Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When The Wall St journal says "next year" the bonuses will be lower and 10,000 jobs will be lost that's as good a time as any to remind people what Wall St is and isn't... or does the reminder only apply when someone isn't a fan of Wall St.?
I'd offer further explanation, but I think doing so would be a fruitless endeavor as the point was obviously too far over your head to begin with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feltdesigner
If the 99% are required to use personal responsibility when it comes to credit and using their house as an ATM so should those who are putting the country in jeopardy with bad business practices and socialized losses.
I can't disagree. But this movement (or at least most of the loudest voices) seem to be implying that everything is the fault of the greedy, corporate evil-doers. That fact that a lot of those in "the 99%" were at least partially at fault due to their own personal irresponsibility is not even a consideration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feltdesigner
Marching has changed a lot in this country.
It has...but most of those marches and movements that resulted in positive change were very well-organized and had a clear message and focused, tangible, realisitc goals, such as, "end segregation," or, "end the war and bring the troops home." And, as some of us have pointed out, that is the biggest problem with the whole "occupy" thing. As far as most people watching can tell, there is no clear message other than maybe, "we don't like the status quo." And again, that's great - but without clearly defined goals or messages, its not a cohesive movement as there is nothing that the protestors seem to be moving towards....so what's the point? What are their goals?
That is a valid question. It does not seem unreasonable to ask these people what they are hoping to achieve. Ducking the question and talking around it just makes them look like idiots.
...but most of those marches and movements that resulted in positive change were very well-organized and had a clear message and focused, tangible, realisitc goals, such as, "end segregation," or, "end the war and bring the troops home." And, as some of us have pointed out, that is the biggest problem with the whole "occupy" thing. As far as most people watching can tell, there is no clear message other than maybe, "we don't like the status quo." And again, that's great - but without clearly defined goals or messages, its not a cohesive movement as there is nothing that the protestors seem to be moving towards....so what's the point? What are their goals?
That is a valid question. It does not seem unreasonable to ask these people what they are hoping to achieve? Ducking the question and talking around it just makes them look like idiots.
Reading what you wrote made me realize that the same folks who were all swoony eyed over Obama's vague "Hope and Change" non-message are probably the same ones still hoping for the change that they THOUGHT they were promised. Only now, instead of wearing Obama T-shirts, they are camping out on Wall Street.
Folks, it was just a campaign slogan, lol.
Nothing wrong with hope! But I never did understand what it was that Obama was gonna change. Whatever it was, he either didn't choose the right things or he didn't know what it was he was supposed to change, cause . . . well . . . nothing has changed (unless you count the debt spiraling out of control, job loss, looming inflation on the horizon, etc etc etc) All that stuff is change . .. it just isn't GOOD change. I certainly don't think it was what folks expected when they voted for "change."
This is what happens when there IS NO CLEAR MESSAGE. People need to define what it is they want. And then listen very very carefully to what politicians say they can and can't deliver.
"CUT THE BUDGET" is very clear. Folks got elected, went to Washington and took the message they had gotten from their constitutents - and attempted to "CUT THE BUDGET."
Of course, it didn't work but at least those folks were trying to do what they were sent to DC to do.
"FLAT TAX" - now that is a message that everyone can understand.
Just cause this is a movement, it doesn't mean it is an effective movement. And that is too bad! Cause the media is there! Folks are showing up . . . they just can't seem to articulate WHY they are showing up.
Occupy Wall Street! It doesn't matter WHY! Just BE THERE!
Last edited by brokensky; 10-12-2011 at 11:49 AM..
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,670,113 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tober138
It has...but most of those marches and movements that resulted in positive change were very well-organized and had a clear message and focused, tangible, realisitc goals, such as, "end segregation," or, "end the war and bring the troops home." And, as some of us have pointed out, that is the biggest problem with the whole "occupy" thing. As far as most people watching can tell, there is no clear message other than maybe, "we don't like the status quo." And again, that's great - but without clearly defined goals or messages, its not a cohesive movement as there is nothing that the protestors seem to be moving towards....so what's the point? What are their goals?
That is a valid question. It does not seem unreasonable to ask these people what they are hoping to achieve? Ducking the question and talking around it just makes them look like idiots.
Yes & neither was a quick & easy fix, inspite of good organization & clear, concise messages.
I was 9 years old when the Woolworth sit-in happened & in high school when the anti-war rallys started. When I graduated from college, I was still looking at segregated want ads. Male wanted (the good jobs), Help wanted male or female (You could get by, financially with those.) and the ever popular Help wanted female (Good luck surviving financially with those.)
I think that the current protesters are looking for a quick fix for problems that are just as deeply embedded & systemic as the previous problems. I'm just a little too old & sick & tired to hit the pavement with them & don't think that they'll have any success quickly. If they have any success, they have to get their act together first.
