# US Protests spread to 1000 cities



## Makalakumu (Oct 9, 2011)

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/203434.html



> The "Occupy Wall Street" movement  began demonstrations against corporate greed and unemployment in  mid-September and has continued staging protest rallies.
> 
> As of Friday morning, the website "Occupy Together," a hub for  nationwide events in solidarity with "Occupy Wall Street" reported  gatherings in 1,000 cities.
> 
> ...



Now there isn't really an excuse to not get involved.  No matter which team you identify with, there is plenty to agree upon...


----------



## Big Don (Oct 9, 2011)

They would exclude many of us for having jobs and bathing regularly.


----------



## billc (Oct 9, 2011)

Oh, I agree that these protestors should pay more attention to cleaning up after themselves, being polite to the men and women who protect us from criminals, and should clear out so peope who own businesses and work 16 hours a day can actually get some business done.  I can agree with those things.

I still think the picture of the guy pooping on the police car pretty much says everything you need to know about these silly people.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 9, 2011)

Big Don said:


> They would exclude many of us for having jobs and bathing regularly.



Now that's funny, right there.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Oct 9, 2011)

I have a friend who attended Occupy Seattle for about 5 hours. According to him they're a disjointed mashup of idealists, radicals, intellectuals, blithering idiots, and listless people who have absolutely nothing better to do. Add that to a general lack of cohesion or direction, and you have a big chaotic mess.


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 9, 2011)

People may have different opinions on what to do, but when I can stand across from people who have diametrically opposed politics to mine and point at the same problem, we've gotten pretty far.

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk


----------



## Omar B (Oct 9, 2011)

I'm the type of guy who might get lynched there.  A devout objectivist, capitalist with 2 jobs.  Nah, I won't be staning in the street complaining about lack of employment while not looking for a job or asking for government for handouts so I can sit in a park throwing slurs at some of the institutions that produce money.


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 9, 2011)

Not getting lynched and talking about solving problems without the initiation of force. That's the angle you have to take.

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk


----------



## Omar B (Oct 9, 2011)

I'm just glad I don't work downtown anymore, though both my trains I usually take pass close by there so I've seen/heard my fair share of them.  They do try to talk to me though, I have the long hair and I guess because I'm a metalhead wearing a band t-shirt I must be one of their ilk.  No, not because I don't cut my hair and play guitar doesn't mean I'm gonna hod hands and sing campfire songs and talk about sharing everything.

The country is not in a good place, but financially and employment-wise we have been far worse.  Bitching and moaning for handouts doesn't help, making it difficult for other people to get to work doesn't help.  What does help is working.  You may not get or have the job you want, but keep your head down and work and go to school at the same time, install some sort of 5 year plan.  Uncle Sam won't do everything, and shouldn't in a country built upon personal freedom and responsibiity.


----------



## billc (Oct 9, 2011)

1


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 9, 2011)

Spreading to a thousand cities, protesters morons or not, it is really good to see us get passionate about something which would probably not have happened if it wasn't for the unemployed in this country as a result of Wall Street and Corporations. It it good people peacefully protest Wall Street I hope it spreads every city in the country. There is hope for this country yet. This is what this country was founded on. As so many forget that.


----------



## billc (Oct 9, 2011)




----------



## kegage (Oct 9, 2011)

In support of the "Occupy Together" movement, a friend of mine posted a " We are the 99%" poster. Below is my response.  I had a conversation with a gentleman last night who told me he was a part of the "Occupy Memphis" protest yesterday. During the discussion I asked him if he was speaking for himself, or was he trying to speak for the movement. He said that he could speak as a representative of the Occupy Movement, at least locally. I made sure he understood what that meant and he said he did. We had a very long, useful, and calm conversation. His statements were well thought out. He used all the correct buzzwords like "revolution" and called the corporate CEOs the right names like "capitalist pig" and the politicians "treasonous dogs". He allowed that the list of so-called "demands" that have been published and are widespread over the internet, are not in actuality from the de facto leadership, but could not tell me who the leaders were, or if there were leaders. However, he did agree in principle with some of the demands, but could not tell me how to implement them, or how they could be done if the below goals were achieved, but they should happen. He also could not tell me what their goals were other than in generalities, and those were to: Radically reform the economic system, Keep capitalism, but end the "cronyism", Smaller and fiscally responsible government, Return to the original concepts and operate within the constitution, Get rid of the current politicians and replace them with people who will truly represent the people and not pander to corporations and special interest groups (Sounds familiar). When he spoke of the politicians being "treasonous", I ask if he knew what treason was. His reply was, "Not adhering to the will of the people." It was a good conversation, but he did not have answers or solutions for the most basic questions. He was understandably irritated and frustrated with the system, and was more about protest slogans and complaining than solutions. He kept referring to the "movement' as being embryonic, but it would grow and "sweep over the nation" and all of this stuff would be figured out in the future.


