Occupy Wall Street list of demands - are you serious?

**Clovis** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 03:16 PM

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic...

Originally Posted by Snowman

So you are with the crowd that believes that if you get sick and lose your job because you became incapable of doing it thus losing your insurance, you should be thrown into the street to die...

Nice... remind me to never ride with you, after all if I get run down by a car, my life ain't worth scraping off the pavement.

**Nick_Ninja** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by Clovis

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic...

Like the rest of the GOP?

**Clovis** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 03:27 PM

Soooo.....

Are you coming to the Devil's Spine again this year?

Originally Posted by Nick_Ninja

Like the rest of the GOP?

**Nick_Ninja** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by Clovis

Soooo.....

Are you coming to the Devil's Spine again this year?

Uh --- no.

**Clovis** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 03:31 PM

**Snowman** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by Clovis

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic...

After some Tea Party'ers yelled let them die at the debate, I wouldn't be too sure.

**Clovis** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 04:17 PM

Is this what you're talking about Snowman?

http://gawker.com/5839564/gop-debate...s-let-them-die

**dirkterrell** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 05:32 PM

Ok, I'm sure you've all been waiting with bated breath.

The Bill Moyers video that Jeff posted a link to is a good review of some things that have happened to the middle class by design. I believe this nation reaches its greatest potential when the middle class is healthy. I believe that the society envisioned by the Founders is the best one yet conceived and one that best aligns with human behaviors.

The way income and wealth are distributed through a society can range from the extreme of every person having/getting the same amount to the other extreme of having it concentrated in one person. Although we have not seen societies of those exact extremes, we have seen attempts to move toward them and it is clear that neither is optimal. The Founders understood this and tried to form a balanced society somewhere between them. They saw the value in a society with large numbers of people who worked hard to better themselves and who could reap the rewards of that hard work.

I suspect I am like most of you and the majority of US citizens. While I sometimes entertain the idea of striking it rich, I realize that my self-chosen path in life does not have a high probability of leading to that situation and that a life of productive work over many years is the way to grow my assets and contribute in some meaningful way to my family and society. I admire the men and women who get up every day and go to work to provide for themselves and their family just as much as I admire those who got rich by doing something that society valued. People like us are the ones who truly make this country successful.

Government's primary role is to ensure that the rights of individuals are not trampled on by others, domestic (hence, laws, courts, etc) or foreign (defense). Most libertarians end it right there. But, there are things that the government can do better or more efficiently than private industry (e.g. infrastructure items like streets/highways, and what I call "knowledge infrastructure" like basic research in health and science where the knowledge is freely disseminated). I also believe that there needs to be a public education system so that all children, no matter their financial situation, can have the opportunity to become better citizens. As Jefferson said, "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." But it is in these matters of the "public welfare" that we need to be very careful in giving government the power to control.

Enter the politicians. I don't doubt that there are many who truly believe in public service but I suspect they are mostly beaten down by those who lust for the power. In order to achieve that power, they have to receive the votes of the people, and it is here that they have done a masterful job of distorting the system. Our two-party system has been skillfully tuned to give the two major parties the only seats at the table. They have done this by turning voting decisions into either/or scenarios, a lesser of two evils sort of thing.

The left typically panders to the poor and the right to the rich. The middle class is caught in between. The left appeals to our sense of compassion for those who are poor through no fault of their own, for instance getting sick and being unable to work. The right appeals to our sense of fairness for those who got rich because of their own efforts. Most people would be in agreement with those positions. But the politicians use the extremes to bifurcate the voters and more easily ensure their election. The liberals point to rich fat cats who got that way by using their money tilt laws in their favor and the conservatives point to the lazy bums who sit around and play video games while drawing welfare. By loudly proclaiming the extreme negatives of what are otherwise ideas with merit (helping those truly in need and rewarding people who work hard), the politicians polarize people into one camp or the other and we can't work together on shared ideals because we fear that we are "giving in" to the other side that supports these extremes.

