#OccupyWallstreet

[spidey07]

Answer: The corporate owners, the manufacturing executives, the factory workers, the retail franchise owners, the logistics company employees, the retail employees, the stock market and private investors, AND the credit lenders.

I hope you realize that protesting at the retail locations has a negative impact on all of the above -- not just "the ebul credit lenders;" and, the worst of that impact will be on the employees at the lowest levels. Subsequently, they protesters are going to continue losing support as they piss off more and more average working Americans.

The anti-consumerist angle that the creators of OWS fantasize about needs to be dropped ASAP, or the entire "movement" is completely (and rightfully) f*cked.

Unless, of course, their goal really is to destroy capitalism...?

All the signs, words, actions, demands, etc. prove this is really the case and that fact cannot be disputed.

Or are we really to totally ignore the destroy capitalism message? Does the left and protesters think we're that stupid?

 

[HendrixFan]

Answer: The corporate owners, the manufacturing executives, the factory workers, the retail franchise owners, the logistics company employees, the retail employees, the stock market and private investors, AND the credit lenders.

I hope you realize that protesting at the retail locations has a negative impact on all of the above -- not just "the ebul credit lenders;" and, the worst of that impact will be felt by the employees at the lowest levels.

Not true. There are only a few people who are seeing gains over the last 30 years adjusted for inflation. As the middle class crumbles to pieces, the manufacturing executives, factory workers, retail franchise owners, the logistics company employees, the retail employees and the stock market and private investors all suffer. A healthy and vibrant middle class would provide a great boost to all those mentioned. A debt based society in which the majority of the population sees its income shrinking over a long period of time, masked in part by easy access to debt, is not a good thing. Unless you are the recipient of the debt payments...

That said, it is pretty stupid to "occupy" shoppers.

 

[HendrixFan]

Or are we really to totally ignore the destroy capitalism message? Does the left and protesters think we're that stupid?

You don't even know what capitalism is.

 

[cybrsage]

One nit that I corrected you on before. You're implying that if an officer encounters resistance during an arrest, he should use pepper spray. It's actually a situation where he MAY use pepper spray. That's an important difference.

No, that is a lie you create to make a point you can attack and win. I explicitly said this:

"But again, having the legal right to do something does not make it right to do that thing. Just like with the victory mosque in NYC, the right thing to do is to not follow through with what you have the legal right to do.

Sometimes, right is not right."

I know, I know, it is easier to attack points you create yourself, but it is silly to do so.

You keep making that claim, but have yet to back it up. All you have is one retired Philadelphia officer who claims he saw resistance on the video. Of course his purported "resistance" was one woman allegedly withdrawing her arm and a guy curled up defensively on the ground, neither of which matches the examples of active resistance listed earlier.

Are you pretending examples are exhaustive and that there are no other possibilities available? Please say you are not that stupid.

If the officer was not viewing a film...then what was he viewing?

Further, the other key requirement that you consistently ignore is that in order to be resisting arrest, there must actually be an officer trying to effect an arrest. You have yet to show any evidence whatsoever this was true, and the article you linked suggests otherwise. Instead, based on everything I've seen, it appears we had a large group of students seated peacefully on the ground (in a public area, no less). Then a UCD officer walks up out of the blue and starts painting the students with pepper spray, having made no apparent attempt to arrest anyone or interact with anyone individually.

That is because you WANT to see only that. It fits in with your world view, so anything else is ignored.

Finally, you continue to brush away the 9th Circuit court ruling stating explicitly that protestors sitting peacefully with arms locked does NOT constitute active resistance justifying the use of violent measures like pepper spray. In fact, the court made this ruling in spite of the fact these protestors took it a step further and placed metal guards over their arms to prevent police from separating them.

Not at all. In fact, I agreed with them. I know, I know, it is far easier to attack a point you invent yourself than the one I actually made...but it does make you look silly when you do it. Especially when you claim I said the opposite of what I actually said.

So even if the Philly cop's spin is true AND if there was, in fact, an attempt to arrest either or both of those individuals, there is still no legal basis whatsoever for assaulting all of the other students who were merely engaged in peaceful protest.

Sure there is, and it is contained in the same 9th Circuit Court ruling you just metioned. I refer you to the term called Active Resistence. Read the ruling again, specifically seeking out active resistence.

If you have evidence to the contrary, feel free to produce it. Otherwise you're just blowing the usual partisan smoke. I expect you'll just keep yapping dishonestly without making any effort to support your assertions.

By "blowing partisan smoke", you actually mean "not making most of the claims I pretend you made", then I agree with you. Most of what you just accused me of were invented by you so that you could attack them successfully. Pretty silly.

