On September 26 2011 21:19 Sea_Food wrote: Can someone who knows about this tell me how is this even possible?
I tought that in USA there is democracy and if 51% of people think that A should happen, A will happen. 51% can get anyone president and majority in congress. Now there are people in the street complaining that the top 1% of the population are too greedy and corrupted and the bottom 99% are having hard time. Clearly the top 1% cant vote themselfs the leaders, so almost the majority of the ones having hard time must want that they have hard time because they are voting for politics that let it continue. Dosnt make sence to me, someone explain please.
The top 1% vote themselves in by controlling the mainstream media and controlling which candidates get the money. If you and I are both running for president, and the top 1% want me in, all they have to do is give me $100 million and I can get my smiling face anywhere I want it in a day. If they don't like what you have to say, you can still run for president, but you won't get very far. And anything you do will be criticized and trashed by the media because the commercials pay for the tv and the commercials are bought by top 1% -- major corporations.
Ever seen V for Vendetta? Did you read 1984? Basically these stories are a more extreme version of what already exists. Most United States citizens are too afraid to change anything, and the cops are typically the stupidest of the populace due to the job requirements being some of the lowest out there. US cops are basically grown up kids who got bullied or abused so much that they value power over compassion. And when they work as a cop they can kill anyone holding a gun without much justice being brought on them.
There a public libaries in america with computers for people without them right? Go find a candidate that you like from the internet if mainstream media wont show them. If things really are as bad as people say there are, shouldnt the americans put a little effort and tougth on what they vote instead of just turning on their TV and deciding from the first 2 they see there. Clearly its less effort than holding a protest.
On September 26 2011 21:19 Sea_Food wrote: Can someone who knows about this tell me how is this even possible?
I tought that in USA there is democracy and if 51% of people think that A should happen, A will happen. 51% can get anyone president and majority in congress. Now there are people in the street complaining that the top 1% of the population are too greedy and corrupted and the bottom 99% are having hard time. Clearly the top 1% cant vote themselfs the leaders, so almost the majority of the ones having hard time must want that they have hard time because they are voting for politics that let it continue. Dosnt make sence to me, someone explain please.
The top 1% vote themselves in by controlling the mainstream media and controlling which candidates get the money. If you and I are both running for president, and the top 1% want me in, all they have to do is give me $100 million and I can get my smiling face anywhere I want it in a day. If they don't like what you have to say, you can still run for president, but you won't get very far. And anything you do will be criticized and trashed by the media because the commercials pay for the tv and the commercials are bought by top 1% -- major corporations.
Ever seen V for Vendetta? Did you read 1984? Basically these stories are a more extreme version of what already exists. Most United States citizens are too afraid to change anything, and the cops are typically the stupidest of the populace due to the job requirements being some of the lowest out there. US cops are basically grown up kids who got bullied or abused so much that they value power over compassion. And when they work as a cop they can kill anyone holding a gun without much justice being brought on them.
There a public libaries in america with computers for people without them right? Go find a candidate that you like from the internet if mainstream media wont show them. If things really are as bad as people say there are, shouldnt the americans put a little effort and tougth on what they vote instead of just turning on their TV and deciding from the first 2 they see there. Clearly its less effort than holding a protest.
Sadly, the majority (of most countries, so don't try to take a swipe at Americans =\) won't do that. But that's not the point. The point is that the institution makes it so that any change is grudging and reinforces the status quo. Look at Ron Paul for example. Whether you agree or disagree with him, the media refuses to give him any attention and if by some miracle he did win, he would not have the support of Congress (both parties don't really like him) or the lobbies (of things he wishes to cut or downsize). Why vote for him, knowing full well that you are basically throwing your vote away? On top of that most people would argue that candidates make all sorts of empty promises to get into office so it's not like research will yield perfect information.
And while I agree with the general consensus here on TL about the protest, the police had no justification in acting the way they did. The protesters seem to be making scapegoats out of Wall Street, but I support their right to protest. Hell, I think people should protest more often for little or no reason at all! It seems that the people in charge have forgotten what our voice sounds like.
On September 26 2011 21:19 Sea_Food wrote: Can someone who knows about this tell me how is this even possible?