----------



## kegage (Oct 9, 2011)

I tried to edit the post, but it wouldn't work. Here is the way it is supposed to read. Not a lot of difference, but some.   In support of the "Occupy Together" movement, a friend of mine posted a " We are the 99%" poster on Facebook. Below is my response.     I had a conversation with a gentleman last night who told me he was a part of the "Occupy Memphis" protest yesterday. During the discussion I asked him if he was speaking for himself, or was he trying to speak for the movement. He said that he could speak as a representative of the Occupy Movement, at least locally. I made sure he understood what that meant and he said he did. We had a very long, useful, and calm conversation. His statements were well thought out. He used all the correct buzzwords like "revolution" and called the corporate CEOs the right names like "capitalist pig" and the politicians "treasonous dogs". He allowed that the list of so-called "demands" that have been published and are widespread over the internet, are not in actuality from the de facto leadership, but could not tell me who the leaders were, or if there were leaders. However, he did agree in principle with some of the demands, but could not tell me how to implement them, or how they could be done if the below goals were achieved, but they should happen. He also could not tell me what their goals were other than in generalities, and those were to: Radically reform the economic system, Keep capitalism, but end the "cronyism", Smaller and fiscally responsible government, Return to the original concepts and operate within the constitution, Get rid of the current politicians and replace them with people who will truly represent the people and not pander to corporations and special interest groups (Sounds familiar). When he spoke of the politicians being "treasonous", I ask if he knew what treason was. His reply was, "Not adhering to the will of the people." It was a good conversation, but he did not have answers or solutions for the most basic questions. He was understandably irritated and frustrated with the system, and was more about protest slogans and complaining than solutions. He kept referring to the "movement' as being embryonic, but it would grow and "sweep over the nation" and all of this stuff would be figured out in the future.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 9, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> I have a friend who attended Occupy Seattle for about 5 hours. According to him they're a disjointed mashup of idealists, radicals, intellectuals, blithering idiots, and listless people who have absolutely nothing better to do. Add that to a general lack of cohesion or direction, and you have a big chaotic mess.



Ripe for some kind of charismatic leader.  A messiah.  When do they stop chanting and start building bombs?


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 9, 2011)

JUST GO. It's nothing to be afraid of. Americans worry so much about stepping outside the box. They make all kinds of excuses and compromises. It's all based off of low grade horizontal political bullying. When you stand out and call the bluff, there are no teeth behind it...yet.

If you get out now, while we are still nominally free, it will be easier. If you wait, the price only gets higher.

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 9, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> JUST GO. It's nothing to be afraid of. Americans worry so much about stepping outside the box. They make all kinds of excuses and compromises. It's all based off of low grade horizontal political bullying. When you stand out and call the bluff, there are no teeth behind it...yet.
> 
> If you get out now, while we are still nominally free, it will be easier. If you wait, the price only gets higher.
> 
> Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk



I am getting closer to my father in his outlook as I get older.  He hated hippies; I didn't understand why.  Now I do.  I understand the threat to my society, to my way of life.  I don't like the economic situation; I don't like the way the future looks.  But I really do not like this nonsense.

These morons do not speak for me.  They'd better quit claiming they do.  And they had really better stay the F out of my way.


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 9, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I am getting closer to my father in his outlook as I get older.  He hated hippies; I didn't understand why.  Now I do.  I understand the threat to my society, to my way of life.  I don't like the economic situation; I don't like the way the future looks.  But I really do not like this nonsense.
> 
> These morons do not speak for me.  They'd better quit claiming they do.  And they had really better stay the F out of my way.


 
How do these protests threaten the society in which you live?

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 9, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> How do these protests threaten the society in which you live?
> 
> Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk



http://detnews.com/article/20111009...-for-Occupy-Detroit?google_editors_picks=true



> Videos have caught incidents of Jewish passers-by being taunted by the protesters &#8212; of course, it's a quick step from attacking financial institutions to indulging anti-Semitism.
> 
> State lawmakers in New York have received emails reportedly connected to Occupy Wall Street containing this cheery call to action: "It's time to kill the wealthy."



That's how.


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 9, 2011)

Did you see this?

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 9, 2011)

Sorry, the more I hear about these protests, the more solidly they seem to be just an excuse for slacker losers to gather, *****, whine, break ****, and act like thugs while spouting empty, barely thought our ideals, most of which are mutually exclusive, fail to understand basic economics, or which would turn the US into a Soviets wet dream. They fail at math, they fail at bathing, they just fail. IF they had businesses of their own they'd see just how wrong they are, but hey, when you're living on your 3rd year of tax payer assistance and haven't bothered to try for 2 of the 3, you have lots of time to hang out in parks with other clueless losers and slackers.
Yeah, losers.  Occupy Wallstreet are losers in my opinion. I wouldn't join them if you paid me to. 

