also, the "Don't Taze Me Bro" guy was given ample opportunity to comply. He elected not to. Thus, he was tazed.
  • Just because something is horrible or bad doesn't mean it can't also be funny.
  • RymRym
    edited November 2011
    Just because something is horrible or bad doesn't mean it can't also be funny.
    Just as graffiti or vandalism can sometimes be awesome, it's still (rightly) a criminal offense. It's a situation where the judge will heartily laugh and openly applaud you for your action while simultaneously fining you the maximum permissible amount by law and ordering you to undo the damage.
    Post edited by Rym on
  • He didn't need to be tazed, but he did need to be forcibly removed. The tazing was police brutality. It was also funny.
    Yeah, the actual act was horrendous, but the statement and the tone of voice used in "Don't taze me, bro" was funny and therefore made the whole thing funny. It's a little like how the Three Stooges are funny. The things that Moe does to Curly would not be funny at all in a different context.

    As some of you may recall I used to be knee deep into a lot of shady Internet money making crap. For a while I was making thousands of dollars extra a month but, at the end of the day, it wasn't worth the time and energy required to maintain that income stream. Do you have any idea how much work is involved going from a nobody to an influential social media personality?
    Wait . . . are you claiming to be an "influential social media personality"?
    If someone says, "Everyone who is rich inherited their wealth" and I offer up names of rich people who did not inherit their wealth I am not apologizing for anything. What I am doing is pointing out that their original statement is wrong. Nothing more, nothing less.
    Okay, nothing personal here, but I'm reasonably certain that if you look back on what was actually said in this thread, no one said, "Everyone who is rich inherited their wealth", and your idea that you were offering counter-examples of wealthy people who did not inherit their wealth is a bit of a stretch, especially when it's easily shown that your counter-examples really didn't start from nothing, or didn't even start from being just moderately wealthy. Your counter-examples, in fact, are a bit like the person who claimed to have won the Boston Marathon, but was found later to have not started running the race until the last couple of miles or so. When you start out with a tremendous advantage, like Gates, it's not too astonishing when you do well for yourself.

    I don't apologize for the wealthy.
    This also is nothing personal, but the history of your comments tells another story. You have more often than not taken the side of the Big Oil companies, the insurance companies, the Bush Administration, mortgage companies and big banks, etc. Anyone who cares to search your comments can see that for themselves.

    If you've somehow changed your mind, that's fine, but I don't see it. What have you been saying, especially in the last few pages of this thread, if not apologizing and defending the 1%? From the comment you made that the poor in America are better off than the poor in Africa until right now, your comments place you pretty steadfastly in the "1% apologists" camp that one would likely hear from commentators of FOX or some such thing.

  • My comments and opinions have changed since my sabbatical on here. You can go back years if you want to but I'm not the same person from back then. Look to the last few months.

    Yes, I used to be a mover and shaker in the social media world. Circa four years ago. I still have the contacts but I don't move in those circles anymore. It got too shady, even for me.

    How much of an advantage did Gates have and how much is he worth now? How many other people had the same amount of advantage Gates had and ended up where he did? That advantage may have opened some doors but that's all it did, open some doors. It was up to Gates to act once the door was opened.

    What about Chris Gardner? Did he come from a privileged background or did he earn his way to the top?

    Yes there are successful people who started with a very secure foundation but there are also successful people who started with a foundation built of sand. Those are the folks I truly respect but, when I bring up them I hear, 'they're not on the Forbes list' or 'they're not American so they don't count.' How can you not respect J.K Rowling as a rags to riches story? Who cares if she is not American how much of her wealth came from having her books and movies available for sale in the USA?

    Don't confuse apologies for respect. I respect those who have earned their way to the top I don't apologize for their success.

    Yes, the poor in America are better off than the poor in Africa. That's a fact. Unless you are disputing that fact?

    FOX? I don't even have TV service, nothing over the air and I don't pay for cable TV.
  • edited November 2011

    Yes, I used to be a mover and shaker in the social media world.
    ??????
    I'd have to re-grow my beard, start wearing olive drab BDUs, and write a messianic autobiography designed to promote a cult of personality. It could work.
    ¡El Padrino José, libertador de los EEUU! ¡Viva José el Hambriento! ¡Viva la revolución!

