Clock Crew

What are your thoughts on the protests spreading throughout various cities in the US?

Today there was a huge resurgence of activity in New York, probably in large part due to the highly publicized police attacks that have been going on. While the media seems to be trying to pass this off as unemployed college students and recent graduates, from the videos I've seen they seem to be of all ages and professions. I'm not sure what they're going to accomplish or how, but I hope it keeps gaining momentum and coherency until some sort of tipping point is reached.

I was wondering when the Arab Spring's effects would finally hit the US. Quite a year for people making noise.

Nobody seems to know what they want, including the protesters. Their demands are all over the place and some of them are frankly ignorant and/or ridiculous.


Most of the occupy wallstreet folks I've seen are also huge morons who are blaming their own poor life decisions and idiotic money management on "the rich", and are acting like tools at the protests (guy fawkes masks, zombie costumes, ect). Nobody gives a shit about what they say because the vocal majority of them look and sound like brainless hippies and hipsters.


EDIT: After looking it up on wikipedia apparently their central demand is for "a presidential commission to separate money from politics", ie making lobbying illegal. This is the first I've heard of that, but it does seem like a good idea to me.

I think the Occupy Wallstreet thing happened is because if you look at the situation in the United States it plays out like a fucking cartoon with random bankers going "Whoops!" before running off with a bag of cash. The elections you have are run like it's a game show. Nobody on television seems to know what they're talking about.

Most of the people there are just dissatisfied with how things are but can't pinpoint exactly what because everything seems to have gone to shit.

Disorganized? Yes. Invalid? Not to me. From the quotes I've seen on de teevee they seem pretty knowledgable for an angry mob (check out New Left Media's coverage of Tea Party rallies http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbyFeFhUTmI ), and while my criticism of the whole thing would probably be just not thinking they can accomplish anything, maybe all they really want to do is bring attention to how the super rich have really screwed over the rest of us/aren't doing their part.

While I agree that their immediate demands aren't really apparent, they did manage to reach a consensus on a lot of what's wrong with the country. Honestly, they're citizens, not politicians. It's their job to say "Hey, this is fucked up!" and it's their elected officials' jobs to figure out how to fix it. Also, I haven't seen a hell of a lot in the way of consensus coming out of the government either, so you can hardly expect an even larger body with no training in that area to be much less muddled.

Someone once told me about the Occupy Wall Street movement that "no one involved understands how economics works." Could anyone elaborate?

I think that person is confused. Taxing the rich and increasing protection for workers and students would do quite a lot to send things in the right direction. People are coming out of college with mountains of debt and no jobs so they can't spend money and stimulate the economy. Companies with increasing profits don't pay out to the society that fuels them in the form of higher wages because of the incredibly high demand for employment. Those sentiments are being echoed in those crowds, and it's the job of the government to respond appropriately.

It's nice to see that people are actually targeting the cause of our problems now instead of the elected government or some miscellaneous scapegoat.

Quote from: Thor;1864481EDIT: After looking it up on wikipedia apparently their central demand is for "a presidential commission to separate money from politics", ie making lobbying illegal. This is the first I've heard of that, but it does seem like a good idea to me.

Lobbying isnt inherently evil but its used for bad things a lot of the time.

Quote from: SnakeClock;1864511Someone once told me about the Occupy Wall Street movement that "no one involved understands how economics works." Could anyone elaborate?

Somebody who gets themselves in massive debt getting a worthless degree don't understand economics.


Also their central demand that the rich "pay their fare share" is based on an incorrect assumption.

QuoteThe top 1 percent of all households got 18 percent of all personal income and paid nearly 28 percent of all federal taxes in 2005

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/05/top-1-what-they-make-and-pay/

The top 1% pay more than average

I just take it as an indicator of the failure of our government and social unrest. It's definitely warranted.

I've been pretty pissed about all the shit that's been going on, and quite frankly I'm glad that a lot of other people are too and are finally making noise about it.