Yes the country's got issues, but they don't have the answers. That makes them part of the problem in my book.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Oct 10, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Ripe for some kind of charismatic leader.  A messiah.  When do they stop chanting and start building bombs?


That is my big concern here. I easily see this turning into an armed revolution. Or just a bunch of violent riots. Neither is something I want. Another possibility is civil war. If that comes, I won't even pick a side. I'll be finding a different country.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> That is my big concern here. I easily see this turning into an armed revolution. Or just a bunch of violent riots. Neither is something I want. Another possibility is civil war. If that comes, I won't even pick a side. I'll be finding a different country.


I'll pack my crap and head to Canada.  I've got no problem with civil war, but it'd be nice if people knew why they were fighting.


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 10, 2011)

You are assuming Canada would let you in...

Regardless, I was actually on site today.  I'm telling you that it wasn't anything like the way the media represented it.  Ron Paul is greatly respected at this place.  That is really the underground theme.  And there is no way the MSM is going to say that!


----------



## MA-Caver (Oct 10, 2011)

Omar B said:


> I'm the type of guy who might get lynched there.  A  devout objectivist, capitalist with 2 jobs.  Nah, I won't be standing in  the street complaining about lack of employment while not looking for a  job or asking for government for handouts so I can sit in a park  throwing slurs at some of the institutions that produce money.


I've been out of work and trying to go out and FIND work whenever/however I can (including hours on the net applying here and there and filling out (feels like) 1000 question applications and all that. I'm no slacker, if there's a job and the pay is equal to the work that's involved then I'm all over it. I worked at my last job for a good two years before losing it. Now I'm searching again...
However, no unemployment, no disability (hearing impaired), basically nothing except an occasional under the table "here's a few bucks, thanks for helping out" jobs I've done. High gas prices (am I whining yet??) preventing me from being able to put more than a few gallons into my gas tank so that I can at least go out and LOOK for places that are going to hire (as opposed to "accepting applications") ... (am I whining yet??) let alone even FILL up my tank to which it would last longer through the week giving more time, greater search area(s) to look for work. No bus or public transportation that goes out to/from my area at all. Everywhere around me hasn't hired since before the last storm in April which tore up quite a few buildings/businesses. (am I whining yet?... am I a slacker now?), so no-one is or has done any hiring or doesn't have any "use for me". 
I've been doing the best job search that I can for the last 7 months. The longer I stay unemployed the harder it's going to be to find work... especially if some companies are not hiring anyone who is unemployed but looking for applicants who want to switch companies... (scratches head on that one since high unemployment figures would make this particular move inadvisable and illogical to boot... low unemployment figures would seem a good (safe) time to do this). Am I whining yet? 

I don't like those who just want to protest because it gets them out of the responsibility of LOOKING for a job. I can do without those types myself alright. Yet I'm pretty close to wanting to join those protesters in an attempt to get my voice heard as well. Does that make me a slacker? 
I know you weren't pointing fingers Omar so I'm not getting into your face or anyone else's. Just I hate reading about how it's better to just "find a job" and quit protesting. A portion of our population is out of work. Current administration talks about a job plan but the opposition is asking where do we get the money? Hey the answer is taxes and everyone who DOES work throws a fit. As long as I was working I didn't care about paying taxes much, I worked, and at the first of the year I get my W-2's fill it out send it in and get a refund and okay lather, rinse, repeat. But I'm NOT working right now. Does that cancel out the two years of taxes I've paid out? Oh sure I haven't paid 10-15-20 years worth so well... just tough cookies for me. 




Bill  Mattocks said:


> Ripe for some kind of charismatic leader.  A messiah.   When do they stop chanting and start building bombs?



My heart/gut tells me we won't have Chicago '68, or Selma, Watts or Washington D.C. type rioting going on. Yet seems that is the popular trend going on elsewhere on the planet. http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2011/09/global_protests.html. Perhaps a little revolution is a good thing now-and-again. 
What's frustrating is that (almost all of us) hung on a man's promise of CHANGE and it's not happening like HE said it would and well, we're getting kinda impatient waiting on it when deep down inside we're realizing that WE (the people) are the one who put this smooth talking politician (aren't they all?) into office and whell... gee. Gas prices went up, unemployment went up, big major banks got bailed out ... banks... the ones funded by a single larger bank needed bail outs... then we find those ones who got the monies for the bail out used it for themselves to compensate for their loss of salary... (the ole' gotta pay yourself first adage). Then wars and more wars and we're fricken starting them. Terrorists started it? Umm we can go around the revolving door on this one but we don't need thousands of troops to hunt down and kill several hundred leaders. We've outsted a tyrant and mass murderer that's good, time to move on... we've killed a major head of a terrorist organization and a couple of his 2nds ... good move on... no need to stay in a particular area... go to where they're hiding. 

