bushwacked Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 I suppose "ideologically similar" And I think SEC is the only one using that term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 (edited) And I think SEC is the only one using that term. Okay, what "distinct similarities and common ground" do they share? Edited November 1, 2011 by SEC=UGA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Okay, what "distinct similarities and common ground" do they share? Are you reading anybody's post besides your own? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Sll the people I know wanna be left aloneSome people I don't know? They wont leave you alone! You gotta be just - be just like them The gang And the government No different The gang And the government No different The gang And the government No different That makes me 1% That makes me 1% That makes me 1% That makes me 1% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Are you reading anybody's post besides your own? Absolutely. And it seems you guys are insinuating that theses groups are similar strictly because of the fact that they are an upstart, grass roots faction... Am I missing something else? If that is all you are insinuating that they have in common then I can agree to it, but, the tenor of your initial post would have me believe that there is more to it than that. This is why I was clarifying what I was asking by using the word "ideological" rather than simply using the phrases that you used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 (edited) Absolutely. And it seems you guys are insinuating that theses groups are similar strictly because of the fact that they are an upstart, grass roots faction... Am I missing something else? If that is all you are insinuating that they have in common then I can agree to it, but, the tenor of your initial post would have me believe that there is more to it than that. This is why I was clarifying what I was asking by using the word "ideological" rather than simply using the phrases that you used. I would say they have in common anger at what they see as anti-democratic, cronyist public-private collaboration. the two movements really do spring from a diagnosis of the same problems. but they share almost nothing "ideologically" as their prescriptions are so radically different. one side feels that when legislation controls buying and selling, inevitably the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. so government should get out of picking winners and losers and focus on the things only government can do. no more bailouts, no more venture capital in politically favored industries, no more oppressive regulation with carefully carved out exceptions for political allies and those with the best lobbyists. when there's not as much government influence to peddle, cronyism and corruption will inevitably decrease. the other side believes that the answers to cronyism lie in confiscating wealth, sanitizing the system by restricting the first amendment rights of corporations and other organizations, forgiving debt, and giving the government more power and an overall heavier hand to wield over the private economy. and of course, both sides see the other's "solutions" as likely to make the problem dramatically worse. Edited November 1, 2011 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted November 1, 2011 Author Share Posted November 1, 2011 (edited) one side feels that when legislation controls buying and selling, inevitably the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. so government should get out of picking winners and losers and focus on the things only government can do. no more bailouts, no more venture capital in politically favored industries, no more oppressive regulation with carefully carved out exceptions for political allies and those with the best lobbyists. when there's not as much government influence to peddle, cronyism and corruption will inevitably decrease. You might be schooled on Republican economics, but you just described the Tea Party and OWS in this paragraph. Did you miss the OWS protesters saying, "Banks got bailed, we got sold out?" [Az] Nice read from a Tea Party blog. [/Az} Posted Oct. 31, 2011, 3:54 p.m. EST (23 hours ago) by JonoLith This content is user submitted and not an official statement I’ve been discussing the issues of this movement with many people, and specifically with people who are detracting from the movement. I understand that I am just one voice, but I feel moved to attempt to encompass what it is this movement is standing for. This is specifically directed at those who think the movement is foolish, or uninspired, in an effort to create an understanding for us all. I try, very hard, to make points that are not debatable; that cannot be argued. My intention is to inspire debate and have a meaningful discussion amongst all parties. The Basics We are all Human. We all Die. We have a short period of time on this earth. We create systems in order to maximize that time spent on earth. The system that we live in currently is called “Democracy.” It is actually a Republic. The purpose of any created system is to see to the benefit of all people who are a part of said system. The only way to argue with this point is to reveal yourself as a psychopath, as it is intrinsic to the very structure of any fair and equal system. The system needs to be in place to ensure the maximum quality of life for all participants, regardless of the situation that they are born into. This means that if a Citizen stumbles, or is harmed, or finds himself/herself in trouble, we will have a system that supports them, puts them back on their feet, and allows them to continue through life, unencumbered. It is the only Human thing to do. Isn’t This System Seeking the Benefit of All? That was it’s original intent. As stated by it’s creators. We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. The unarguable intent, in short, is to see to the Well Being of All Citizens. This is not an “Us Vs. Them.” statement. This is a statement that encompasses all people regardless of anything. If you are an American Citizen, you are protected. (I tend to hold the world to these standards as well, as we are all Human.) Right now the unemployment rate is around 9%. Right now the poverty rate is around 15%, which is up from around 14% in 2010. Right now the top 1% own around 40% of the wealth. Right now the bottom 80% own 7% of the wealth. Right now the Consumer Debt is 2.4 Trillion. Right now the National Debt is 15 Trillion. Right now the Student Debt is 1 Trillion. Right now the Credit Card Debt is 826 Billion. These figures do not indicate an economy working for the Well Being of All Citizens. Why is it this way? This is a point that many people debate, and there are fingers to point all around. The truth, no matter how you slice it, is basic Human Greed. Whether you believe that the people who are in debt deserve it, or whether you believe it is the top 1%, or whether you believe it is the Fed, or the Government, or anything, the answer will always lead you to Human Greed. To put it simply; people desire more then what they have. This