Granted they're disorganized as fuck and don't know what they're doing a lot of the time, but I hope they don't stop.  If they keep at it maybe they'll get a clue as to what they want to accomplish and finally fucking do it.

Because right now the guys in charge and the people with money aren't doing their fucking jobs.

The CEOs of Bear Sterns get to keep their jobs while working class people are living out of their cars basically and it pisses me off.

Quote from: Thor;1864698Somebody who gets themselves in massive debt getting a worthless degree don't understand economics.


Also their central demand that the rich "pay their fare share" is based on an incorrect assumption.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/05/top-1-what-they-make-and-pay/

The top 1% pay more than average

Shit like this: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/general-electric-paid-federal-taxes-2010/story?id=13224558

Also by their fair share I think they just mean pay a little more than they are, obviously our tax system is not flat, but the Bush tax cuts for the top earners should not have been extended. Clinton gave us a surplus, why can't we go back to the taxes of his era? Obviously it didn't kill tons of jobs as Republicans would have us believe.

These bankers ruined our economy, begged for and took a huge bail of our tax money, and now want to charge us $5 a month just to use our ATM cards. Well, I can't blame people for being pissed.

Quote from: F U Clock;1864760Shit like this: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/general-electric-paid-federal-taxes-2010/story?id=13224558

Also by their fair share I think they just mean pay a little more than they are, obviously our tax system is not flat, but the Bush tax cuts for the top earners should not have been extended. Clinton gave us a surplus, why can't we go back to the taxes of his era? Obviously it didn't kill tons of jobs as Republicans would have us believe.

Better yet, let's go back to pre-Reagan era taxes.

I think it's awesome. It's like when I play Tropico and I totally fuck the citizens and they start mobbing. That would be how I am personally legitimizing this whole thing; they wouldn't be doing it if it wasn't worth doing, for whatever reason. And plus, if its bring people together, that's the best thing.

Quote from: RenegadeClock;1864767These bankers ruined our economy, begged for and took a huge bail of our tax money, and now want to charge us $5 a month just to use our ATM cards. Well, I can't blame people for being pissed.

My bank doesn't charge any money for using their ATMs, and also charges no service charges of any kind. It's your job as a consumer to find a bank with a contract you can agree to, not the governments.

Quote from: F U Clock;1864760Shit like this: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/general-electric-paid-federal-taxes-2010/story?id=13224558

Also by their fair share I think they just mean pay a little more than they are, obviously our tax system is not flat, but the Bush tax cuts for the top earners should not have been extended. Clinton gave us a surplus, why can't we go back to the taxes of his era? Obviously it didn't kill tons of jobs as Republicans would have us believe.

Increasing tax rates wouldn't solve problems like that. Even if the income tax rate for that company was 99% they would still end up paying zero since they made no profit, or whatever the loophole was. That requires closing tax loopholes, which I have yet to hear suggested and is an entirely different matter. Once again, OW doesn't know what they want.

Also, is OW supposed to be "anti rich" or "anti corporation"? Laws regarding those two things are very different.

Quote from: Thor;1864818My bank doesn't charge any money for using their ATMs, and also charges no service charges of any kind. It's your job as a consumer to find a bank with a contract you can agree to, not the governments.



Increasing tax rates wouldn't solve problems like that. Even if the income tax rate for that company was 99% they would still end up paying zero since they made no profit, or whatever the loophole was. That requires closing tax loopholes, which I have yet to hear suggested and is an entirely different matter. Once again, OW doesn't know what they want.

Also, is OW supposed to be "anti rich" or "anti corporation"? Laws regarding those two things are very different.

Obama's proposed closing tax loopholes. I don't know about OW, but I was just linking that to say there's a lot of unfair shit going on with corporations/ the super rich and how much they're taxed. I believe OW is very anti-corporate as they've said they want to do away with corporate lobbying of our political system.

