Occupy Wall Street

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
When the Occu-Poos consider taking their smelly tents to the White House lawn, then I might consider actually liking them.

But here in Los Angeles, the Unions have lobbied to keep the Occu-Poos in place, something that made our Mayor Phoney (Tony) Villar retreating from his threats to move them.

Fucking Unions own this whole state. [/quote]

I would love to see them occupy the White house Lawn[/quote]

Absolutely!!!

Had they done this…I fucking might have joined up.

[quote]Jeffrey of Troy wrote:
"I was still deeply puzzled as to why OWS, this hapless, hopeful band, would call out a violent federal response.

That is, until I found out what it was that OWS actually wanted.

The mainstream media was declaring continually “OWS has no message”. Frustrated, I simply asked them. I began soliciting online “What is it you want?” answers from Occupy. In the first 15 minutes, I received 100 answers. These were truly eye-opening.

The No 1 agenda item: get the money out of politics. Most often cited was legislation to blunt the effect of the Citizens United ruling, which lets boundless sums enter the campaign process.

No 2: reform the banking system to prevent fraud and manipulation, with the most frequent item being to restore the Glass-Steagall Act - the Depression-era law, done away with by President Clinton, that separates investment banks from commercial banks. This law would correct the conditions for the recent crisis, as investment banks could not take risks for profit that create kale derivatives out of thin air, and wipe out the commercial and savings banks.

No 3 was the most clarifying: draft laws against the little-known loophole that currently allows members of Congress to pass legislation affecting Delaware-based corporations in which they themselves are investors.

When I saw this list - and especially the last agenda item - the scales fell from my eyes. Of course, these unarmed people would be having the shit kicked out of them."

The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy | Naomi Wolf | The Guardian [/quote]

Then why are they stinking up NYC instead of Washington??

Why not OCCUPY someplace that might actually make a difference?

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

Then why are they stinking up NYC instead of Washington??

Why not OCCUPY someplace that might actually make a difference?
[/quote]

Aren’t they in DC? I heard something about a “march to dc” and I think someone posted videos earlier.

Self entitled useless twats fuck, forcing others to listen to their jibba-jabba oh what I would have given to be in one of these places while these occucunts started their cult chants.

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

Then why are they stinking up NYC instead of Washington??

Why not OCCUPY someplace that might actually make a difference?
[/quote]

Aren’t they in DC? I heard something about a “march to dc” and I think someone posted videos earlier.[/quote]

They started in NYC…their main presence is in NYC and everything they want to change is controlled in Washington D.C.

Makes perfect sense.

[quote]benos4752 wrote:
Part 1: - YouTube
One of my favorite episodes I got so pissed at the losers who sold shirts making fun of walmart employees

Occupy interrupts Obama with Mic check.

» Richmond City Audits Local Tea Party After Standoff with Mayor - Big Government
http://biggovernment.com/cowens/2011/11/28/richmond-city-audits-local-tea-party-after-standoff-with-mayor/

[quote]benos4752 wrote:
» Richmond City Audits Local Tea Party After Standoff with Mayor - Big Government
http://biggovernment.com/cowens/2011/11/28/richmond-city-audits-local-tea-party-after-standoff-with-mayor/[/quote]

This is not surprising.

Typical pandering to the Occupy crowd…why should they receive free services and rent when other groups are charged…me thinks that a court will nail the city to the wall.

The smelly people in LA were finally evicted, nearly 300 arrested with bail set at $5k minimum. 30 tons of trash and debris, bottles filled with urine and cans filled with feces were found, suspected to be thrown at cops in the event of an eviction. The stench of urine is still in the air.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
The smelly people in LA were finally evicted, nearly 300 arrested with bail set at $5k minimum. 30 tons of trash and debris, bottles filled with urine and cans filled with feces were found, suspected to be thrown at cops in the event of an eviction. The stench of urine is still in the air. [/quote]Are you sure you aren’t confusing this with the senate thanksgiving party?