Damn I'm getting tired... 
Point is our country needs fixing and fixing bad or we're going to be too poor to launch a decent defense and we're spread out all over too much to effectively defend. 
Perhaps I'm being naive or just too much forest for the trees but point is... our country needs fixing. Far too many are flying under the radar making billions in this country. I'm not saying distribute the wealth equally, I'm saying (for myself at least) Stop making so much money that to take a cut in salary would require your business (banks are businesses) to ask for a bail out. 
Ranting raving... bla bla bla bla... when are they going to stop spending and start working for their money and making their money WORK? 




Bill  Mattocks said:


> I am getting closer to my father in his outlook as I  get older.  He hated hippies; I didn't understand why.  Now I do.  I  understand the threat to my society, to my way of life.  I don't like  the economic situation; I don't like the way the future looks.  But I  really do not like this nonsense.
> 
> These morons do not speak for me.  They'd better quit claiming they do.   And they had really better stay the F out of my way.


 Those morons do not speak for me either, and yeah I too can see why our dads didn't like the hippies of the 60's, I've lived among their offspring for a time and can't say I liked it a lot, a little now and again because some of them really were good people. But unlike them I liked the respect I got when I was working and making money at a regular job. But as I mentioned I'm out of work and thus given labels of slacker, loser, lazy, irresponsible (taking care of two elderly disabled parents while I'm at it), and whatever else, gives one a nice inferiority complex because I didn't finish high-school (got a GED instead) and had to drop out of college so I don't have that nice piece of paper hanging on my wall letting prospective employers know that I didn't tell my education to f-off so many times that they threw me out, which means I won't tell THEM to f-off. 




Bob Hubbard said:


> I'll pack my crap and head to Canada.  I've got no problem with civil war, but it'd be nice if people knew why they were fighting.


 My gf and I have discussed leaving the country should the SHTF :s492:, but more-n-likely we're not going to be able to afford it. It would be nice to know what people are fighting for, for a change that would be really neat to actually understand and appreciate and support whatever the cause is and feeling good about it because it's a good cause.  Helping other countries that are unable to help themselves is a very noble and righteous thing to do... but right now well, WE are in trouble and WE need to take care of OUR problems before we can continue to help with others and their problems.


----------



## Omar B (Oct 10, 2011)

I totally get you man.  I was making  a generalization.


----------



## Jenna (Oct 10, 2011)

If you all who are decrying the efforts of these (albeit misdirected and in many cases misguided protestors) are yourselves happy with the condition that your national economy, and the wider global economy is now in (through absolutely no fault of your own), then no, you should not protest.

Those of you who suggest protestors are not presenting solutions and are therefore presenting only problems are partially correct.  However few if any top economists view the global economy as being rescuable from the inevitable impending catastrophe that is set to strike every one of us.  For that, exactly what solution is there?  Further, many here are recitent towards adopting change, yet to suggest that our current financial and socio-political systems are working to our benefit is peculiar.  To continue to support the status quo within those systems I would suggest might teeter on self-destructive.

While I have heard little sense in these protestors individually, I would be stupider than I am to expect anything other from them.  Why?  Because these are ordinary punters.  Why would I expect them to have thought through complex financial solutions to problems that even the IMF and BoE declare are catastrophic and are pushing us towards a global recession the likes of which we have not experienced?

Further, now these protests are infiltrated by everyone from every side of the political puzzle through actors and idiot celebs to millionaire mouthpieces like Michael Moore et al and all for their own specific egocentric ends.  

The protests are a farce.  I suggest to them all that they go occupy theirselves.  

However...

Mobs are by definition not thorougly organised.  There is no single voice here, let alone a voice of reason.  Still, they are protesting the condition of their nation as they see it.  They feel helpless.  What else are they to do?  As I say, if you feel your world and your nation is doing ok by you then of course you have no need to protest anything.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Oct 10, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> I'll pack my crap and head to Canada.  I've got no problem with civil war, but it'd be nice if people knew why they were fighting.


I'll pass on civil war. One war in my lifetime was enough. I would have to have a very good reason to do that.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 10, 2011)

Here is a basic flaw in the logic being used:  _"If you are dissatisfied with the way our economy is going, you must support these protesters."_  Yes, I am dissatisfied, but no, that does not mean I must support these numskulls.

Another variant apparently posits that if all the solutions tried so far have yielded negative results, then this must be the solution.  Uh, no.

And the final insult to logic is the exasperated utterance, _"Well, we have to do something."_  No, we do not.  If we are on fire, pouring gasoline on ourselves is _'doing something'_, but it's not very smart.  We do not have to do anything if we cannot do the right thing.