What we need to do is focus on the things we agree on, and understand that ideas are good or bad based on their own merits, not whether they are proposed by one side or the other. I don't know of many people, liberal or conservative, who like the idea of an able-bodied person just sitting around living off the public. I also don't know many who think that financial firms should be able to knowingly sell mortgage-backed securities as AAA rated when they know that they are no such thing. So, why aren't we solving these obvious problems?

We aren't solving them because the politicians don't want them solved. If a liberal politician entertains the idea from a conservative colleague that deadbeats shouldn't be on the public dole, votes and money are lost and he is vilified as not being compassionate. If a conservative entertains the idea from a liberal colleague that financial firms should not be able to sell toxic assets as AAA rated, he loses votes and money and he is vilified as participating in class warfare. By splitting the middle class, the politicians ensure their ability to pander to the extremes and the decay continues.

So, in the end, the problem ultimately resides with the middle class and our inability to see beyond the games being played by the politicians. It keeps us from solving problems that most of us actually agree on. And until we can do that, the downward spiral will continue. The middle class will be pinched out of existence from below by those pandering to the Free Shit Army and from above by those pandering to those who get rich by stealing wealth via the influence of money on politics. That will be the end of our society and we will have no one to blame but ourselves.

**Clovis** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 06:07 PM

+1

I actually was waiting with baited breath.

Nice post Dirk, I agree.

Originally Posted by dirkterrell

Ok, I'm sure you've all been waiting with bated breath.

The Bill Moyers video that Jeff posted a link to is a good review of some things that have happened to the middle class by design. I believe this nation reaches its greatest potential when the middle class is healthy. I believe that the society envisioned by the Founders is the best one yet conceived and one that best aligns with human behaviors.

The way income and wealth are distributed through a society can range from the extreme of every person having/getting the same amount to the other extreme of having it concentrated in one person. Although we have not seen societies of those exact extremes, we have seen attempts to move toward them and it is clear that neither is optimal. The Founders understood this and tried to form a balanced society somewhere between them. They saw the value in a society with large numbers of people who worked hard to better themselves and who could reap the rewards of that hard work.

I suspect I am like most of you and the majority of US citizens. While I sometimes entertain the idea of striking it rich, I realize that my self-chosen path in life does not have a high probability of leading to that situation and that a life of productive work over many years is the way to grow my assets and contribute in some meaningful way to my family and society. I admire the men and women who get up every day and go to work to provide for themselves and their family just as much as I admire those who got rich by doing something that society valued. People like us are the ones who truly make this country successful.

Government's primary role is to ensure that the rights of individuals are not trampled on by others, domestic (hence, laws, courts, etc) or foreign (defense). Most libertarians end it right there. But, there are things that the government can do better or more efficiently than private industry (e.g. infrastructure items like streets/highways, and what I call "knowledge infrastructure" like basic research in health and science where the knowledge is freely disseminated). I also believe that there needs to be a public education system so that all children, no matter their financial situation, can have the opportunity to become better citizens. As Jefferson said, "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." But it is in these matters of the "public welfare" that we need to be very careful in giving government the power to control.

Enter the politicians. I don't doubt that there are many who truly believe in public service but I suspect they are mostly beaten down by those who lust for the power. In order to achieve that power, they have to receive the votes of the people, and it is here that they have done a masterful job of distorting the system. Our two-party system has been skillfully tuned to give the two major parties the only seats at the table. They have done this by turning voting decisions into either/or scenarios, a lesser of two evils sort of thing.

The left typically panders to the poor and the right to the rich. The middle class is caught in between. The left appeals to our sense of compassion for those who are poor through no fault of their own, for instance getting sick and being unable to work. The right appeals to our sense of fairness for those who got rich because of their own efforts. Most people would be in agreement with those positions. But the politicians use the extremes to bifurcate the voters and more easily ensure their election. The liberals point to rich fat cats who got that way by using their money tilt laws in their favor and the conservatives point to the lazy bums who sit around and play video games while drawing welfare. By loudly proclaiming the extreme negatives of what are otherwise ideas with merit (helping those truly in need and rewarding people who work hard), the politicians polarize people into one camp or the other and we can't work together on shared ideals because we fear that we are "giving in" to the other side that supports these extremes.