I tought that in USA there is democracy and if 51% of people think that A should happen, A will happen. 51% can get anyone president and majority in congress. Now there are people in the street complaining that the top 1% of the population are too greedy and corrupted and the bottom 99% are having hard time. Clearly the top 1% cant vote themselfs the leaders, so almost the majority of the ones having hard time must want that they have hard time because they are voting for politics that let it continue. Dosnt make sence to me, someone explain please.
The top 1% vote themselves in by controlling the mainstream media and controlling which candidates get the money. If you and I are both running for president, and the top 1% want me in, all they have to do is give me $100 million and I can get my smiling face anywhere I want it in a day. If they don't like what you have to say, you can still run for president, but you won't get very far. And anything you do will be criticized and trashed by the media because the commercials pay for the tv and the commercials are bought by top 1% -- major corporations.
Ever seen V for Vendetta? Did you read 1984? Basically these stories are a more extreme version of what already exists. Most United States citizens are too afraid to change anything, and the cops are typically the stupidest of the populace due to the job requirements being some of the lowest out there. US cops are basically grown up kids who got bullied or abused so much that they value power over compassion. And when they work as a cop they can kill anyone holding a gun without much justice being brought on them.
There a public libaries in america with computers for people without them right? Go find a candidate that you like from the internet if mainstream media wont show them. If things really are as bad as people say there are, shouldnt the americans put a little effort and tougth on what they vote instead of just turning on their TV and deciding from the first 2 they see there. Clearly its less effort than holding a protest.
Sadly, the majority (of most countries, so don't try to take a swipe at Americans =\) won't do that. But that's not the point. The point is that the institution makes it so that any change is grudging and reinforces the status quo. Look at Ron Paul for example. Whether you agree or disagree with him, the media refuses to give him any attention and if by some miracle he did win, he would not have the support of Congress (both parties don't really like him) or the lobbies (of things he wishes to cut or downsize). Why vote for him, knowing full well that you are basically throwing your vote away? On top of that most people would argue that candidates make all sorts of empty promises to get into office so it's not like research will yield perfect information.
And while I agree with the general consensus here on TL about the protest, the police had no justification in acting the way they did. The protesters seem to be making scapegoats out of Wall Street, but I support their right to protest. Hell, I think people should protest more often for little or no reason at all! It seems that the people in charge have forgotten what our voice sounds like.
Protesting over nothing will just devalue the meaning of it and the rest of the populace will just think they're idiots anyway. You're not achieving anything by doing that...
On September 26 2011 17:12 Saji wrote: Arrested For Talking to a Cop
He warns him to get back, the dude starts waving his hands in the cops face, the cop pushes him and he still doesn't budge. The one with the girls is ridiculous and way out of line, but this idiot deserved to get his ass taken to the ground and arrested. I don't see how anyone can defend that.
On September 26 2011 21:19 Sea_Food wrote: Can someone who knows about this tell me how is this even possible?
I tought that in USA there is democracy and if 51% of people think that A should happen, A will happen. 51% can get anyone president and majority in congress. Now there are people in the street complaining that the top 1% of the population are too greedy and corrupted and the bottom 99% are having hard time. Clearly the top 1% cant vote themselfs the leaders, so almost the majority of the ones having hard time must want that they have hard time because they are voting for politics that let it continue. Dosnt make sence to me, someone explain please.
The top 1% vote themselves in by controlling the mainstream media and controlling which candidates get the money. If you and I are both running for president, and the top 1% want me in, all they have to do is give me $100 million and I can get my smiling face anywhere I want it in a day. If they don't like what you have to say, you can still run for president, but you won't get very far. And anything you do will be criticized and trashed by the media because the commercials pay for the tv and the commercials are bought by top 1% -- major corporations.
Ever seen V for Vendetta? Did you read 1984? Basically these stories are a more extreme version of what already exists. Most United States citizens are too afraid to change anything, and the cops are typically the stupidest of the populace due to the job requirements being some of the lowest out there. US cops are basically grown up kids who got bullied or abused so much that they value power over compassion. And when they work as a cop they can kill anyone holding a gun without much justice being brought on them.
There a public libaries in america with computers for people without them right? Go find a candidate that you like from the internet if mainstream media wont show them. If things really are as bad as people say there are, shouldnt the americans put a little effort and tougth on what they vote instead of just turning on their TV and deciding from the first 2 they see there. Clearly its less effort than holding a protest.