I guess whenever I hear "class warfar" trotted out, or hear a multi-millionaire complaining that they really don't take that much home after taxes, it makes me want to projective vomit in their face. FOX News loves to make the poor people watching it feel bad about themselves by running segments talking about how the poor in this country really don't have it all that bad. If you are a multi-millionaire, paying a little more in taxes is not going to send you to the poor house. It's not even going to really affect you. Arhgrharhgh it just makes me angry because FOX ran a segment about how something like 40% of the country (bottom earners) paid no income tax last year and how we should make sure they're paying taxes and it's like Jesus you guys they can.not.afford.it.

Quote from: Thor;1864818My bank doesn't charge any money for using their ATMs, and also charges no service charges of any kind. It's your job as a consumer to find a bank with a contract you can agree to, not the governments.

Where I live I only have two banks available, and I pay up to a 3 dollar service charge because no ATMs in Philadelphia are affiliated with the bank I use.

Quote from: Thor;1864818My bank doesn't charge any money for using their ATMs, and also charges no service charges of any kind. It's your job as a consumer to find a bank with a contract you can agree to, not the governments.

Who said anything about the government?

Most of the banks aren't charging this fee yet, but now that BofA is starting it the speculation is that many others will follow suit. Possibly even your bank. The policy is essentially a tax on the poor, because they don't charge it to anyone with over $20k in the bank. And the stupid thing is that debit cards actually save the banks money because they are more efficient than dealing with cash or checks.

Quote from: RenegadeClock;1865115Who said anything about the government?

Most of the banks aren't charging this fee yet, but now that BofA is starting it the speculation is that many others will follow suit. Possibly even your bank. The policy is essentially a tax on the poor, because they don't charge it to anyone with over $20k in the bank. And the stupid thing is that debit cards actually save the banks money because they are more efficient than dealing with cash or checks.

I guess I misinterpreted your post.


Regardless, banks are a service. If you don't like the way they provide that service you should take your business elsewhere. That's how capitalism works.


I'm not sure what any of this has to do with OW though, apart from that I'm starting to see a trend of people supporting them because they have some vague sense of not liking people who have more money than them, and using a lot of flimsy justifications for being jelly of their swag.

Quote from: Topcatyo;1864746I've been pretty pissed about all the shit that's been going on, and quite frankly I'm glad that a lot of other people are too and are finally making noise about it.

Granted they're disorganized as fuck and don't know what they're doing a lot of the time, but I hope they don't stop.  If they keep at it maybe they'll get a clue as to what they want to accomplish and finally fucking do it.

Because right now the guys in charge and the people with money aren't doing their fucking jobs.

Of course they're doing their jobs.

It just happens that their jobs are to seize power and make money.

I think people's opinion of "the rich" is informed by the rich that they've met in their life.

My most personal interaction with rich folk would be my grandparents (one of whom is now deceased and the other has Alzheimer's so bad he's basically impossible to talk to). They were multi-millionaires who treated the other members of their family like shit, giving away family land without consulting the rest of us as a way to hurt us, favoring some cousins over others - my grandma stooped low enough to lie about one of my aunts going back on drugs, which she's struggled to stay clean from for years, as an excuse for not spending Christmas with her, I am not making that shit up. In any case, they spent money like it was nobody's business - they built an indoor pool in their house despite living on the fucking lake. The funny thing is, they didn't work for all that money whatsoever. It was inherited from the sale of my great grandfather's company. My grandparents never did a thing for it - My grandma was an English teacher, my grandpa taught woodworking at a few Colleges, occasionally.

I guess my opinion of rich people has largely been influenced by them, in that they did not deserve their money whatsoever, used it as a tool to hurt other people, and most importantly, never actually worked for it. I feel like most people who are super rich were born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Sure, this is America, and it's possible for a person to have a brilliant idea or start a successful company and shoot up the social ladder - but it's very fucking unlikely. We are behind IRAN in wealth inequality in the world. I think there's a lot of right-wing hot air leading people to feel sorry for rich people, and I just think that's preposterous.

