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.
Do you mean OWS is a comedy? Yes, it's more like a farce.
Farces are often highly incomprehensible plot-wise. Farces usually have
fast-paced plots whose speed usually increases, culminating in an ending
which often involves an elaborate chase scene.
Do you mean OWS is a comedy? Yes, it's more like a farce.
Farces are often highly incomprehensible plot-wise. Farces usually have
fast-paced plots whose speed usually increases, culminating in an ending
which often involves an elaborate chase scene.
Very funny, in a lame sort of way.
Maybe you should change careers.
But, I think in doing a comedy show, one has to be able to read.
I'd just like us all to take a moment and recognize the fact that for once conservatives have a funny bone and like something that came from the Daily Show.
I'd just like us all to take a moment and recognize the fact that for once conservatives have a funny bone and like something that came from the Daily Show.
Truth is stranger (aka makes it funnier) than fiction, as they say.
In every society, regardless of the type, there will be those that have and those that do not have. Those who are willing to do more to get more, and those who just want to get by. The difference is that the vast majority already know this reality. It is only the socialists that think otherwise. Their inability to cope with reality gives them the delusion that everyone is equal. They are society's parasites that must live off the labor of others.
There are two economic truisms that are beyond the comprehension of socialists:
You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it; and
What one receives without work, another must work without receiving.
Since the "haves" support the "have-nots" via tax funded social programs all is well and good if you have lots of haves and few have-nots.
It's when the have-nots equal or outnumber the haves that the haves start balking at increased taxes to support a growing group of have-nots. The have-nots then get angry if you start cutting their entitlements due to lack of money.
Having more have-nots than haves doesn't have a happy ending IMHO.
Collectivism such as that advocated by many OWSers is inherently dual class. Conservatives tend to believe that almost everyone is smart & capable enough to make his/her own way thru life (as long as there is sufficient freedom and thus sufficient opportunity). Liberals/collectivists tend to believe that only some people are capable, and that many are not and can't make it without significant help. With such a belief a dual class system is inevitable.
A lot of my friends are blue collar middle class guys my age (mid 50's). Most of them grew up in the city of Seattle, but only one or two still lives there. The city is very liberal and caters to the very rich and very poor. One way or another the middle class tends to leave for the suburbs.
Yes, I wonder if the "upscale" protesters are as fond of the notion of redistribution of wealth as the ghetto protesters. I'm thinking, um, not.
20yrsinBranson
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.