    LOL. Don't encourage me too much. If I ever did acquire sufficient political power, I'm pretty sure I'd make Robespierre look like a poseur.

    However, this Saturday, I think I'll go down to OWS Baltimore, put on my best "Antonio Banderas in Evita" impersonation and see how much power is up for grabs . . .

    I might need some Spanish lessons from you. I can do Banderas speaking English, but my Spanish needs work.

    Actually, I do a way better Walken than Banderas. I wonder if I should try that instead.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • That's the thing, even though the Occupy movement has had it's tents trampled, they can't stop a significant amount of people from showing up day to day. Can you imagine if even more people decide that, while they can't protest for weeks on end, they can take one day a week and show up to support it? Every day and night would be an even larger non-stop protest.

    There's a lot of energy and anger in the Occupy movement, and what they really need now is a solid message and some leadership to turn the beast towards some specific goals.
  • edited November 2011

    As some of you may recall I used to be knee deep into a lot of shady Internet money making crap. For a while I was making thousands of dollars extra a month
    Steve, please don't think I'm picking on you. I'm not. I'm dead serious when I say: Thousands? Really and for true? How many thousands? Note - not said in sarcasm - said more in avarice and greed. I never thought any of those internet money things worked.

    What were you doing? . . . and how do you start? I could use some extra thousands a month, and I can be shadier than Shady vonShadow MacShadenstein if I put my mind to it.

    Is everyone doing this? Why hasn't anyone told me about this sooner?
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • Tell me too. I probably have fewer scruples than Joe.
  • Tell me too. I probably have fewer scruples than Joe.
    You wish. My level of scruples is inversely proportional to my level of emotional baggage, so I'm actually into the negative scruple range. I actually have an overdraft on my scruple account. I owe scruples.

  • Tell me too. I probably have fewer scruples than Joe.
    You wish. My level of scruples is inversely proportional to my level of emotional baggage, so I'm actually into the negative scruple range. I actually have an overdraft on my scruple account. I owe scruples.

    If you want to make money and have no scruples, sell fake medicine and shit.
  • edited November 2011
    Steve was secretly trafficking drugs on SilkRoad.
    Tell me too. I probably have fewer scruples than Joe.
    You wish. My level of scruples is inversely proportional to my level of emotional baggage, so I'm actually into the negative scruple range. I actually have an overdraft on my scruple account. I owe scruples.

    If you want to make money and have no scruples, sell fake medicine and shit.
    Better yet, sell real medicine to people who don't need it. Ask Pfizer, Merck, GSK, AstraZeneca, Rabaxi, Bayer, and Abbott: That's where the real money is at. Dolla dolla bill, y'all.
    Post edited by WindUpBird on
  • Money ain't as easy to get these days, most advertisers wised up.

    There was an eBay program shoemoney set up a few years back. In the beginning I was making tons of money with it but after the system changed hands a few times the commissions went lower and lower.

    There was an exploit in the system. All a person had to do was visit a webpage containing your affiliate code and any eBay purchases counted as yours. A few of us figured this out earlier and would use hidden frames on pages to display the adv code or otherwise spread it on web forums.

    Long story short, we made huge commissions with very little work.

    The attempt also worked by creating content kids would view on the same PC their parents used. 5 years ago everyone used the same account so little Johnny would trigger my eBay or amazon link and when mom and dad shopped later I would get the commission.
  • On the Parker-McCloundy Scale of Shadiness, where a 10 is successfully selling the Brooklyn Bridge to tourists multiple times, that's like a 1.2.
  • So at what point are these things going to be considered riots?
  • I didn't know there was such a thing as Criminal Anarchy. I mean, it makes sense, but I just never considered it.
  • Well I'm well armed for the coming end times, are you guys ready? :P
  • Have I mentioned that I hate ignorant hippies?

    I don't mind the smart and educated ones. Just the ignorant ones. I'm getting really tired of seeing shit like "All the cops are just workers for the one percent, and they don't even realize they're being exploited." (cite)

    Oh, that's all they are? Okay then, don't bother calling them when someone breaks into your house and steals your shit. Don't bother reporting that rape, or that assault, or that vandalism that just happened. COPS ARE DOING THEIR JOB. Stop giving them shit for it. Stick to the ones who are abusing their power and leave the rest of them alone!
Sign In or Register to comment.