What we need to do is focus on the things we agree on, and understand that ideas are good or bad based on their own merits, not whether they are proposed by one side or the other. I don't know of many people, liberal or conservative, who like the idea of an able-bodied person just sitting around living off the public. I also don't know many who think that financial firms should be able to knowingly sell mortgage-backed securities as AAA rated when they know that they are no such thing. So, why aren't we solving these obvious problems?

We aren't solving them because the politicians don't want them solved. If a liberal politician entertains the idea from a conservative colleague that deadbeats shouldn't be on the public dole, votes and money are lost and he is vilified as not being compassionate. If a conservative entertains the idea from a liberal colleague that financial firms should not be able to sell toxic assets as AAA rated, he loses votes and money and he is vilified as participating in class warfare. By splitting the middle class, the politicians ensure their ability to pander to the extremes and the decay continues.

So, in the end, the problem ultimately resides with the middle class and our inability to see beyond the games being played by the politicians. It keeps us from solving problems that most of us actually agree on. And until we can do that, the downward spiral will continue. The middle class will be pinched out of existence from below by those pandering to the Free Shit Army and from above by those pandering to those who get rich by stealing wealth via the influence of money on politics. That will be the end of our society and we will have no one to blame but ourselves.

**Ghost** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by dirkterrell

We aren't solving them because the politicians don't want them solved. If a liberal politician entertains the idea from a conservative colleague that deadbeats shouldn't be on the public dole, votes and money are lost and he is vilified as not being compassionate. If a conservative entertains the idea from a liberal colleague that financial firms should not be able to sell toxic assets as AAA rated, he loses votes and money and he is vilified as participating in class warfare. By splitting the middle class, the politicians ensure their ability to pander to the extremes and the decay continues.

So, in the end, the problem ultimately resides with the middle class and our inability to see beyond the games being played by the politicians. It keeps us from solving problems that most of us actually agree on. And until we can do that, the downward spiral will continue. The middle class will be pinched out of existence from below by those pandering to the Free Shit Army and from above by those pandering to those who get rich by stealing wealth via the influence of money on politics. That will be the end of our society and we will have no one to blame but ourselves.

In broad strokes, I agree.

However, there are details being glossed over that make the Middle Class Everyman seem the culprit in his own undoing, and I don't think that's wholly accurate.

I think the backlash that is OWS and the Stop SOPA/PIPA "movements" show that not everyone is purely complacent and sheepishly "taking it".

But, even if we're not the easy dupes "they" think we are, the Political Machine still holds all the power. OWS has been going on for a while, yet its effect has been (arguably) negligible in practical changes brought about by its presence.

SOPA and PIPA may be stopped, but I wonder how much of that is the voice of the everyman being heard, and how much of it is the weight of the corporations who've signaled their opposition. Probably, it's some combination of both.

Back to the divisive politics--the American Citizen is the subject of literally hundreds of millions of dollars of propaganda from every source imaginable--from the various political factions, from corporations, from movements and organizations, and whatever else. Even the news itself isn't "news" in any pure sense, it's tailored to its specific niche audience in order to sell the products related to those target demographics who watch it.

Then, in the middle of this propaganda barrage, we have Joe Average who just wants to put his kids through college, see his sick parents cared for, and be sure that he has enough health insurance that the cancerous lump in his chest won't wipe him and everything he's worked the past 20+ years to build down the drain.

He's not researching the "truth", he's not really going to investigate, analyze and come to a decision on what are the root causes and what's the best course of action--he's just going to listen to whichever of the sound bites he's keyed into and hope that a solution is found.

Now, some people will have come to the same conclusion Dirk presented, and they may agree with most of it. But, when it comes time to "enact policy", the only method available to them is to vote--and when your voting is so restricted that neither candidate really matters, and neither one is anything other than a stooge of Political Forces X or Y, then the entire process of voting--the only "voice" we have--is rendered moot and mute.

I, personally, would like to see the country unified, strengthened, and made great again. I'd like to see the cronyism and usurpation of power end. I'd like to see an empowered middle class, a reduced level of poverty, and an elimination of corporate influence in politics and in our wallets.

Problem is, Who do I vote for?

There's no one, on any level from Mayor to President, who wants to disturb and disrupt the political status quo--because to do so would mean they couldn't get elected.