The problems that weigh against Paul and Kucinich is that the moment they start sounding like whack jobs the average voter no longer listens to what they have to say, no matter how good their ideas are.
If a voter is uninformed about a subject, then even the truth is going to sound "whacky" to them.
I think that the current protesters are looking for a quick fix for problems that are just as deeply embedded & systemic as the previous problems. I'm just a little too old & sick & tired to hit the pavement with them & don't think that they'll have any success quickly. If they have any success, they have to get their act together first.
When President Obama was elected I was concerned, not by his election, but more because the wholly unrealistic expectations that the man was the second coming were going to lead to disillusionment, particularly from the younger voters.
Next will likely come more disillusionment when this movement fails to meet a concrete objective.
What happens when a large group becomes doubly disillusioned? I shudder to think of the possibilities.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,670,113 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821
Reading what you wrote made me realize that the same folks who were all swoony eyed over Obama's vague "Hope and Change" non-message are probably the same ones still hoping for the change that they THOUGHT they were promised. Only now, instead of wearing Obama T-shirts, they are camping out on Wall Street.
Folks, it was just a campaign slogan, lol.
Nothing wrong with hope! But I never did understand what it was that Obama was gonna change. Whatever it was, he either didn't choose the right things or he didn't know what it was he was supposed to change, cause . . . well . . . nothing has changed (unless you count the debt spiraling out of control, job loss, looming inflation on the horizon, etc etc etc) All that stuff is change . .. it just isn't GOOD change. I certainly don't think it was what folks expected when they voted for "change."
This is what happens when there IS NO CLEAR MESSAGE. People need to define what it is they want. And then listen very very carefully to what politicians say they can and can't deliver.
"CUT THE BUDGET" is very clear. Folks got elected, went to Washington and took the message they had gotten from their constitutents - and attempted to "CUT THE BUDGET."
Of course, it didn't work but at least those folks were trying to do what they were sent to DC to do.
"FLAT TAX" - now that is a message that everyone can understand.
Just cause this is a movement, it doesn't mean it is an effective movement. And that is too bad! Cause the media is there! Folks are showing up . . . they just can't seem to articulate WHY they are showing up.
Occupy Wall Street! It doesn't matter WHY! Just BE THERE!
As the saying used to be, Be there or be square.
In 2008 I got a clear consice message from Hillary, but the choice turned out to be hope & change. Hope for what & change what? I liked Biden, because he was regional & I knew his record, but hope & change?
McCain also had a clear & concise message, but Palen scared the bejesus out of me. I'm OK with voting against a candidate or a concept, but I couldn't make a choice, so I sat that one out. I have no right to complain, but I sure think that this group is going about things backassward.
But who packaged them up as AAA rated securities? Who knashed their teeth at the thought of obscene profits earned on the back of the middle and lower class?
There is plenty of blame to go around.
Indeed.
We are living in strange times when the prey are blamed more than the crooks.
We are living in strange times when the prey are blamed more than the crooks.
If laws were broken they are indeed crooks and should go to prison. The "prey", however, were also guilty in some respects as well. One can really desire something - such as a much bigger house - so much that they can be blinded to the truth, which is what they can afford.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,670,113 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowercountry
When President Obama was elected I was concerned, not by his election, but more because the wholly unrealistic expectations that the man was the second coming were going to lead to disillusionment, particularly from the younger voters.
Next will likely come more disillusionment when this movement fails to meet a concrete objective.
What happens when a large group becomes doubly disillusioned? I shudder to think of the possibilities.
Me too. I was still trying to figure out what Hope & Change meant.
I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out why the tax cut for hiring an unemployed person was not done when the Democrats were still a majority.
I'm watching the Republican field with great fear. I'm about as middle of the road as they come. Three years of "No" has been counter productive, to say the least.
Me too. I was still trying to figure out what Hope & Change meant.
I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out why the tax cut for hiring an unemployed person was not done when the Democrats were still a majority.
I'm watching the Republican field with great fear. I'm about as middle of the road as they come. Three years of "No" has been counter productive, to say the least.
I'll be candid. I have a lot of issues with the candidates as well but I also have a great fear of the "us vs. them" mentality that is reinforced by the media, as if running the country was a sporting event between the red jerseys and blue jerseys.
We need to get beyond that great divide but for the life of me I don't know how (or I'd run LOL). I think about 15% of the country is extreme left and another 15% is extreme right. The trouble is that those 30% are so rabid that they often carry the elections.
Here's another interesting story, and this one is from MSNBC:
A labor leader in Chicago is expected to receive pension payments of nearly $500,000 a year, while another could get about $438,000 a year, according to reports Wednesday.
Last edited by lowercountry; 10-12-2011 at 12:46 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
