#OccupyWallstreet

[michal1980]

Except they are of course on the hook for it in the future and many of them had jobs before the crash.

Cry some more spidey! The People are waking up. They hate the Tea Party, and they like Occupy Wall Street. Aren't you happy that finally the will of The People is coming forth?

The will of the non working that want to take from the working is not something I would be happy about.

Thats what they want. Take Take Take. Just as greedy as the wall street types they are protesting.

 

[Zargon]

everyone income grew. Theres just grew fast/more. They didn't steal that money from anyone.

Stealing implies that you somehow 'owned' something.

http://www.advisorperspectives.com/...ncome.html?household-incomes-mean-nominal.gif

estimates range from 190-300% total inflation since from 79-99

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Income_Distribution_1967-2003.svg

according to this the 95% income went up ~150% by 1999, and has gone down since. meaning they are infact technically making LESS money now than in 1977. while the richest of the rich are actually making quite MORE than they were

 

[michal1980]

estimates range from 190-300% total inflation since from 79-99

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Income_Distribution_1967-2003.svg

according to this the 95% income went up ~150% by 1999, and has gone down since. meaning they are infact technically making LESS money now than in 1977. while the richest of the rich are actually making quite MORE than they were

So how much of that money was OWNED by the 99% that the 1% stole?

 

[IceBergSLiM]

So how much of that money was OWNED by the 99% that the 1% stole?

your poor why are arguing so much? Why can't you just admit you got fucked and are getting fucked along with the rest of the middle class? Your like the wife of the abusive husband making excuses...oh I had it coming to me I did over cook that pot roast

 

[Craig234]

everyone income grew. Theres just grew fast/more. They didn't steal that money from anyone.

Stealing implies that you somehow 'owned' something.

http://www.advisorperspectives.com/...ncome.html?household-incomes-mean-nominal.gif

False on every point. Now try finding a chart with the top 1% and top 0.01%.

Here's your own link adjusted for inflation, showing the bottom 80% flat:

If the distribution of income were as in 1950-1980, Americans would have a fortune more wealth as they shared in economic growth.

 

[Ausm]

False on every point. Now try finding a chart with the top 1% and top 0.01%.

Here's your own link adjusted for inflation, showing the bottom 80% flat:

If the distribution of income were as in 1950-1980, Americans would have a fortune more wealth as they shared in economic growth.

That doesn't look like much is trickling down:whiste:

 

[monovillage]

I finally found the OWS manifesto.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...treet_a_manifesto_for_insert_date_111687.html

Hopefully a supporter of OWS can let us know if it's the "real" manifesto.

 

[Schadenfroh]

What did the coast guard do to deserve this?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46869

In Boston, the “Occupy” rabble spat on a female Coast Guard officer and threw a water bottle at her:

The Coast Guard in Boston confirmed that a woman in uniform was harassed and spat upon near Occupy Boston protesters.

The woman was walking to the train and said protesters spit on her twice, called her foul names and even threw a water bottle at her.

Now, the Coast Guard is warning all staff working on Atlantic Avenue to avoid those protesters while in uniform.

Devon Pendleton, a spokesman for Occupy Boston, doesn't believe that those male protestors are actually part of the movement. However, Pendleton wants to be clear, that if protestors are responsible for doing something so disrespectful, he'd like to apologize on behalf of Occupy Boston.

If the people that harassed her are part of the OWS movement, I hope they deal with it internally.

 

[spidey07]

I finally found the OWS manifesto.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...treet_a_manifesto_for_insert_date_111687.html

Hopefully a supporter of OWS can let us know if it's the "real" manifesto.

Sounds about right if you read their signs and listen to their whining.

 

[michal1980]

your poor why are arguing so much? Why can't you just admit you got fucked and are getting fucked along with the rest of the middle class? Your like the wife of the abusive husband making excuses...oh I had it coming to me I did over cook that pot roast

Because I'm not.

the people making excuses are the OWS people who think everything should be free, and someone else stole it from them. Like they are owed free cars, houses, food, education, etc.
All while talking on their iphones.

 

[michal1980]

Sounds about right if you read their signs and listen to their whining.

from reading the OWS site, seems spot on.

Of course they will deny it, and call everyone that doesn't 'believe' in their unformed rants a denier or puppet, or slave, or some other personal attack.

 

[Craig234]

from reading the OWS site, seems spot on.

Of course they will deny it, and call everyone that doesn't 'believe' in their unformed rants a denier or puppet, or slave, or some other personal attack.

Let's see what you won't whine about.

Let's say a person posted, 'All Republicans are racists and want to wipe out anyone not white in the world and give all the land to whites.'

Or, 'Republicans hate social spending because they think starving people are funny'.

Now, what would you label the person who said those things, without 'personal attack'?

 

[Zargon]

So how much of that money was OWNED by the 99% that the 1% stole?

where do you think that profit came from?

off the backs of the workers, and they decided to keep it as income for themselves instead of pay it back to hard working employees.

illegal? no? not very moral though

thats what half the uproar for a large portion of the population over wall st is

they failed, got a bailout(OUR money), gave themselves big bonus's for it.

how can that make you happy/not upset? stealing from the fed == stealing from you

 

[Ausm]

I finally found the OWS manifesto.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...treet_a_manifesto_for_insert_date_111687.html

Hopefully a supporter of OWS can let us know if it's the "real" manifesto.