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

There is so much that has happened to this country since 9/11, since Bush took office through the current President. There is allot people are upset about, bad economy no one is fixing, the "Yes, we can" was really, "Yes, we can do nothing." I've already blame Bush for his leadership and the mess we are in, the Banks, WallStreet, who capitalize on greed and failure. People losing homes and livelihoods. Homes being foreclosed, people still losing their jobs people still stuck in the in the cycle of layoffs and the repeated long unemployment periods, since Clinton. Affordable health care for individuals and small business'.  Being able to make ends meet.  Established small business owners struggling under the constant weight of failure and bankruptcy. Protesters disorganized, slackers, etc. Pure political rhetoric and propaganda to maintain the "New World Order" of greed, goverment abuse, and economic failure. There is a lot of things people are dissatisfied about. And conservatives like Gingrich calling the protest as a result of Obama's class warfare, and democrats like Pelosi paying at best lips service support shows support for business as usual. That the current path we are on is ok by them.  What kills me is the support for both parties B.S. by the media against the protesters convincing many people protesting is wrong, degrading the protests who at least have the nuts to protest. These people are not drinking the kool aid.

Hey if conservatives are calling it class warefare, and the democrats doing nothing to change things, both sides not wanting change, not speaking against the protest, and the media pushing that agenda, doing the bidding, it is an obvious slap in the face things need to change. Thank God some people have the nuts to due the American thing, to exercise their freedom to protest (peacefully) against the condition of this country and the government. It is long over due, organized or not, morons or not.  At one time this country was taxed on tea, that caused a momentous revolution, changing and giving birth to this country. Something we have forgotten.   


*Thomas Jefferson 3rd President (1801-1809) said, periodic revolution, &#8220;at least once every 20 years,&#8221; was &#8220;a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.&#8221;*


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 10, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> There is so much that has happened to this country since 9/11, since Bush took office through the current President. There is allot people are upset about, bad economy no one is fixing, the "Yes, we can" was really, "Yes, we can do nothing." I've already blame Bush for his leadership and the mess we are in, the Banks, WallStreet, who capitalize on greed and failure. People losing homes and livelihoods. Homes being foreclosed, people still losing their jobs people still stuck in the in the cycle of layoffs and the repeated long unemployment periods, since Clinton. Established small business owners struggling under the constant weight of failure and bankruptcy. Protesters disorganized, slackers, etc. Pure political rhetoric and propaganda to maintain the "New World Order" of greed, goverment abuse, and economic failure. There is a lot of things people are dissatisfied about. And conservatives like Gingrich calling Obama's class warfare, and democrats like Pelosi paying at best lips service support shows there is a class warfare going on.  What kills me is the support for both parties B.S. by the media against the protest convincing many people protesting is wrong, degrading the protests who at least have the nuts to protest. These people are not drinking the kool aid.



Not every problem has a government solution.  Government may have gotten us into this problem, but that does not mean that government can get us out.

In the meantime, these protesters are imbeciles of the first water.  The fact that we have problems does not grant them legitimacy.  Another group that sees we are in trouble, thinks they know the reason, and offers protest to speak about it is Fred Phelps' _"God Hates Fags"_ group.  They, likewise, have not _'drunk the koolaid'_.  Just because a group is protesting and offensive does not mean they have a legitimate point.

The concept _"Look, these guys are different and bold!  We must listen to them and show them respect,"_ is not logical, it's based on pure emotion.  I reject it.  Lots of morons are different and bold and not worthy of respect.


----------



## Big Don (Oct 10, 2011)




----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Not every problem has a government solution.  Government may have gotten us into this problem, but that does not mean that government can get us out.
> 
> In the meantime, these protesters are imbeciles of the first water.  The fact that we have problems does not grant them legitimacy.  Another group that sees we are in trouble, thinks they know the reason, and offers protest to speak about it is Fred Phelps' _"God Hates Fags"_ group.  They, likewise, have not _'drunk the koolaid'_.  Just because a group is protesting and offensive does not mean they have a legitimate point.
> 
> The concept _"Look, these guys are different and bold!  We must listen to them and show them respect,"_ is not logical, it's based on pure emotion.  I reject it.  Lots of morons are different and bold and not worthy of respect.



Government is by the people for the people, it is to govern. It is not to create problems, have it's own interests, or sit on it's hands while thousands of people have lost homes, jobs, business and all the while have us drink the kool aid. The problem is the political bi-partisan us against them mentality where at the core it is a "New World Order" that is going to lead us to a third world. My God, man, we are almost there, our country was brought to its knees because of greed and associated incompetence. Far worse that a bunch of " disorganized morons" protesting from emotion. Hell, anger, dissatisfaction, is pure emotion.  How do you think the Tea Party was started, Spock and a bunch of Vulcans sat around a table logically forming the Tea Party...no way.  It was people who were emotionally motivated for change. 