The system is so rigged, and so broken, that the only way to change it is to become part of it. But, once you're part of it, you can't change it--too many allegiances to those who got you there, too much "at stake" if you try to rock the boat.

The Founding Fathers never could have known that Corporations would be given the same rights as people, nor that PACs and SuperPacs and the entire kick-back cronyism of our political system would evolve to such a level that the everyman's voice has been taken out of the loop.

So, blame (what's left of) the Middle Class if you want, but they've been so marginalized and de-fanged that they're in the impossible position of trying to change something that's beyond their power or influence (as money talks) to affect.

**Zanatos** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by Snowman

So you are with the crowd that believes that if you get sick and lose your job because you became incapable of doing it thus losing your insurance, you should be thrown into the street to die...

Nice... remind me to never ride with you, after all if I get run down by a car, my life ain't worth scraping off the pavement.

I was trying to be sarcastic and poke a stick at some of the conservatives' unbridled hate for the less fortunate.

I am lucky to be a military retiree and have medical bennies, but I have a buddy who had a kidney transplant. If he ever loses his job, he will never be able to get health insurance again - unless he could afford to pay $3K+ per month.

**CYCLE_MONKEY** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 06:45 PM

Originally Posted by Zanatos

I was trying to be sarcastic and poke a stick at some of the conservatives' unbridled hate for the less fortunate.

I am lucky to be a military retiree and have medical bennies, but I have a buddy who had a kidney transplant. If he ever loses his job, he will never be able to get health insurance again - unless he could afford to pay $3K+ per month.

Typical libtard spin. It's not unbridled hate for the unfortunate you moron, it's unbridled hate for the perpetually and willfully lazy and stupid. Big difference.

**CYCLE_MONKEY** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by Snowman

Nice... remind me to never ride with you, after all if I get run down by a car, my life ain't worth scraping off the pavement.

Awwww, c'mon Snowman, you know I'd scrape you off the pavement........(so another rider didn't hit your corpse and crash...).

**CaptGoodvibes** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by CYCLE_MONKEY

Typical libtard spin. It's not unbridled hate for the unfortunate you moron, it's unbridled hate for the perpetually and willfully lazy and stupid. Big difference.

You are incapable of making any distinction Frank. Your propensity to slander all "libtards" and put them into one group proves you will lie at all costs to get your extreme message heard. There is no chance of you ever working towards a solution because you have so much animosity for anyone that isn't as hateful as you. Seriously. It got old a long time ago.

**Ghost** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 07:10 PM

Originally Posted by CaptGoodvibes

It got old a long time ago.

So did Frank.

**Zenshu** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 07:45 PM

If you want free college join the military problem solved...don't think you should have to do anything at all and it should be handed to you on a silver plater? then kill yourself because you are the "age of entitlement" assholes that make living in this world in this time such a giant embarrassment. Seriously...what is wrong with these people...."WAAAHHH WAHHHH WAAAHH I Want to be given everything for free and never have to actually get off of my fat ass for any reason...I want free college so that I canz tellz people I iz smarted and I want to get paid even if I don't work. And i want all of the debt that I collected to be erased so that I can take all that free money I didnt work for and spend it on whatever products are left since we are making so that we cant afford to import things and at the same time making it so no one in America will work in a factory to produce any products since they can sit at home and collect a free check." Seriously...someone needs to knock some sense into these morons.

**Zenshu** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 07:51 PM

Also!....The only ALMOST good point they make is about medical care...While I disagree that all private insurance should be banned I do think that there should be medical care for people who NEED it....not like some states medical care *cough* Maine *Cough* who take state taxes to pay for an unemployed crack whores 46 abortions...and also pays for breast implants....make people qualify for government medical aid...like certain age/disabilities/other factors preventing them from getting a job and insurance. but by no means should we have a free healthcare system. I have friends who tell horror stories about Canadian medical care....why?...because doctors and surgeons there work for peanuts...Our healthcare works because the doctors are afraid to loose their jobs and their huge paychecks...take away the money and no one will try to be the best doctor in the world.

**dirkterrell** · Wed Jan 18th, 2012, 09:19 PM