My friend posted this picture(above) to Facebook.
These are the comments that followed.
These are the comments that followed.
Me: LIKELIKELIKELIKELIKE
Speaker 1(J): dislike.... as that should not only be possible for people who join the armed forces. Education is a right, not a privilige.
Speaker 2(C): This guy doesn't get it. The 1% of the 99%? No, my friend. There are many, many people, among them liberals that you seem to regard as simply lazy, that work much, much harder than you and don't enjoy your same success. I bet you would not have the balls to hold up that note up to the face of a single mother holding down two crappy jobs with no health insurance who can barely make ends meet because of the select few who crashed the economy three years ago. If going into the Armed Forces is now the only way to make it to the 1% of the 99%, then that is a pretty shitty American Dream.
Me: The main point I get from this (the one that I agree with) is that he's actually doing something to BECOME part of the 1%- as is the single mother. They're working hard, trying to make ends meet whatever way they can, instead of sitting in a tent for a month and not making any progress. I agree that the system is broken, and a lot of the fault lies with corrupt bankers, but not all bankers are corrupt. Taking away the gains that the select, honest few have worked their whole lives to have just to punish the others isn't the 'American Dream' either. I would describe myself as pretty liberal, but I still know the value of an honest days' work, and the importance of working hard. I agree something needs to be done, but just sitting here and saying 'we're upset because we're poor, do something' isn't what's going to fix it.
Speaker 2 (C): For all their flaws, the Occupy movement is doing something. How many of us are mad that the economy was recklessly driven into an iceberg, and not a single culprit has been indicted or punished for it? How many of us are mad with how one political party panders to the top 1%, and the other party yields to them too? I'm guessing a lot. However, how many of those, myself (and possibly you) included, are doing anything about it? The Occupy movement is.
Me: What, exactly, are they doing then?
Speaker 2(C):Igniting a national conversation about this. Raising public awareness and support for this issue. Basically, exercising their democratic right to protest. In mature, civilized democracies, that is what exacts political change. And as difficult as that is, it does more help than any one of us arguing on the Internet.
Me: I wouldn't say arguing, merely discussing a national issue. Which I do recognize that they are bringing an issue to light; yet that issue was already a focus. I can support and approve of their desire to bring about change; I just can't agree with the way they're choosing to do it.
Speaker 3 (A): how do you suggest they do it then?
Me: I wouldn't be so arrogant as to suppose to have all the answers; or really any of them. I don't know how it should be changed, or what should be changed. I just don't see what good spending a month in a park is doing. Why not get a national petition going, or some other form of protest? Then it's still nation-wide and participatory, but those of us with jobs and school don't have to quit them to try and make a difference.
Speaker 1(J): dislike.... as that should not only be possible for people who join the armed forces. Education is a right, not a privilige.
Speaker 2(C): This guy doesn't get it. The 1% of the 99%? No, my friend. There are many, many people, among them liberals that you seem to regard as simply lazy, that work much, much harder than you and don't enjoy your same success. I bet you would not have the balls to hold up that note up to the face of a single mother holding down two crappy jobs with no health insurance who can barely make ends meet because of the select few who crashed the economy three years ago. If going into the Armed Forces is now the only way to make it to the 1% of the 99%, then that is a pretty shitty American Dream.
Me: The main point I get from this (the one that I agree with) is that he's actually doing something to BECOME part of the 1%- as is the single mother. They're working hard, trying to make ends meet whatever way they can, instead of sitting in a tent for a month and not making any progress. I agree that the system is broken, and a lot of the fault lies with corrupt bankers, but not all bankers are corrupt. Taking away the gains that the select, honest few have worked their whole lives to have just to punish the others isn't the 'American Dream' either. I would describe myself as pretty liberal, but I still know the value of an honest days' work, and the importance of working hard. I agree something needs to be done, but just sitting here and saying 'we're upset because we're poor, do something' isn't what's going to fix it.
Speaker 2 (C): For all their flaws, the Occupy movement is doing something. How many of us are mad that the economy was recklessly driven into an iceberg, and not a single culprit has been indicted or punished for it? How many of us are mad with how one political party panders to the top 1%, and the other party yields to them too? I'm guessing a lot. However, how many of those, myself (and possibly you) included, are doing anything about it? The Occupy movement is.
Me: What, exactly, are they doing then?
Speaker 2(C):Igniting a national conversation about this. Raising public awareness and support for this issue. Basically, exercising their democratic right to protest. In mature, civilized democracies, that is what exacts political change. And as difficult as that is, it does more help than any one of us arguing on the Internet.
Me: I wouldn't say arguing, merely discussing a national issue. Which I do recognize that they are bringing an issue to light; yet that issue was already a focus. I can support and approve of their desire to bring about change; I just can't agree with the way they're choosing to do it.
Speaker 3 (A): how do you suggest they do it then?
Me: I wouldn't be so arrogant as to suppose to have all the answers; or really any of them. I don't know how it should be changed, or what should be changed. I just don't see what good spending a month in a park is doing. Why not get a national petition going, or some other form of protest? Then it's still nation-wide and participatory, but those of us with jobs and school don't have to quit them to try and make a difference.
Speaker 1(J): There is nothing to petition for, a petition would imply that this could be fixed with revisions complying with our current political framework. But what is under protest is our whole Power/political construct itself. This is the first time people in almost 1000 cities, 80+ countries people have mobilized against the current economic/political dynamic in place. this could be pretty cool..
Speaker 4 (Poster): I personally just think it's a terrible idea. Granted there isn't a single voice for all the protests cause not all of them are protesting the same thing however, anyone protesting capitalism is protesting the system that has raised hundreds of millions, if not billions, of people out of poverty since it was first implemented and as a whole, nations and the world itself only continue to become richer due to it. Those protesting for a higher minimum wage would actually kill the jobs they're trying to get. I personally don't see the point of shutting down Oakland Harbor which is top 5 on the list of places in America where we import and export. Our economy wasn't wrecked by a few corporate criminals, recessions are a natural part of the capitalistic model. Some are to blame for bribery/trade-offs/ponzi schemes etc. but those didn't cause the economy to suddenly tank. The corporate greed that some of them are protesting are the reason jobs are being created right now. Greed in the capitalistic model is good. We just prefer to re-label it as self-interest.
Speaker 1(J): Yes that can't be denied. And self interest is very useful... as long as externalities are made corporate costs through regulation....not costs to the public as often happens in the states. I think a large part of what the protesters are frustrated with is the extent to which the 1% have almost exclusive access to influencing our public policy. Through the growth and income disparity created through current capitalistic policy, our government is ultimately controlled by a group of few individuals - the top 1%. sounds like an oligarchy to me
Speaker 3 (A): youuuuu know!!!
At this point, I lost my interest to comment.
Go Greed!
Go Greed!
No comments:
Post a Comment