My impression of rich people comes not only from every person I've met with any degree of wealth being an arrogant douchebag (which I think is just something that happens to most people when they have too much money), but from the people who have all the money visibly not acting anything like Bill Gates. If you have fuckloads of money and you don't act like Bill Gates you're a bad person.

Quote from: Thor;1865121That's how capitalism works.

That's why people are protesting. The way capitalism works isn't sufficient at the moment. What's so great about capitalism?

occupy my butt

The only experience I have with rich people are what I see on the news with politicians and with companies like GE and with BP and Bear Sterns and Goldmann Sachs and landlords more than doubling the rent of all their tenants (http://www.minotdailynews.com/page/content.detail/id/559293/Rude-awakening--Residents-wake-up-to-notice-more-than-doubling-rent.html?nav=5010) (months before winter, might I add) and Natalie Portman wearing a million dollar dress (http://justjared.buzznet.com/2006/10/22/natalie-portman-harpers-bazaar/) and there's a whole bunch of stuff but there's the stuff that I've linked you specifically to make you angry

Quote from: AlbinoClock;1865426What's so great about capitalism?

There's no viable alternative to it. How do you solve the economic calculation problem without citizens determining price by whether or not they're willing to pay for something?

Capitalism and trade aren't synonymous. Capitalism is focused on accruing surplus labor (capital), whereas trade is simply the exchange of goods. Market forces like supply and demand can exist in, say, a merchantilist system as well as a capitalist system and without the same degree of encouragement of exploitation. There is more than one way to set up your currency.

Quote from: AlbinoClock;1865715Capitalism and trade aren't synonymous. Capitalism is focused on accruing surplus labor (capital), whereas trade is simply the exchange of goods. Market forces like supply and demand can exist in, say, a merchantilist system as well as a capitalist system and without the same degree of encouragement of exploitation. There is more than one way to set up your currency.

I'm not sure I understand. Isn't mercantilism just capitalism with heavy trade tariffs to encourage people to buy goods produced in their own country? That's not an alternative, that's the same thing as capitalism but worse (because everything is way more expensive and there's less competition)

Unless you're referring to a system in which people trade goods and services directly for what they want, which is an extremely archaic and inefficient system.

Quote from: Thor;1865733I'm not sure I understand. Isn't mercantilism just capitalism with heavy trade tariffs to encourage people to buy goods produced in their own country? That's not an alternative, that's the same thing as capitalism but worse (because everything is way more expensive and there's less competition)

Unless you're referring to a system in which people trade goods and services directly for what they want, which is an extremely archaic and inefficient system.

The defining characteristic of capitalism is the drive to obtain surplus labor. You can't let that run unchecked or you get the situation in the US today.

Quote from: AlbinoClock;1865917you get the situation in the US today.

You mean with the extremely high Human Development Index and low poverty rate (compared to the vast majority of the world)? Oh yes lets put a stop to that


EDIT: Can you name ONE successful modern country that doesn't have free market capitalism as part of its economy?

(I'll try not to No True Scotsman fallacy)

Quote from: Thor;1865998You mean with the extremely high Human Development Index and low poverty rate (compared to the vast majority of the world)? Oh yes lets put a stop to that


EDIT: Can you name ONE successful modern country that doesn't have free market capitalism as part of its economy?

(I'll try not to No True Scotsman fallacy)

Canada has roughly a third of the poverty rate of the States, and while its system is largely capitalistic it does incorporate elements of socialism. Which, of course, doesn't indicate that capitalism needs to be eliminated altogether and replaced with a radically different system. It simply indicates that there are improvements that can be made, and that a system of absolute capitalism is probably a bad idea.

Quote from: Silly Putty Clock;1866143Canada has roughly a third of the poverty rate of the States, and while its system is largely capitalistic it does incorporate elements of socialism. Which, of course, doesn't indicate that capitalism needs to be eliminated altogether and replaced with a radically different system. It simply indicates that there are improvements that can be made, and that a system of absolute capitalism is probably a bad idea.