 

[cybrsage]

Are you talking about UC Davis? You just posted this out of nowhere, with no indication of who you are responding to.

Sorry, yes.

If so... The UC Davis cop violated university policy. Not only that, but assembly is a Constitutional right, just like the right to bear arms.

You must have a permit to assemble, just like you need a permit to bear most types of arms. No right is violated if the assembly is illegal.

By the way, if a cop is trying to infringe on your right to assemble using force, you have the right to do even more than interlock your arms and not move, you have the right to shoot him in self defense. That's the reason gun rights exist... Self defense against government, not for hunting like Obama says.

Yes, but since they were illegally assembling, none of what you just claimed is valid.

Or are you rightwingers backpedaling on the right to bear arms?

Oh hai! Look at that! A statement which has nothing to do with the topic at hand! There is a name for it, can you remember what that is called?

 

[palehorse]

Not true. There are only a few people who are seeing gains over the last 30 years adjusted for inflation. As the middle class crumbles to pieces, the manufacturing executives, factory workers, retail franchise owners, the logistics company employees, the retail employees and the stock market and private investors all suffer.

Bullshit. Your question was "who profits?", not "who profits the most?"

Any/every lost sale negatively impacts every link in the chain -- even moreso the employees at the lowest levels... you know, the ones you supposedly hope to lift up.

This is Econ 101 sh1t.

A healthy and vibrant middle class would provide a great boost to all those mentioned. A debt based society in which the majority of the population sees its income shrinking over a long period of time, masked in part by easy access to debt, is not a good thing. Unless you are the recipient of the debt payments...

Please explain to me how impeding sales solves ANY of that problem without simultaneously damaging those who you are claiming to help.

That said, it is pretty stupid to "occupy" shoppers.

At least we can agree on that much...

 

[cubby1223]

Most of the crazed black friday shoppers aren't buying products outright, they are putting it on their credit cards. The consumerism that we see is a driver of debt which, as I explained earlier in this thread, is a big part of the destruction of the middle class. Guess who is profiting off of the debt induced consumerism that we see on black friday?

Do you have any fucking clue what real life is about? You sound very much like you isolate yourself from other people, defining them not on personal experiences but by what a select few trusted sources tell you about other people.

 

[spidey07]

Do you have any fucking clue what real life is about? You sound very much like you isolate yourself from other people, defining them not on personal experiences but by what a select few trusted sources tell you about other people.

He's also ignoring that consumer debt is going way down and saving going way up in the obama economy.

 

[Jhhnn]

He's also ignoring that consumer debt is going way down and saving going way up in the obama economy.

Of course debt is going down. That's what happens when thousands of McMansions are foreclosed on and written off. That debt ceases to exist.

Obviously savings are up- witnessing the ass-raping going on all around them as a result of the collapse of the Ownership Society, anybody who has a job is saving, realizing that they just might be next for the massive Dick of Doom.

None of this speaks very well for the idea of economic recovery, given that Trickledown economics changed us from wage driven consumerism to debt driven consumerism. That's how trickledown works- money goes to the top, and gets lent back down to the rest of us. People don't get higher wages, they just get bigger lines of credit, lower interest, and longer to pay. That means more money flows to the top, reinforcing the trend.

Maybe the Job Creators aren't job creators at all, but rather rent seeking lenders, huh? Let's give 'em another tax cut, so they'll have more to lend to us & the govt, right?

 

[Bowfinger]

No, that is a lie you create to make a point you can attack and win. I explicitly said this:

"But again, having the legal right to do something does not make it right to do that thing. Just like with the victory mosque in NYC, the right thing to do is to not follow through with what you have the legal right to do.

Sometimes, right is not right."

I know, I know, it is easier to attack points you create yourself, but it is silly to do so.

I quoted your own words sweetheart. If what you actually said is not what you meant, perhaps you should learn to express your thoughts accurately.

Are you pretending examples are exhaustive and that there are no other possibilities available? Please say you are not that stupid.

I'm not pretending anything of the sort. That's your straw man, or as you put it, "it is far easier to attack a point you invent yourself than the one I actually made".

The real point, of course, is that you've yet again dodged your failure to provide evidence supporting your claim. All you do is repeat the same third-party hearsay without ever backing it up. When you can show us where, in the videos this self-serving "resistance" occurred, you may have a point. Until then all you have is deflection and after-the-fact excuses. We'll call that Strike 1.

If the officer was not viewing a film...then what was he viewing?

