I get it. If I want to win an argument I call somene a retard.
PS you chart shows there are jobs. That lower line would have be at ZERO if your statement "there are none" were to hold true.
Retard Conservatives in this thread: "Hey you dirty smell hippies, get a job"
There are none, that's the point you retards. Conservatives are really bad at looking at the 'big macro picture'.
What do you think most "evil corporations" do with their own profits?Most of the people you just named have grown their wealth through investing in their own work, ie producing.
I have never advocated lobbying, from Hollywood or anywhere. I have no problem with anyone who uses their celebrity to spread their ideals. That is pretty much what art is. It certainly is clearly speech. Money is where I draw the line though.
I have explained already in this thread that some random family of four with two working professionals may be 1%, but they aren't the target of the rage. You are just trying to muddy the issue by playing dumb. I just got done explaining that the financial industry is the target, hence the name Occupy Wall Street. It was in the post you responded to...
They are different, they don't have undue influence on the political process that has tied into business to push money upward. You are either trolling or are unbelievably dense to think that ultra wealthy elites on Wall Street have no more influence than a random family that makes $400k a year.
As I said before, personalities such as Oprah, Michael Moore, Al Gore, Jon Stewart, Oliver Stone, David Letterman, etc, each compound their own vast wealth using many of the same methods as the bankers and traders on Wall Street -- that is, they invest their income and then collect vast sums of additional wealth from interest and dividends.
On top of that, many of those personalities use their own vast wealth and position to push political agendas on a daily basis. In fact, Hollywood is one of the largest and most influential lobbying entities in this country! Woops!!
Why are some of the actual 1% exempt from the hostilities and anger that is supposedly aimed at "the 1%"?
Is there a master list of "acceptable" or exempt 1%ers somewhere that I can use for future reference? I'd really like to ensure that "innocent 1%ers" don't mistakenly get caught up in this mess. That would be a real shame.
Thanks ahead of time...
PS: Be careful, this was a trick question. I already know the answer. The reason some of "the 1%" are exempt from your wrath is because they have successfully fooled you into believing that they're on your "side," and that they're somehow different from the other ultra-wealthy elites you're screaming at on Wall Street.
OWS is...sort of an attempt to bring the dialogue to the left, which has worked so far.
It's deeply confusing for rank and file righties, who want something or somebody to follow, not something they'd need to build themselves with their own ideas.
According to several OWS supporters in this thread, the US population now fits into three categories:
1. The 'Haves who disagree with us' (Evil 1%ers)
2. The 'Haves who are OK because they're on our side.' (Good 1%ers)
3. The 'Have Nots' (99%ers)
I'd simply like to know who gets to decide which category each 1%er belongs to...
Yep, and that's why the leaders of the Right hate it so desperately, because they lose control of the discussion- it moves outside of the frame they've provided. And in not yet offering any concrete proposals, OWS thwarts their attack mechanisms, promotes discussion at a level Right pundits can't control.
The reaction from the usual suspects is telling. For the Right, the slogan is the message and the goal wrapped into one. For OWS, the slogan is just a collection point for ideas that will define the solutions. The former is a deeply authoritarian way of doing things, despite the denials, and the latter is anything but.
It's deeply confusing for rank and file righties, who want something or somebody to follow, not something they'd need to build themselves with their own ideas.
Righties have no ideas mainly because they have no interest in politics and governing. It is a us vs. them pro-wrestling drama to them, courtesy of the talk radio soap operas under the guise of politics they pollute their brains with daily.
Personally they are best ignored as I cannot think of the last time the right has ever contributed anything positive to the USA except haterism every step of the way.
ph, that question really has no purpose.
The main effort of OWS is to bring attention to the issue and let lawmakers realize that enough people are dissatisfied not only with what is going on today, but with how they are handling it.
Many do not care about specifics, and are not trying to railroad the reps into something that cannot be physically accomplished (such as some of the Californian spending programs with no means to pay for them, not that the programs are BAD, but you can't get a free coffee at Starbucks no matter how much you may want one...)
That lack of specific issue makes it VERY hard for pundits to target and slam. As soon as they try and quash one thing, there is no real uproar about it, it simply gets redefined or other issues surface that matter more to those being addressed. It is quite infuriating when you do not have one solid tangible target to sling mud at.
Righties have no ideas mainly because they have no interest in politics and governing. It is a us vs. them pro-wrestling drama to them, courtesy of the talk radio soap operas under the guise of politics they pollute their brains with daily.
Personally they are best ignored as I cannot think of the last time the right has ever contributed anything positive to the USA except haterism every step of the way.
Righties need someone to follow? The left has a problem with the right because they have ideas, and principles, they stand for something. Standing for something means you can be attacked for having those ideas.
The OWS has none of that. No ideas, no plans, no principles. How can they expect to achieve anything without direction, or ideas, or plans.
The OWS wants to compare them selves with the Arab spring crowd? LOL. OWS is not even in the same league. The Arabs had goals, they wanted their leaders gone. Then they acted to achive those goals.
OWS is the direct opposite, angry that life is hard, and they aren't getting things they feel entitled to. And to top it off, ask them what they want, and they have a blind look in their eyes. Come to think about it, those that dressed up as zombies were right on.
Indeed.You illustrate my point in ways that you can't even comprehend.
Thank You.
Kudos! Right on target and very well said.Yep, and that's why the leaders of the Right hate it so desperately, because they lose control of the discussion- it moves outside of the frame they've provided. And in not yet offering any concrete proposals, OWS thwarts their attack mechanisms, promotes discussion at a level Right pundits can't control.
The reaction from the usual suspects is telling. For the Right, the slogan is the message and the goal wrapped into one. For OWS, the slogan is just a collection point for ideas that will define the solutions. The former is a deeply authoritarian way of doing things, despite the denials, and the latter is anything but.
It's deeply confusing for rank and file righties, who want something or somebody to follow, not something they'd need to build themselves with their own ideas.
So what you are saying is that OWS is just a bunch of whiners. that same lack of focus means they wont get anything done.
The former is a deeply authoritarian way of doing things, despite the denials, and the latter is anything but.
No, you said that.
Are you paying attention? Do I need to put subtitles on the bottom of my posts?
You illustrate my point in ways that you can't even comprehend.
Thank You.
I am pretty sure confiscating my wealth to forgive your trillion dollars worth of school debt is much more authoritarian than anything coming from the GOP. Its funny. By definition "progressives" are authoritarian.
I am paying attention. The question is are you?
Trying to put a handle where there isn't one, I see, then making assignments based on your own assumptions.
OWS is at the suggestion gathering phase, rather than the proposal phase. I realize that's difficult for Righties to comprehend, given that their proposals come pre-packaged from the top down.
They may never offer any concrete proposals at all, but rather leave it up to the participants & supporters to carry the messages to politicians through other avenues.