You're not taking into account the absurd amount of valuable natural resources Canada has relative to its population. It's the same reason Norway is so successful. Why don't you compare Canada to a more accurate counterpart, like Alaska?

Alaska's poverty rate is 9.8%, compared to roughly 10.8% in Canada. That's right, Alaska has a lower poverty rate than Canada.

Keep in mind Alaska is one of the most republican states in America, and practically the opposite of a socialist state like Canada.

EDIT: Removed extraneous data points about median household income

Quote from: Thor;1866165You're not taking into account the absurd amount of valuable natural resources Canada has relative to its population. It's the same reason Norway is so successful. Why don't you compare Canada to a more accurate counterpart, like Alaska?

The Alaskan median household income is $66,000 USD per year, compared to Canada's $68,000 CAD. These are roughly similar amounts. Alaska's poverty rate is 9.8%, compared to roughly 10.8% in Canada. That's right, Alaska has a lower poverty rate than Canada.

Keep in mind Alaska is one of the most republican states in America, and practically the opposite of a socialist state like Canada.

Yeah, I read the wrong number on the Wikipedia article. I was scanning and I saw 4.9%. In any case, I could make a similar argument to the one you made- Canada has a low population density(8.5 people per square mile), but Alaska's(1.2 people per square mile) is even lower.

WELL I went to occupy san diego. flash about my experiences coming later tonight!

Just found this article: http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10?op=1

And this one: http://www.dangerousminds.net/comments/occupy_wall_street_a_banker_explains_what_really_happened_to_america/

Make of them what you will.

[U2]iX-zcYygIE8&[/U2]

[U2]YQlYC8Yjirc[/U2]

Every protest is a freak show. Making fun of how stupid some of these people look is a convenient way to ignore the fact there's a metric fuckton of disillusioned, unhappy people protesting there.

Watched (most of) the second video. I don't really see anyone making a fool of themselves except for how they look. If your only argument against someone is that they're dressed silly then that's a pretty poor argument.

It's not just that they look like jackasses, they also don't have rational arguments and MANY MANY MANY people are joining the protests for completely irrational reasons. You know those guys with the handwritten letters on the OWS website? Half of those people are idiot liberal arts majors who ruined their own lives with poor decisions and expect the government to bail them out. The link silly puddy provided was one of the first coherent pro-OWS things I've seen, and the FIRST to site any kind of source. In fact I've more often seen OWSers quoting incorrect statistics than correct ones.

In conclusion, it's not just that the majority look like retards (they do). They have also opened their mouth and removed all doubt.

I realize this is ad hominem against the group, and it does NOT disprove their ideals, I'm just saying that they suck


An aside: That was a good link Silly Puddy but I don't have time at the present to dig into it and try to dissect it in any way. Very informative though.

edit: Reformatted post several times

For the record, I'd like to say that the douchebags on the Internet with the hand-written paper signs ending with "I am the 99%" make me sick every bit as much as they do you. I think these protests are doomed to fail, simply because the people involved are DOING IT WRONG. This is what happens when you learn how to be angry from Rage Against the Machine.

I just want to say that I am surprised there is fundamental room for debate about this. It's simple, the top guys have to do their god damned jobs.

Period.

Color me wrong, whatever, politics aren't my strength anyway; but damn, if they are not saying something about it, no fucking one will.

Democrats, republicans, who gives a shit? The country needs to start doing something now. Conformity leaves to stagnation.

Quote from: TequilaClock;1867057I just want to say that I am surprised there is fundamental room for debate about this. It's simple, the top guys have to do their god damned jobs.

Period.

Color me wrong, whatever, politics aren't my strength anyway; but damn, if they are not saying something about it, no fucking one will.

Democrats, republicans, who gives a shit? The country needs to start doing something now. Conformity leaves to stagnation.