Sadly, the majority (of most countries, so don't try to take a swipe at Americans =\) won't do that. But that's not the point. The point is that the institution makes it so that any change is grudging and reinforces the status quo. Look at Ron Paul for example. Whether you agree or disagree with him, the media refuses to give him any attention and if by some miracle he did win, he would not have the support of Congress (both parties don't really like him) or the lobbies (of things he wishes to cut or downsize). Why vote for him, knowing full well that you are basically throwing your vote away? On top of that most people would argue that candidates make all sorts of empty promises to get into office so it's not like research will yield perfect information.
And while I agree with the general consensus here on TL about the protest, the police had no justification in acting the way they did. The protesters seem to be making scapegoats out of Wall Street, but I support their right to protest. Hell, I think people should protest more often for little or no reason at all! It seems that the people in charge have forgotten what our voice sounds like.
Protesting over nothing will just devalue the meaning of it and the rest of the populace will just think they're idiots anyway. You're not achieving anything by doing that...
Hmmm what about...
Protesting is the very heart of Democracy, a one party state can have elections, but it can't tolerate open protest, therefore the test of a Democracy is not who can vote but how free the citizens are to protest.
Having a meaningless protest over nothing in a state where protest is rare actually strengthens a Democracy as it reminds the population of the importance of demonstation.
I belive the above sentiments are at least as coherent and based on available evidence as yours.
The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized.
On September 26 2011 21:19 Sea_Food wrote: Can someone who knows about this tell me how is this even possible?
I tought that in USA there is democracy and if 51% of people think that A should happen, A will happen. 51% can get anyone president and majority in congress. Now there are people in the street complaining that the top 1% of the population are too greedy and corrupted and the bottom 99% are having hard time. Clearly the top 1% cant vote themselfs the leaders, so almost the majority of the ones having hard time must want that they have hard time because they are voting for politics that let it continue. Dosnt make sence to me, someone explain please.
The top 1% vote themselves in by controlling the mainstream media and controlling which candidates get the money. If you and I are both running for president, and the top 1% want me in, all they have to do is give me $100 million and I can get my smiling face anywhere I want it in a day. If they don't like what you have to say, you can still run for president, but you won't get very far. And anything you do will be criticized and trashed by the media because the commercials pay for the tv and the commercials are bought by top 1% -- major corporations.
Ever seen V for Vendetta? Did you read 1984? Basically these stories are a more extreme version of what already exists. Most United States citizens are too afraid to change anything, and the cops are typically the stupidest of the populace due to the job requirements being some of the lowest out there. US cops are basically grown up kids who got bullied or abused so much that they value power over compassion. And when they work as a cop they can kill anyone holding a gun without much justice being brought on them.
There a public libaries in america with computers for people without them right? Go find a candidate that you like from the internet if mainstream media wont show them. If things really are as bad as people say there are, shouldnt the americans put a little effort and tougth on what they vote instead of just turning on their TV and deciding from the first 2 they see there. Clearly its less effort than holding a protest.
Sadly, the majority (of most countries, so don't try to take a swipe at Americans =\) won't do that. But that's not the point. The point is that the institution makes it so that any change is grudging and reinforces the status quo. Look at Ron Paul for example. Whether you agree or disagree with him, the media refuses to give him any attention and if by some miracle he did win, he would not have the support of Congress (both parties don't really like him) or the lobbies (of things he wishes to cut or downsize). Why vote for him, knowing full well that you are basically throwing your vote away? On top of that most people would argue that candidates make all sorts of empty promises to get into office so it's not like research will yield perfect information.
And while I agree with the general consensus here on TL about the protest, the police had no justification in acting the way they did. The protesters seem to be making scapegoats out of Wall Street, but I support their right to protest. Hell, I think people should protest more often for little or no reason at all! It seems that the people in charge have forgotten what our voice sounds like.
Protesting over nothing will just devalue the meaning of it and the rest of the populace will just think they're idiots anyway. You're not achieving anything by doing that...
Hmmm what about...
Protesting is the very heart of Democracy, a one party state can have elections, but it can't tolerate open protest, therefore the test of a Democracy is not who can vote but how free the citizens are to protest.