Another lame attempted duhversion. Of course he viewed a recording. I suggested nothing to the contrary. You're right, it is far easier to attack a point you invent yourself than the one I actually made.

That is because you WANT to see only that. It fits in with your world view, so anything else is ignored.

Yeah, OK, then for the umpteenth time show us some proof. You keep making the claim, yet you never even try to support it. You just spew the same empty allegations. Either put up or show the maturity you demand from others and admit you are wrong.

We'll call that Strike 2.

... I know, I know, it is far easier to attack a point you invent yourself than the one I actually made

I do believe that's the only one of your points you've actually supported ... by providing multiple examples with your own straw man posts.

but it does make you look silly when you do it. Especially when you claim I said the opposite of what I actually said.

Yes, just like that. I quote you verbatim. You deny your own words and pretend I made it up.

Sure there is, and it is contained in the same 9th Circuit Court ruling you just metioned. I refer you to the term called Active Resistence. Read the ruling again, specifically seeking out active resistence.

Really? Prove it. Cite the exact wording from the ruling that allows the police to assault innocent bystanders because a nearby individual has engaged in an act of active resistance (pretending for a moment you have actually provided evidence of such "resistance" ... which you haven't.). Like it or not, the court explicitly declared the use of pepper spray was unacceptable against peaceful, seated protestors with locked arms because their actions did NOT constitute active resistance.

That's a big Strike 3 for you. You make lots of noise but you duck the ball whenever you're pressed to support your claims.

By "blowing partisan smoke", you actually mean "not making most of the claims I pretend you made", then I agree with you. Most of what you just accused me of were invented by you so that you could attack them successfully. Pretty silly.

You're already out honey. You're not special. You don't get four strikes, even when it is the same tired dancing and dodging. If you can produce evidence supporting your fantastic stories, do so. Don't keep blowing smoke and lying about what others say. Put up or crawl back under you bridge.

 

[Bowfinger]

[ ... ]
You must have a permit to assemble, just like you need a permit to bear most types of arms. No right is violated if the assembly is illegal.

Yes, but since they were illegally assembling, none of what you just claimed is valid.

Now you're just making up more self-serving BS. Kindly show us where UC Davis required a permit for students to gather on that public student area on their campus.

Oh hai! Look at that! A statement which has nothing to do with the topic at hand! There is a name for it, can you remember what that is called?

A cybrsage post?

 

[Bowfinger]

Do you have any fucking clue what real life is about? ...

Do you? Pray tell what you think life is about. I'm guessing you think it has something to do with greed: most money, most stuff, fanciest cars, the usual morally bankrupt fixations that turned America into a debtor nation full of shallow, selfish people. But hopefully I'm mistaken.

 

[spidey07]

Do you? Pray tell what you think life is about. I'm guessing you think it has something to do with greed: most money, most stuff, fanciest cars, the usual morally bankrupt fixations that turned America into a debtor nation full of shallow, selfish people. But hopefully I'm mistaken.

But that is the American way. To succeed and to become independently wealthy. We live in one of the few countries where one can do that. I know that's against your very core, it is however how a liberal thinks, how they justify their redistribution, it is...the mind of a liberal.

The very idea that one can become wealthy, live off their investments and transactions all via the hands of the "banksters" is so horrific to the liberal. The only way the liberal sees one living is by handout of government money, for in their mind all money belongs to the government in the first place.

You see, I have learned the ways of the liberal. It's a great skill that allows me to expose what they really think and truly believe. One good thing about this protest is it's exposing what the left really wants and what they stand for (communism). And this country wants nothing to do with the shit OWS is pushing.

 

[cybrsage]

I quoted your own words sweetheart. If what you actually said is not what you meant, perhaps you should learn to express your thoughts accurately.

You seletively cut out the individual parts you wanted to show out of context. Stop being stupid on purpose.

So lets go back to the start and you quote me in context. As a note, if you keep calling me sweetheart I am going to take you on your offer for ghey sechs and ram your rump. No lube, either, just the way you like it.

 

[cybrsage]

Now you're just making up more self-serving BS. Kindly show us where UC Davis required a permit for students to gather on that public student area on their campus.

The claim was that you can assemble simply because the constitution says so. This is not true.

I know, I know, you like to take things out of context so you can ask me for ghey sechs again. You can just ask, no need to play dumb to do it.

 

[Bowfinger]

But that is the American way. To succeed and to become independently wealthy. We live in one of the few countries where one can do that. I know that's against your very core, it is however how a liberal thinks, how they justify their redistribution, it is...the mind of a liberal.

The very idea that one can become wealthy, live off their investments and transactions all via the hands of the "banksters" is so horrific to the liberal. The only way the liberal sees one living is by handout of government money, for in their mind all money belongs to the government in the first place.