Well that's the problem with their fragmented argument - not all of it is just bitching about the haves having it all, which they do. A good bit of it is about removing money from the political system, meaning no more corporate lobbying. Which I see as a huge problem in our government. I'd like to think we'd already have much stricter vehicle mileage restrictions if it weren't for oil company lobbying. With the recent supreme court ruling that corporations can give unlimited amounts of money to political campaigns, a huge shift has taken place in which corporations have way more sway with who gets into office than normal people do. Monetarily anyways.

There's a protest in my city this weekend and I was considering going, but I've never gone to shit like this before. I want to go just to see whats up

I haven't been keeping up to date with this whole thing, but I just saw this picture and thought it would be relevant to the conversation:
(https://clockcrew.net/talk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fa4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-ak-snc7%2F310637_2401946404850_1136777814_3897571_1123034735_n.jpg&hash=60a0199a1912c0337ed080fdb8731964cd3bb62b)

Quote from: RobClock;1867376I haven't been keeping up to date with this whole thing, but I just saw this picture and thought it would be relevant to the conversation:

First of all, what a fucking moron.

Second of all, what a fucking moron! I hate this smug, self-satisfied attitude some rich white bastards have. I bet your parents are poor and you live in a trailer right? Oh wait, I'm POSITIVE you come from means.

And he acts like he's the shit because he works 30+ hours a week. FUCK YOU! 40+ hours is full time, you child. There are people who can't feed their families who work 60+ hours a week.

Sorry just... Man that kid is a pompous toolbag who has no sense of empathy.

EDIT: And I'm confused as to whether the whole 99 thing refers to people who have exhausted all of their unemployment benefits or the bottom 99% or earners. If he's referring to the bottom 99% of earners, then A.) Yeah you are a 99%-er, and B.) Holy shit.

You shouldn't have to work your ass off just to scrape by. If you do have a strong work ethic, you should be rewarded for it. Working 60 hours a week should make you rich.

And yeah, the whole 99% thing refers to the bottom 99% of earners.

Tucson and Phoenix get occupied this Saturday. I am interested to check out the place, but I am scared of going since the state's been getting really gun friendly lately, and some crazed fucking gop fan could arrive shooting everyone.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/12/1025555/-Open-Letter-to-that-53-Guy

An interesting response to the marine dude thats been floating around the internet.

I like all the people in the Clock Crew I've looked up to share the same opinions as me!

So anyway, I was going to make a flash about how I went to Occupy SD but then I got lazy so I'll just post the story here.

So I got on a train and came into the Civic Center. Right away it reminded of two things, A. The childhood fantasy of building your own society with friends and B. Mine craft.

When you first walk in you enter the area I called the ghetto, where basically all the homeless people hung out and slept in their sleeping bags and borrowed ipods and shit from kids and were listening and watching movies and shit, and then you had the suburban area with all the tents, the smell of pot high in the air, socializing strong. You also had the market area, with food, supplies, and a doctor's area, and the People's Massage parlor. pretty nifty. Then we had the G.A, which stands for general assembly, where all the political of the protesters hung out and discussed the next issue.

Before I had gotten there a homeless guy killed himself in front of everyone by falling head first off of a parking structure in the civic center, and they were discussing whether or not to hold a candle light vigil, everyone agreed except one guy who said "Yeah I just think its funny that we can't come to a decision on anything important, but now we can all agree to waste time and hold a candle light vigil, just so the press can get a shot,"  everyone voted again and the motion passed, and when that guy was given his candle he chucked it on the ground and walked off. After that some chick with a harp played a song that sounded like Joana Newsome, like, exactly like it, but less good. My friend and I didn't care for it, really.

So then me and my friend did some pot brownies and got lost in San Diego. Some guy tried to sell me his shitty ass rap CD for 10 bucks, can you believe that? Anyway, when we got back people were chanting and marching going "FUCK! YEAH! THE 99%! FUCK! YEAH! THE 99%!" really lame slogan, and the people in the chant were basically just the crust kids with their bandanas over their mouth, and the stoner kids with drug rugs on. Everyone else, the adults and classy looking kids in thier vests and fedoras were hanging back. Once they stopped marching everything went to shit. People in the G.A were angry and disruptive, no one could come to a conclusion on anything, and the G.A broke up. Some chick started walking around the suburb area with the megaphone going "Come on now! We have to unite! We have to bring ourselves back together!" No one did, and lots of people were leaving, which is when i found out the fucking tent my friend and I were going to sleep was being borrowed from some other kid who wanted to leave, so he grabbed that shit and left with him. So its 1 in the morning, so I had to call my girlfriend to come pick me up like a fucking 7 year old at a sleep over.
The end!