The change has to start somewhere, with someone. And it has. How effective will it be, how successful the powers be will shut it down and we will go back to being mindless drones, with no emotion, no passion, just dead-pan faced complacency, waving mechanically worn out faded pom-poms in the air for our illusionary political side. Time will tell.  But the protest could solidify into a growing movement that could result in significant change.  The government sure in hell ain't doing a damn thing, but for it's self. That is including both parties.  I fear no change, and neither do they (those people joining in the protest all over the country who have loss, who are dissatisfied with the government and the economy), no matter how we devalued they are. The louder and stronger the protest against the protesters become, the more impact the protesters are having.


----------



## Big Don (Oct 10, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> Government is by the people for the people, it is to govern. It is not to create problems, have it's own interests, or sit on it's hands while thousands of people have lost homes, jobs, business and all the while have us drink the kool aid.


 Did government force people to buy houses they couldn't afford?





> The problem is the political bi-partisan us against them mentality where at the core it is a "New World Order" that is going to lead us to a third world.


NTSA





> My God, man, we are almost there, our country was brought to its knees because of greed and associated incompetence. Far worse that a bunch of " disorganized morons" protesting from emotion. Hell, anger, dissatisfaction, is pure emotion.  How do you think the Tea Party was started, Spock and a bunch of Vulcans sat around a table logically forming the Tea Party...no way.  It was people who were emotionally motivated for change.
> 
> The change has to start somewhere, with someone. And it has. How effective will it be, how successful the powers be will shut it down and we will go back to being mindless drones, with no emotion, no passion, just dead-pan faced complacency, waving mechanically worn out faded pom-poms in the air for our illusionary political side. Time will tell.  But the protest could solidify into a growing movement that could result in significant change.  The government sure in hell ain't doing a damn thing, but for it's self. That is including both parties.  I fear no change, and neither do they (those people joining in the protest all over the country who have loss, who are dissatisfied with the government and the economy), no matter how we devalued they are. The louder and stronger the protest against the protesters become, the more impact the protesters are having.


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

Big Don said:


>



Who ever made that is someone gulping kool aid out of aid pitcher.  Flow charts like these are for those who need it worked out for them. I hate mindless idiotic crap like this. Whomever created this must have stayed up all night  working on this brilliant master piece of.....  -LOL with the right touch of sarcasm.


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

Don, 

There are allot of people out there who lost homes because they where 1. greedy and wanted a better home, or just a home. 2. ignorant / inexperienced an ill advised understanding the loan and home buying process, i.e. an ARM (which is a trap set up to make loan institutions $$$$$) and not reading or understanding that tricky bank jargon in the fine print.  But they didn't play pocket pull financially masturbating the loans, nor make poor decisions with short sightedness knowing better, ignoring the writing on the wall that drove us into financial ruin. Who allowed them all of sudden that then, and not before than, they were qualified?  And who said it would boost the economy to do so?


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Oct 10, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> Government is by the people for the people, it is to govern. It is not to create problems, have it's own interests, or sit on it's hands while thousands of people have lost homes, jobs, business and all the while have us drink the kool aid.



I repeat, not every problem has a government solution.  Put in other terms, the government cannot fix every problem, nor should it try to fix problems it cannot fix.



> The problem is the political bi-partisan us against them mentality where at the core it is a "New World Order" that is going to lead us to a third world. My God, man, we are almost there, our country was brought to its knees because of greed and associated incompetence. Far worse that a bunch of " disorganized morons" protesting from emotion. Hell, anger, dissatisfaction, is pure emotion.  How do you think the Tea Party was started, Spock and a bunch of Vulcans sat around a table logically forming the Tea Party...no way.  It was people who were emotionally motivated for change.



As I keep stating, I think the Tea Party is a bunch of kooks too.  Quit assuming that because I think the Wall Street protesters are morons, I must just LOVE me some Tea Party morons instead.  Morons are morons.



> The change has to start somewhere, with someone.



That's knee-jerk crap, as I've stated.  Gee, draining people's blood didn't cure the plague.  Maybe hitting them with dead fish will work.  Hey, change has to start somewhere!  No, if the 'change' is stupid, just championing it because it is new is not only not logical, it's stupid.



> And it has. How effective will it be, how successful the powers be will shut it down and we will go back to being mindless drones, with no emotion, no passion, just dead-pan faced complacency, waving mechanically worn out faded pom-poms in the air for our illusionary political side. Time will tell.  But the protest could solidify into a growing movement that could result in significant change.  The government sure in hell ain't doing a damn thing, but for it's self. That is including both parties.  I fear no change, and neither do they (those people joining in the protest all over the country who have loss, who are dissatisfied with the government and the economy), no matter how we devalued they are. The louder and stronger the protest against the protesters become, the more impact the protesters are having.