You see, I have learned the ways of the liberal. It's a great skill that allows me to expose what they really think and truly believe. One good thing about this protest is it's exposing what the left really wants and what they stand for (communism). And this country wants nothing to do with the shit OWS is pushing.

You are so full of shit you should have your own Hazmat team. There is nothing inherently wrong with being successful and earning wealth. The problems are when people use unethical means to do so, or worse, have become so obsessed with money and stuff that they lose any sense of what's really important in life. Here's a hint: it ain't money. Money is a wonderful tool, but it is a corrupt replacement for real moral values.

Of course I sincerely doubt you're capable of digesting a single word of this. You've proven time and again you have no integrity whatsoever, no values beyond what's best for Spidey. You are a failure as a human being ... and a perfect role model for the immoral extreme right fringe.

 

[spidey07]

You are so full of shit you should have your own Hazmat team. There is nothing inherently wrong with being successful and earning wealth. The problems are when people use unethical means to do so, or worse, have become so obsessed with money and stuff that they lose any sense of what's really important in life. Here's a hint: it ain't money. Money is a wonderful tool, but it is a corrupt replacement for real moral values.

Of course I sincerely doubt you're capable of digesting a single word of this. You've proven time and again you have no integrity whatsoever, no values beyond what's best for Spidey. You are a failure as a human being ... and a perfect role model for the immoral extreme right fringe.

Right, that's my point. In the mind of a liberal, the liberal gets to decide what is ethical or not. To the liberal, any way to spin it as "greed" is unethical and therefore the liberal should take that ill gotten gains. (this has also been demanded by OWS protesters, it is afterall the foundation of communism and what the liberal feels).

Oh, I know exactly what you believe and how you feel. I have completely and totally digested the mind of the liberal. And this country IS going to stop it. Your post reaks of exactly what the liberal thinks - you wish to impose your will on others and force them to live how you think they should. Who the hell are you to tell somebody what's most important? This is America.

And go fuck yourself, I bet I give more to charity than you pay in taxes.

 

[Bowfinger]

You seletively cut out the individual parts you wanted to show out of context. Stop being stupid on purpose.

You're lying again. It was an exact and full quote. I didn't cut a single word.

So lets go back to the start and you quote me in context. As a note, if you keep calling me sweetheart I am going to take you on your offer for ghey sechs and ram your rump. No lube, either, just the way you like it.

Sorry, I find pedophilia disgusting, dear child, and have absolutely no interest in you. Better luck trolling elsewhere.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

sweetheart

dear child

Obviously you have some feelings for cyberage or you wouldn't use these terms of endearment when addressing him.

 

[cybrsage]

You're lying again. It was an exact and full quote. I didn't cut a single word.

Nope.

Sorry, I find pedophilia disgusting, dear child, and have absolutely no interest in you. Better luck trolling elsewhere.

That is not what you said last night. You hurt me deeply...last night you said you loved me and I felt good...

 

[OrByte]

Obviously you have some feelings for cyberage or you wouldn't use these terms of endearment when addressing him.

don't be jealous.

 

[cybrsage]

Obviously you have some feelings for cyberage or you wouldn't use these terms of endearment when addressing him.

Last night he said I was his one and only...and today he is being so mean to me. I don't know what to think now. I am starting to think he simply used me for his pleasure...

 

[cybrsage]

don't be jealous.

No need to fight over me. You all can take turns.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

don't be jealous.

I'm not jealous, just pointing out the facts. Maybe you're the one that's jealous seeing that you brought it up.

 

[Bowfinger]

The claim was that you can assemble simply because the constitution says so. This is not true.

ROFLMAO! What a cowardly sack you are. These are your exact words child:

"You must have a permit to assemble, just like you need a permit to bear most types of arms. No right is violated if the assembly is illegal."

"Yes, but since they were illegally assembling, none of what you just claimed is valid."
​

I'm not in the least surprised you lack the integrity to acknowledge your exact words and the maturity to admit you were wrong ... yet again. Here's a hint. That big 'L' on your forehead does NOT mean you're "1337".

I know, I know, you like to take things out of context so you can ask me for ghey sechs again. You can just ask, no need to play dumb to do it.

Here's another hint. Not only are such comments exceptionally childish and lame, they may also get you vacationed. I'm not a mod and won't presume to speak for them, but those sorts of comments have provoked harsh responses in the past. If you are truly incapable of anything even marginally intelligent, perhaps it would be better for you just crawl back under your bridge until you regain your composure.

My $0.02.