Your account makes Fox News sound right when they call it a hippie drum circle. Kinda disappointing actually.

Quote from: Buttplug;1867819Your account makes Fox News sound right when they call it a hippie drum circle. Kinda disappointing actually.

Well, California has never been the place ripe for revolution. I'm sure the Boston and New York protests are much better.

Quote from: FloundermanClock;1867726http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/12/1025555/-Open-Letter-to-that-53-Guy

An interesting response to the marine dude thats been floating around the internet.

I actually hadn't seen it. What a proud douche.

I think these protests are very important to that process, Corpse, because not everyone can do the job from the inside. It's important to have people who are prepared to work within the parties and take care of the legislation, but it's also important to have people on the outside being publicly visible and taking part in the dialogue. I think their lack of some distinct set of demands only lends them power, because there's really nothing the media can effectively debunk or some simple partisan solution that can be co-opted by those vying for power. They're pointing out some problems, particularly with economic inequality, and pretty much saying they won't stand down until something happens to make progress in that direction. You're not going to just have a simple bill to get these people to go home.

I just worry about what winter will do.

I think that a lot of people in these protests aren't in a position to strike, for whatever reason. A protest is a way for them to help voice an opinion and the fact that they were attacked and arrested for exercising rights that the USA was supposed to be built on is disgusting.

Tax the rich, cloth the poor, feed the hungry.

I think folks are angry, and they've got a right to be angry but most of em haven't got a clue what to be angry at. We do need to redefine the human condition though. There's no reason for people to starve to death, or be homeless. I think these folks are more interested in getting revenge on the rich, rather than coming up with solutions to the problem. Does that problem mean doing things that will piss the rich off a lot? Probably, but there's a certain degree of dishonesty when a man is taxed more for labor than for making money itself do all the work for income.

I bet you that more than half of these rich bastards are cheating their taxes anyhow, and it's wrong.

Quote from: TequilaClock;1867057I just want to say that I am surprised there is fundamental room for debate about this. It's simple, the top guys have to do their god damned jobs.

Period.

Color me wrong, whatever, politics aren't my strength anyway; but damn, if they are not saying something about it, no fucking one will.

Democrats, republicans, who gives a shit? The country needs to start doing something now. Conformity leaves to stagnation.

This is exactly the sort of thing that discredits the movement. Vague anger with no real solutions or clear motive. You sound like the fuckin t-party. "I'm mad as hell and I don't know why!"

Quote from: AMPEEEM;1867817horrible story that I would like to think is fiction but is probably true

this is just pathetic. I feel sorry for the people who went to that protest actually expecting to accomplish something. Still sounds kind of fun though

ITT: people living in the U S of A and realizing some things are shit.

(https://clockcrew.net/talk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fdata.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lt874owi8h1qzsnxyo1_1280.jpg&hash=fd45ab9ae2192ef3179a8e9db33075bbcf2a7883)

Quote from: Thor;1867842This is exactly the sort of thing that discredits the movement. Vague anger with no real solutions or clear motive. You sound like the fuckin t-party. "I'm mad as hell and I don't know why!"


 this is just pathetic. I feel sorry for the people who went to that protest actually expecting to accomplish something. Still sounds kind of fun though

Jesus Christ, I barely ever come to this forum. Do we ever come out with a concrete solution instead of being like "we know better than everyone else here oh man we're so smart uuhhuhhhuhuhhhhh" here?

Sorry but I am pretty frustrated by this mindset. Is not like you have a better idea, right?