is an extremely basic tenant of Humanity. Except that now, it’s no longer a sin to be Greedy. It’s a goal. The Point The point of this movement, at it’s most basic core, is to remove Greed from the conversation. This can be illustrated very cleanly by the first statement that has come out of the movement. “Remove Money from Politics.” To phrase that differently, Abandon Greed. What people haven’t honed in on is that Greed pervades our day to day lives. This is why the movement seems scattered. It is because it is fighting against Greed, and Greed has become embedded in everything we do every single day. It is in every policy that is made by every corporation, it is in every political document that gets passed, it is in every educational facility, and every household. If you do not understand this movement it is not because the movement is crazy, or uninformed. It is because you are so awash in the system of Greed that you are blind to it’s effect on Humanity, and how it has debased and humiliated the majority of Citizens of the World. We are ultimately a Society. If one of us is Wealthy, it is not because of his/her working hard (Although they might have). It is because Fortune/God/Chaos smiled on that person. They are Fortunate to have been put into the situation to be Wealthy. That is all. They are Fortunate to have been born in a society that allows for personal wealth. They are Fortunate to have found the right way to become Wealthy. They are Fortunate they knew the people they knew who helped make them Wealthy. They are not above us. They are not better than us. They are part of us. All Wealth is derived from the People. If we allow Greed to ruin this, then it will ruin our entire Society. Help Build a Society. Abolish Greed. Thanks. [Az] Correction: It's an OWS blog. [/Az] Edited November 1, 2011 by WaterMan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 You might be schooled on Republican economics, but you just described the Tea Party and OWS in this paragraph. no, pretty sure I didn't. "abolish greed". yeah, sure, right after I cure stupidity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted November 1, 2011 Author Share Posted November 1, 2011 Interesting. If they want their jobs to pay them more money, then they should just become CEOs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 one side feels that when legislation controls buying and selling, inevitably the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. so government should get out of picking winners and losers and focus on the things only government can do. no more bailouts, no more venture capital in politically favored industries, no more oppressive regulation with carefully carved out exceptions for political allies and those with the best lobbyists. when there's not as much government influence to peddle, cronyism and corruption will inevitably decrease. the other side believes that the answers to cronyism lie in confiscating wealth, sanitizing the system by restricting the first amendment rights of corporations and other organizations, forgiving debt, and giving the government more power and an overall heavier hand to wield over the private economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 And it seems you guys are insinuating that theses groups are similar strictly because of the fact that they are an upstart, grass roots faction.. You are really glossing over the fact that both movements originated for the same exact reason. Here is another similarity; for all the angst, it's apparent that both the tea party and OWS activists are typically not the most informed. I'll provide you one similarity a day for the next few weeks if you really wish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 (edited) You are really glossing over the fact that both movements originated for the same exact reason. Here is another similarity; for all the angst, it's apparent that both the tea party and OWS activists are typically not the most informed. I'll provide you one similarity a day for the next few weeks if you really wish. from a completely unbiased perspective of course. Your attempts at trying to align the Tea Party with the Flea Baggers are laughable. You're comparing apples to oranges. What's the next similarity from you? Both groups gathered in the streets to protest so that means they are the same? Edited November 1, 2011 by tosberg34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Far from persuading each other, each causes the other to retrench, to dig in, to shut out, to shut down. I guess that the arguments are meant only to persuade the person making it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. - OWS Liberty is not a means to a political end. It is itself the highest political end. - Tea Party When the government's boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence. - The Huddle Moderates Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 The fix? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 The fix? Taking it at it's face value - perfect. Not only adding a tax to a worthless (for most of us) exercise but decreasing volatility and actually making these parasites work for a living too. It needs a method of ensuring the tax doesn't get passed on is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowboyGal2011 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Angry? Watch the video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 (edited) colbert interviews bushwacked and evil_gop_liars nice bangs EGL Edited November 2, 2011 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathpig Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 So is it 'Ignore the crazies and focus on the message'? Or is it 'Ignore the message and focus on the crazies'? Cause the people on the left use the former for OWS and the latter for the Tea Party, and the people on the right do the opposite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The fix? I see a couple of small problems with it, but they are out weighed by the good they do. Of course a better solution would just be to make a super short term capital gains tax on items held less than 1 week or one month. That would eliminate the few problems I see with the proposal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 colbert interviews bushwacked and evil_gop_liars nice bangs EGL Fookin' hilarious. And this entire time I though buttwhacked was a dude! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 I see a couple of small problems with it, but they are out weighed by the good they do. Of course a better solution would just be to make a super short term capital gains tax on items held less than 1 week or one month. That would eliminate the few problems I see with the proposal. I like that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 nonsense nonsense nonsense not nonsense: http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/...rding-the-gses/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-r...hen-on-location :facepalm: ketchup??? And when they got into the discussion of "female-bodied person" it reminded me of this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.