Having a meaningless protest over nothing in a state where protest is rare actually strengthens a Democracy as it reminds the population of the importance of demonstation.
I belive the above sentiments are at least as coherent and based on available evidence as yours.
protests are hardly rare in this county. It's just that the good and valid ones are so often outnumbered by stupid shit like this
On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote: The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized.
There are worse things than having people feel self important in a democracy. I'd much rather people gave a shit about retarded things than not give a shit or feel like they had no voice at all.
On September 26 2011 21:19 Sea_Food wrote: Can someone who knows about this tell me how is this even possible?
I tought that in USA there is democracy and if 51% of people think that A should happen, A will happen. 51% can get anyone president and majority in congress. Now there are people in the street complaining that the top 1% of the population are too greedy and corrupted and the bottom 99% are having hard time. Clearly the top 1% cant vote themselfs the leaders, so almost the majority of the ones having hard time must want that they have hard time because they are voting for politics that let it continue. Dosnt make sence to me, someone explain please.
There is no mechanism which ensures the actual implementation of a proposed policy after the election. For intance, the German Liberal Party (FDP) is the 2nd power in the government-running coalition and didn't apply the policies it was advertising for at all. They won't be held accountable for that in this legislature.
Then there is so much more to say about how democracy in reality is practiced, but I won't dig into that.
What are you protesting exactly? Is there some policy change that you want? I am not convinced that there is anything to protest. You say the rich, the Wall-Street-types, the power-brokers caused the Great Recession. Should we just assume this without proof? Are there other possibilities than that the evil Wall Street people conspired to harm everyone?
On September 27 2011 01:49 treekiller wrote: What are you protesting exactly? Is there some policy change that you want? I am not convinced that there is anything to protest. You say the rich, the Wall-Street-types, the power-brokers caused the Great Recession. Should we just assume this without proof? Are there other possibilities than that the evil Wall Street people conspired to harm everyone?
I think its more so that the big people on top will do whatever it takes to grow their wealth as much as possible and that they ignore the collateral damage of the common guy.
On September 27 2011 01:49 treekiller wrote: What are you protesting exactly? Is there some policy change that you want? I am not convinced that there is anything to protest. You say the rich, the Wall-Street-types, the power-brokers caused the Great Recession. Should we just assume this without proof? Are there other possibilities than that the evil Wall Street people conspired to harm everyone?
Occupy Wall Street is leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%.
If i felt that Wall Street is just another part of the whole Money as Debt thing. That the divide between the working class and the elite should not be this big. I should be there. But im not ;/
On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote: The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized.
This is extrodinarily fucking ignorant. You honestly believe that all these people have nothing better to do with their time then protest the way the economy is (mis)handled, sleep in the streets and deal with dickhead cops?
Comments such as yours really don't need to be added to the discussion. It's not constructive, it's based off of your assumptions, and only serves to piss people like myself off. And I'm not even from the US.
On September 27 2011 02:36 Madkipz wrote: The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%.
So protest the idiots on capitol hill that enable them through laws or lack thereof, not the people who are acting within the confines of the box as drawn up by politicians. Protest the assholes that line their pockets with money from lobbiests from corporations.
The anger is directed at the wrong group, and the group that all these random hippies are directing their rage at are just laughing because they aren't affected in the slightest bit. They're not up for election. They've already got the money they need to do what it is that they do.
Politicians, especially those entering an election year, are the ones who are have a lot at stake when people get pissed off, and the ones who have the actual power to change things.
It's baffling how much energy is being wasted on a futile and worthless protest
On September 27 2011 02:36 Madkipz wrote: The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%.
So protest the idiots on capitol hill that enable them through laws or lack thereof, not the people who are acting within the confines of the box as drawn up by politicians. Protest the assholes that line their pockets with money from lobbiests from corporations.
The anger is directed at the wrong group, and the group that all these random hippies are directing their rage at are just laughing because they aren't affected in the slightest bit. They're not up for election. They've already got the money they need to do what it is that they do.
Politicians, especially those entering an election year, are the ones who are have a lot at stake when people get pissed off, and the ones who have the actual power to change things.
It's baffling how much energy is being wasted on a futile and worthless protest
Why does it matter where they protest? If the gov't was to order the mass production of nuclear warheads, is it so far fetched to think that people would protest outside the factories manufacturing the nukes?
