[Cuy'val Dar]

Aside from putting winners and losers back into what is taught, they also need to teach more recent world history that way we actually learn about how communism doesn't work.

[VirtusMaster]

MaDuce, on 29 October 2011 - 12:40 AM, said:

"Waaaaaaah. The OWS protestors have not created a list convenient talking-points that the media will overplay until they become meaningless platitudes. Waaaaaah." The lack of talking-points and centralized leadership is what's keeping this movement from becoming astro-turfed and co-oped by politicians and business like the Tea-Party.

Some articles that might change the way you look at OWS:

http://www.salon.com...28/protests_21/

Quote

Does anyone really not know what the basic message is of this protest: that Wall Street is oozing corruption and criminality and its unrestrained political power — in the form of crony capitalism and ownership of political institutions — is destroying financial security for everyone else?

http://www.businessi...ut-2011-10?op=1


http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=14817561


http://www.addicting...on-wall-street/


http://www.theatlant...-street/246963/
http://blogs.wsj.com...veys-protester/
^Relevant unless you suddenly believe gov't shouldn't reflect the will of the people.


http://www.bbc.co.uk...gazine-15246205
Divide and conquer is as old as time.


http://www.rollingst...eating-20111025

Quote

Think about it: there have always been rich and poor people in America, so if this is about jealousy, why the protests now? The idea that masses of people suddenly discovered a deep-seated animus/envy toward the rich – after keeping it strategically hidden for decades – is crazy.

Where was all that class hatred in the Reagan years, when openly dumping on the poor became fashionable? Where was it in the last two decades, when unions disappeared and CEO pay relative to median incomes started to triple and quadruple?

The answer is, it was never there. If anything, just the opposite has been true. Americans for the most part love the rich, even the obnoxious rich. And in recent years, the harder things got, the more we've obsessed over the wealth dream. As unemployment skyrocketed, people tuned in in droves to gawk at Evrémonde-heiresses like Paris Hilton, or watch bullies like Donald Trump fire people on TV.

Moreover, the worse the economy got, the more being a millionaire or a billionaire somehow became a qualification for high office, as people flocked to voting booths to support politicians with names like Bloomberg and Rockefeller and Corzine, names that to voters symbolized success and expertise at a time when few people seemed to have answers. At last count, there were 245 millionaires in congress, including 66 in the Senate.

And we hate the rich? Come on. Success is the national religion, and almost everyone is a believer. Americans love winners. But that's just the problem. These guys on Wall Street are not winning – they're cheating. And as much as we love the self-made success story, we hate the cheater that much more.

Don't be this guy:
‎"I'm upside-down in my mortgage and pay $750/month for health insurance," but I'm not going to condemn the system that creates that scenario . . . I'm just going to work harder so I don't lose my home as the value is driven down by artificial market manipulation.

I'm just going to work harder so that the insurance companies will !%# harder when they rape me."

Really guys, you subscribed to this easily enough. Now that Americans are getting mad about the corruption and malfeasance of our economic system, it's no longer something that should be fought?



In any case, they've found a cure for lesbianism: http://m.dailymail.c...ticleID=2053787 So I don't see why even the staunchest GOP corporatists among you aren't behind this!

And just for fun:





http://www.thedailys...n-in-the-u-s-a-

I'm not going to say that I read all those articles about OWS. But I did read the first 3. I also have watched all the GOP debates. From my ability to gather facts it seems like your scenario on the guy who's upside down in his mortgage would be fixed faster by a new president rather than a protest. At any rate, I think it was Newt Gingrich (don't care too much for the guy)that said they should be protesting the White House, not wall street. That's the biggest reason why OWS is stupid to me. Protests don't change who's in office... the people who make the decisions. One of the articles you directed us to pointed out that one benefit of OWS is just to protest for protesting sakes. Anger makes a point. It sure does... the point that these folks don't really have an intelligent place to vent their so called enthusiasm for what's right. How is it right in any way when what you're doing draws riot police? There may be corruption in the government. There may be some laws that benefit this idea of a "plutocracy." But I don't care what you do or say, if what you're doing is making the police your enemy, you are doing it wrong. People (i.e OWS protesters) think that the police are so brutal and out of line. How else do they want them to act? They have no idea which person in the crowd has a gun or a knife. Its a crazy world. They have to act in the interest of protecting their own lives. Anyway... To sum up my points....

1. The way to change things in America isn't to try to get around the laws. It's to make new ones, and abolish old ones, through political activism.
2. Anger and anger fueled violence never has the capacity to make a change for good.
3. If OWS has a problem with rich folks, why are all the videos of them fighting police? There may be some police corruption some in some places... that's a given for any organization. But by in large, those dudes are getting paid 18 bucks an hour average. What side of OWS's argument does that put them on? Not the side OWS is fighting. That's for sure. Even if they don't have a solid list of grievances, they should at least know who they are supposed to be protesting against.

This has all become very interesting to me. Especially with an election coming up next year. Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of this.

Also, side note. This goes out to our OWS friends who aren't business majors... If you want to know where "big corporation's" profit goes to... check out this thing called an income statement. Profit doesn't go into CEO pockets. Profit is what is left after CEO's are paid. Profit is what goes in to mommy and daddy's 401k's and is reinvested into the business to help it grow. Will CEO's get more money from growth? Maybe. But so will your retirement fund, so will people who are looking for jobs who got one because a new Walmart just opened, and so will everyone else in America.