Yes, that's my concern; they're having impact.  That's why I want these protests shut down, by force if necessary.  Enough of this garbage.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

It's not the governments job to give you a job.
The government doesn't create jobs. Not 1 politician other than FDR created 'jobs'. Outside of actually working for the government in a bureaucracy they created.
You create jobs by stimulating the growth of small businesses. You stimulate them by getting out of their way, by making it easier for them to find funds, a place of operations, and so forth.
These small businesses IF they are successful, grow, then need increased resources, including additional people.

What has the government done?
- Dried up small business funds.
- Sought to raise taxes on the owners
- Removed tax credits
- Decreased funding and support for 'development zones'
- Increased 'Employer Contributions' on the tax side, and the health care side.
- Increased regulations
- Increased complexity of the tax code requiring even more record keeping.

Local governments (state and smaller) have also "helped" by doing the same.

I'm sorry, but I could use with less "help" from the government. Every time they 'stick it to the rich', I end up paying more in taxes, have more red tape to wade through, have more things I have to 'discover' to avoid a tax 'gotcha'. Sorry, but no thanks.

I've said this before. I'll say it again.  Someone give me $75,000.  I'll open a studio and hire 4 people. 1 would be my wife which will create an opening in another company for a manager. I know people with 2+ jobs. I know career changers.  Motivated people thinking outside the box are finding work, starting businesses, and surviving, some even thriving. No, not all areas are great. Some areas are devoid of job ops. Your options are start something yourself or move I'm afraid.  I read Monster/Jobs/Dice/Yahoo etc daily. Very little popping up under my search terms.  What does pop up I'm not qualified to do. Sucks. That's why I'm self employed, run 2 businesses with 6 different income streams. Looking to expand and add 2 more soon.  I ain't rich, but I pay income tax and I'm surviving so far.

Wall Street isn't greedy, it's over regulated, over manipulated, over stimulated, and over bailed out. All companies should rise and fall on their own merits, and when they fall, let them. They fall for a reason. Lack of demand, mis management, etc. 


Makalakumu, you're in NYC?


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

Bill I understand, not every problem is solved by the government. That isn't the problem, it is the government making problems.  Hey, I too agree with the Tea Party being odd balls, and God forbid they get someone into the presidency. But, you can't dismiss their passion, their emotion, their dissatisfaction of people who came together and are noticed. Who do have some influence. My point is motivation comes the heart not the head. You think the protesters dumping tea into the Boston Harbor made a logical decision, and acted rationally to taxation, and going against Colonial legislation? Where these protesting colonist intellects and professionals, No, it was an emotional reaction made my disorganized "idiots" against something the ruling government. That incident sparked change. One of the, if not the greatest moments in American history.  This country was started by slackers who didn't want to pay more for freaking tea!


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

As an aside, if anyone is wondering where -my- head is at, read this: What I Believe 
It sums me up quite well.


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

Bob, you know I disagree. The government oversee the economy. It governs how business does business and the practice of business. It regulates against fair business practices, against monopolies (or should but doesn't do it well). It though the economy and regulation sets up the playing field and rules. If we have a poorly managed economy, poor and incompetent decisions made in terms of the economy, and corporate favoritism over small business (I am pro-small business), and the brilliant idea of the housing crisis; people getting loans they shouldn't have and then those loans mismanaged and mishandled. Allowing Wall Street to go unchecked, all in the name of a free market as an solution to a war-time economy.  

Local governments etc. if had that much of impact on the economy and jobs, you wouldn't have so many states without solvency.  You wouldn't have states like Michigan and cities like Detroit economic wastelands.You wouldn't have California in the incomprehensible mess it is in now, getting worse as we speak.  Places that have high jobless rates, bad economies, high cost of living, deterioration of services etc. And you wouldn't have people and business flooding states like Texas from other states who are more stable and offer some job opportunities.  Greed. If you haven't seen it's effects, just look around you. You can't take, take, take, without giving back and not expect to fail.   BTW, as hypocritical as it sounds, I blame the hippies for selling out-


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

You mean California which by law is requiring tax payers to subsidize illegals?  We have too much regulation, too much government involvement.  The last 10 years brought us here, the next 10 are going to be worse as a result.  Hey, we've tried to manage things, lets try letting them just run for a bit. Can't be much worse.
Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression's a good read btw.  Lots of similarities to today. I just hope we don't get an extra 7 years on what should be a 2 year correction now entering it's 3rd year because you have people who pay $900 for a $12 hammer running the show.


----------



## Twin Fist (Oct 10, 2011)

everythign works better with LESS government in it.

these protests are artificial, we now know that they are being paid for indirectly but ultimately by Soros himself, through all his intermeadiate proxy companies and foundations. the working families party has taken out ads and is paying people to be there. 