I doubt that is the real deal looks like it was written by a teenager.

 

[Craig234]

I doubt that is the real deal looks like it was written by a teenager.

It's only a teenager in the sense that it's a right-wing attempt at parody and they have the mentality of one.

 

[michal1980]

where do you think that profit came from?

off the backs of the workers, and they decided to keep it as income for themselves instead of pay it back to hard working employees.

illegal? no? not very moral though

thats what half the uproar for a large portion of the population over wall st is

they failed, got a bailout(OUR money), gave themselves big bonus's for it.

how can that make you happy/not upset? stealing from the fed == stealing from you

Whos morality are we using?

So now you claim the money wasn't stolen, it was earned. by making products that people are willing to buy, and pay workers wages they are willing to work for.



Wallsteet money was a loan. Most banks paid the tarp money back already. So how was it 'stolen'?

The true bailout was for the UAW works who got away with billions.

 

[michal1980]

Let's see what you won't whine about.

Let's say a person posted, 'All Republicans are racists and want to wipe out anyone not white in the world and give all the land to whites.'

Or, 'Republicans hate social spending because they think starving people are funny'.

Now, what would you label the person who said those things, without 'personal attack'?

I fail to see what point you are trying to make.

I would say that person has no idea how to argue. Which is common for alot of the OWS supporters. They would rather call those not supporting their cause sheep, or slaves, then actually discuss what they are for and against.

If your not willing to define what you are for, then you should we ready to have someone else define it for you.

If you stand for nothing, then why are you standing up?

 

[michal1980]

It's only a teenager in the sense that it's a right-wing attempt at parody and they have the mentality of one.

another personal attack from an OWS supporter.

 

[Craig234]

I fail to see what point you are trying to make.

OK. My point was that you post really bad whoppers, and then demand no one criticize you.

I would say that person has no idea how to argue. Which is common for alot of the OWS supporters.

They argue a lot better than you. How many have you heard?

They would rather call those not supporting their cause sheep, or slaves, then actually discuss what they are for and against.

If your not willing to define what you are for, then you should we ready to have someone else define it for you.

If you stand for nothing, then why are you standing up?

They have no problem talking about what they're against.

A radio host made this point well the other day, I think it was Thom Hartmann.

The American revolution grew out of a lot of people with varying issues. They didn't have any 'formal document' until the Declaration of Independence. No constitution, their first 'demands' were for the Articles of Confederation which were very different from the constitution. But they united and fought for their different reasons generally against the oppression of the monarchy. They disagreed strongly on a lot - as I posted recently, for example, Hamilton wanted a permanent President, like a King - others did not.

They effectively fought the revolution without that 'manifesto' of 'agreed demands' all settled until years later with the constitution.

It's clear what the protests are about. They're new. They take time to develop 'formalized' things, unless they're the tea party bought and paid for with an agenda.

 

[Ichigo]

another personal attack from an OWS supporter.

You do know what a *personal* attack is right?

Hypothetically, if I said "You are an idiot for not recognizing that the statement you quoted was not a personal attack", that would be a personal attack.

 

[Nebor]

False on every point. Now try finding a chart with the top 1% and top 0.01%.

Here's your own link adjusted for inflation, showing the bottom 80% flat:

If the distribution of income were as in 1950-1980, Americans would have a fortune more wealth as they shared in economic growth.

The average American wouldn't know what to do with it.

 

[Karl Agathon]

Sounds about right if you read their signs and listen to their whining.

Sounds like they like Jews an awful lot too.

 

[Zargon]

Whos morality are we using?

So now you claim the money wasn't stolen, it was earned. by making products that people are willing to buy, and pay workers wages they are willing to work for.


Wallsteet money was a loan. Most banks paid the tarp money back already. So how was it 'stolen'?

The true bailout was for the UAW works who got away with billions.

if you think that making millions per year while failing to pay your workers enough to keep up with COL is moral, then I guess there is no point to talk to you about this stuff.

I never said anything great about the UAW, they can go blow themselves

yeah most of them paid most of it back, and for almost failing, they gave themselves huge bonuses, instead of keeping the money in the company to help them get even better.

bank of america is handing out multimillion dolalr bonuses to the CEO, and exceo who got double digit millions on his way out(of making the bank fail) and to pay for it, they are adding a 5$ a month debit card fee?

thats bullshit

it snot technically theft, but it might as well be, its bad business thats being handheld by the fed too

you complain too loudly and you get canned. with unemployment where it is they will just hire someone else.

 

[Jhhnn]

Whos morality are we using?

So now you claim the money wasn't stolen, it was earned. by making products that people are willing to buy, and pay workers wages they are willing to work for.

As is common on the Right, you make certain assumptions as to what people are willing to work for, as if not working were a viable alternative, and as if there were more jobs than workers.

You assume choice where none exists at a macro level...

 

[michal1980]

You do know what a *personal* attack is right?

Hypothetically, if I said "You are an idiot for not recognizing that the statement you quoted was not a personal attack", that would be a personal attack.

Craig234 posted

"It's only a teenager in the sense that it's a right-wing attempt at parody and they have the mentality of one."

what point where you attacking in the article linked? none. you were attacking the writer.