If you take advantage of a bug in a game to exploit the bug for your own advantage, you are in the wrong. The same can be said of the people that work on Wall Street who take advantage of the system as it is now. They are just as guilty as the people in Washington because they are perpetuating a system that makes rich people richer and poor people owe rich people money.
On September 27 2011 02:36 Madkipz wrote: The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%.
So protest the idiots on capitol hill that enable them through laws or lack thereof, not the people who are acting within the confines of the box as drawn up by politicians. Protest the assholes that line their pockets with money from lobbiests from corporations.
The anger is directed at the wrong group, and the group that all these random hippies are directing their rage at are just laughing because they aren't affected in the slightest bit. They're not up for election. They've already got the money they need to do what it is that they do.
Politicians, especially those entering an election year, are the ones who are have a lot at stake when people get pissed off, and the ones who have the actual power to change things.
It's baffling how much energy is being wasted on a futile and worthless protest
The suggestion is that 'the top 1%' has at this point throughly rigged the political system, the protesters have as a result gone to a physical manifestation of the source (wall street) rather than a physical manifestation of the symptom (capitol hill). Seems reasonable.
If the nukes start voting on bills, it would make sense to protest at the factories. Otherwise, it would still be stupid. You go to the source of the problem.
And there is no bug in the system. It's that the laws that govern the financial sector are decidedly pro big money because so many of those politicians are benefiting from the laws they enact, either due to funds and promises from lobbyists, or from their own ventures. It's dumb to say they're guilty of anything when the government, the elected body tasked with protecting its people and not fucking them over as they do when they bend to the financial district, failed catastrophically in many ways.
On September 27 2011 02:36 Madkipz wrote: The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%.
So protest the idiots on capitol hill that enable them through laws or lack thereof, not the people who are acting within the confines of the box as drawn up by politicians. Protest the assholes that line their pockets with money from lobbiests from corporations.
The anger is directed at the wrong group, and the group that all these random hippies are directing their rage at are just laughing because they aren't affected in the slightest bit. They're not up for election. They've already got the money they need to do what it is that they do.
Politicians, especially those entering an election year, are the ones who are have a lot at stake when people get pissed off, and the ones who have the actual power to change things.
It's baffling how much energy is being wasted on a futile and worthless protest
The suggestion is that 'the top 1%' has at this point throughly rigged the political system, the protesters have as a result gone to a physical manifestation of the source (wall street) rather than a physical manifestation of the symptom (capitol hill). Seems reasonable.
That accomplishes nothing though. The politicians enable it. Voters have clout over politicians in the form of election. They do not have any power over the financial sector. You enact change by threatening to take away a career politician's cushy pay, health benefits and perks and force him to work like you.
As stupid and discombobulated as the movement was, look at the Tea Party. They brought their rage to the politicians and the polls, not to a place they don't have power. Politicians don't give a shit until they feel you're about to fuck up their status quo, and getting pissed at Wall St. don't challenge that
On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote: The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized.
This is extrodinarily fucking ignorant. You honestly believe that all these people have nothing better to do with their time then protest the way the economy is (mis)handled, sleep in the streets and deal with dickhead cops?
Comments such as yours really don't need to be added to the discussion. It's not constructive, it's based off of your assumptions, and only serves to piss people like myself off. And I'm not even from the US.
I think it's pretty obvious that the protesters are ignorant of politics. The hard fact is that making real changes in the world requires years of hard work. These protesters go out and yell at police and pretend like they're accomplishing something meaningful. How can anyone take it seriously?
On September 27 2011 01:49 treekiller wrote: What are you protesting exactly? Is there some policy change that you want? I am not convinced that there is anything to protest. You say the rich, the Wall-Street-types, the power-brokers caused the Great Recession. Should we just assume this without proof? Are there other possibilities than that the evil Wall Street people conspired to harm everyone?
One of the primary problems with this protest in particular is that there doesn't really seem to be an apparent goal. I mean, I understand the point of the protest, the idea that our government is controlled by the 1% with the money, but they aren't proposing any solution to the problem. They have no ultimatum. Normally, when protests or strikes take place they have an end that they want to meet, and a means in mind to get there. Im seeing no means in this.
EPT
