Occupiers-What Do You Want?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Maverick74, Oct 7, 2011.

  1. Max E.

    Max E.

    You know its funny cause if these far left loons had their way, they would make Chicago keep going further and further left until they have chased away any business that once operated there or had any plans of operating there.

    Then when chicago started to look like Detroit, they would continue to blame corporate america and never put 2 and 2 together, that it was their own bullshit that chased away all the businesses.
     
    #111     Oct 11, 2011
  2. Samsara

    Samsara

    Well, I guess it just comes down to how you and I judge where the mean is in this data set. Do I trust one guy's observations from talking to a few people, who is ideologically on the opposite spectrum as it is? Is that enough or is there other data out there? I thought the Economist was a fair enough source, but I guess not.

    If you just go to that 99% website you'll see some freeloaders, but also a range of stories about people losing their health insurance, getting laid off then getting cancer, complaining about the bailouts etc. I guess, using your logic, those collective observations are greater than your conversations, thus proving you wrong.

    Look man, I only take the contrary position because you're an even keel guy. You may lean a bit with the fringe, but at the end of the day you seem to have an interest in understanding varying sides to the story. Sometimes being objective allows for better solutions to problems, although it's not as fun as beating down straw men.
     
    #112     Oct 11, 2011
  3. Ricter

    Ricter

    #113     Oct 11, 2011
  4. Maverick74

    Maverick74

    I'm not disagreeing with you that there are sad stories in the group. In fact, all of them are sad stories. And I don't believe they are all freeloaders. What I do believe though is that this has been coming for a long time. Even during the good times when everyone was working and had homes, this was starting to boil under the surface. Hell, to be honest with you, it started under Reagan. And that is the divide in this country between free markets and government.

    These protesters want to change the system. And I believe them when they say that. They really believe the system is unfair and quick fixes and patchwork legislation won't give them the long term changes they really desire. These people want the system changed for good and they wanted it changed from a meritocracy to mediocrity. I respect their opinion. In the end, I think they will win. Probably not for awhile, but eventually the US will look like Detroit. And I for one will no longer call the US my home. That will be a sad day when it happens, but I believe there is no stopping it. The system will crash under it's own weight.

    As Tyler Durden likes to say, "on a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero."
     
    #114     Oct 11, 2011
  5. Maverick74

    Maverick74

    OK, so that went right over your labor leaning head. What he is saying is that his job requires him to work 45 hours, but he works another 15 to get ahead. He doesn't work the extra 15 because he gets paid to. He is actually willing to sacrifice the time for the dividends down the road. You know Ricter, some of us use the term entrepreneur. Look up the word. LOL.
     
    #115     Oct 11, 2011
  6. sme

    sme

    There are real dangers. If these groups keep getting ignore/mocked they will have nothing to lose.

    It is like trying to pick a fight with a guy who has nothing to lose. Or fading a strong trending market, you're going to get your head handed to you.
     
    #116     Oct 11, 2011
  7. Ricter

    Ricter

    Ahh, I see. My bad. Many folks are working as I've described, because of layoffs in their departments.
     
    #117     Oct 11, 2011
  8. Samsara

    Samsara

    There ya go -- see that's closer to seeing the picture. Yes, they do want the system changed for good. Whether or not that's feasible is a rational discussion. But it's much different from pretending everyone down there wants a communist revolution and free iPads.

    As I said, there's plenty of room to debate the implicit assumptions of their arguments: for instance, that subsidized health care coverage will make life better and not drive up costs, or that refusing to bail out the banks would not have had dire consequences, etc. This is on the order of policy and economics, rather than talk radio screeching, which is far down the rabbit hole.

    Good to see you're not too far gone. :D
     
    #118     Oct 11, 2011
  9. He's bi-polar, give it a few hours or days and he'll make the exact opposite argument.
     
    #119     Oct 11, 2011
  10. Maverick74

    Maverick74

    Not bi-polar, but I do like to argue. Being agreeable is boring.
     
    #120     Oct 11, 2011