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
The smelly people in LA were finally evicted, nearly 300 arrested with bail set at $5k minimum. 30 tons of trash and debris, bottles filled with urine and cans filled with feces were found, suspected to be thrown at cops in the event of an eviction. The stench of urine is still in the air. [/quote]Are you sure you aren’t confusing this with the senate thanksgiving party?
[/quote]

No, there were hookers, cocaine, lube, lotions, ointments, massages, and kneepads at that party.

“Where am i?”

“Urine LA!”

:slight_smile:

I have 9 more hours to kill.

[quote]StevenF wrote:
“Where am i?”

“Urine LA!”

:slight_smile:

I have 9 more hours to kill. [/quote]

/RIMSHOT

"As I said Eurasian history, taken in its broadest contours, shifts back and forth between periods dominated by virtual credit money and those dominated by actual coin and bullion. The credit systems of the ancient Near East give way to the great slave-holding empires of the Classical world in Europe, India, and China, which used coinage to pay their troops. In the Middle Ages the empires go and so does the coinage ? the gold and silver is mostly locked up in temples and monasteries ? and the world reverts to credit. Then after 1492 or so you have the return world empires again; and gold and silver currency together with slavery, for that matter.

What?s been happening since Nixon went off the gold standard in 1971 has just been another turn of the wheel ? though of course it never happens the same way twice. However, in one sense, I think we?ve been going about things backwards. In the past, periods dominated by virtual credit money have also been periods where there have been social protections for debtors. Once you recognize that money is just a social construct, a credit, an IOU, then first of all what is to stop people from generating it endlessly? And how do you prevent the poor from falling into debt traps and becoming effectively enslaved to the rich? That?s why you had Mesopotamian clean slates, Biblical Jubilees, Medieval laws against usury in both Christianity and Islam and so on and so forth.

Since antiquity the worst-case scenario that everyone felt would lead to total social breakdown was a major debt crisis; ordinary people would become so indebted to the top one or two percent of the population that they would start selling family members into slavery, or eventually, even themselves.

Well, what happened this time around? Instead of creating some sort of overarching institution to protect debtors, they create these grandiose, world-scale institutions like the IMF or S&P to protect creditors. They essentially declare (in defiance of all traditional economic logic) that no debtor should ever be allowed to default. Needless to say the result is catastrophic. We are experiencing something that to me, at least, looks exactly like what the ancients were most afraid of: a population of debtors skating at the edge of disaster.

And, I might add, if Aristotle were around today, I very much doubt he would think that the distinction between renting yourself or members of your family out to work and selling yourself or members of your family to work was more than a legal nicety. He?d probably conclude that most Americans were, for all intents and purposes, slaves."

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/08/what-is-debt-–-an-interview-with-economic-anthropologist-david-graeber.html

In light of the discussion as to what OWS stands for, and what it doesn’t, and the status of the middle class, I like this offering from a law professor at the University of Tennessee (Glenn Reynlods) and what has been dubbed “Reynolds’ Law”:

The government decides to try to increase the middle class by subsidizing things that middle class people have: If middle-class people go to college and own homes, then surely if more people go to college and own homes, weâ??ll have more middle-class people. But homeownership and college arenâ??t causes of middle-class status, theyâ??re markers for possessing the kinds of traits â?? self-discipline, the ability to defer gratification, etc. â?? that let you enter, and stay, in the middle class. Subsidizing the markers doesnâ??t produce the traits; if anything, it undermines them.


This could apply to so many threads, but I will just drop it here.

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
This could apply to so many threads, but I will just drop it here.[/quote]

Love this…I’d like to ask those kids held in Iran for all those years or those kids held in Egypt for throwing shit at police there what they think of the American criminal justice system…

I dunno man, sometimes I do like the English Parliamentary System

[quote]benos4752 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
This could apply to so many threads, but I will just drop it here.[/quote]

Love this…I’d like to ask those kids held in Iran for all those years or those kids held in Egypt for throwing shit at police there what they think of the American criminal justice system…
[/quote]

You cannot argue with a COLLEGE EDUCATED STUDENT HIPSTER PERSON.

Their naive-FU is strong.