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/10/pro-obama-working-families-party-seeks-advertises-for-professional-activists-to-fight-wall-street/

In case you had any doubt that these Wall Street protests were being manufactured by the far left, there&#8217;s this&#8211;
The pro-Obama Working Families Party of New York posted *this advertisement* on Craig&#8217;s list. They are looking for energetic progressives to help them to fight to hold Wall Street accountable. And the pay is *$350-$650 a week* depending on the responsibility and length of time of staff.

it's all fake.


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> You mean California which by law is requiring tax payers to subsidize illegals?  We have too much regulation, too much government involvement.  The last 10 years brought us here, the next 10 are going to be worse as a result.  Hey, we've tried to manage things, lets try letting them just run for a bit. Can't be much worse.
> Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression's a good read btw.  Lots of similarities to today. I just hope we don't get an extra 7 years on what should be a 2 year correction now entering it's 3rd year because you have people who pay $900 for a $12 hammer running the show.



I agree 100% I lived in California long enough to get the hell out, and go back home. It is to me a model of failure. Where this country is at now. I blame everyone government, business and the people of that state and their adhesion to self interest individually and groups. That state has made all the wrong and wtf choices all they way around and they  don't see to learn from it.  It is a fractured and shattered state, run by incompetence for decades, including Brown (first terms decades ago) and Reagan, to WTF Anrold Schwarzenegger, to the current *WTF* Jerry Brown. It is a freaking mess of a state, and this country is not far behind it. Pretty soon if there isn't something done to take this country in a more positive direction, it will not have to deal with illegal immigration from the South or anywhere else, we will be the ones immigrating.  Rant over.


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> everythign works better with LESS government in it.
> 
> these protests are artificial, we now know that they are being paid for indirectly but ultimately by Soros himself, through all his intermeadiate proxy companies and foundations. the working families party has taken out ads and is paying people to be there.
> 
> ...



Ya ever live in California that is fake. I don't think the protests have been manufactured by the left at all, it is people unhappy with the result of Wall Street taking advantage of the people.  Hey maybe you made lots of money off investments. Clearly the protesters have and see a wrong. I have to agree, just as I agree with having legal immigration instead of illegal immigration. Affordable, reasonable health care, not being over-taxed so others don't have pay tax. Support for small business, jobs- low unemployment, a healthy economy.  A competent and sound government. A non-partisain country (not as bad as it is now with all the nut case extremist).  A healthy and sound country. Obviously, some disagree and want to suck all the life left in this country, just for another penny.  All the things promised by politicians in these terms, that have yet to be fulfilled.


----------



## Twin Fist (Oct 10, 2011)

it doesnt matter what you think, or would like to believe. Hell, i would like to believe that all boobies are real, but it just isnt so

the facts are the facts this has been bought and paid for by working families which is funded by the tides foundation which IS george soros.

it is all fake.

there is no "99%"

there are some misguided moronic slackers there who just want some free stuff. but it was all started out as a FAKE demonstration.

and yes, i lived in long beach for 5 years.


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

hmmm....lived in Long Beach for 5 years, explain's your confusion. 





Twin Fist said:


> it doesnt matter what you think, or would like to believe. Hell, i would like to believe that all boobies are real, but it just isnt so
> 
> the facts are the facts this has been bought and paid for by working families which is funded by the tides foundation which IS george soros.
> 
> it is all fake.



Where is this place working families pay for boob jobs funded my George Soros' Tides Foundation in California? By god they need to be shut down women of Long Beach should pay for their own fake boobs!


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

Sorry, y'all have lost me. If you need me I'll be on Google looking up information on boobs.
(and billing myself for research time which is deductible. God I love my job)


----------



## MaxiMe (Oct 10, 2011)

I wonder if this would clean up most of the issues:
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=irish+spring&hl=en&sa=X&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&biw=1440&bih=734&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&tbnid=VIcFVsJX9xRlkM:&imgrefurl=http://www.dpchallenge.com/image.php%3FIMAGE_ID%3D15145&docid=XYXYnMT9kILQZM&w=600&h=398&ei=whqTTsmYLczJrAfSsvWaAQ&zoom=1


----------



## Big Don (Oct 10, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> I wonder if this would clean up most of the issues:
> http://www.google.com/imgres?q=irish+spring&hl=en&sa=X&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&biw=1440&bih=734&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&tbnid=VIcFVsJX9xRlkM:&imgrefurl=http://www.dpchallenge.com/image.php%3FIMAGE_ID%3D15145&docid=XYXYnMT9kILQZM&w=600&h=398&ei=whqTTsmYLczJrAfSsvWaAQ&zoom=1


That and firehoses...


----------



## Big Don (Oct 10, 2011)

BTW, is there a list of these supposed 1000 cities? 
Yeah, I didn't think so...


----------



## Jenna (Oct 10, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Here is a basic flaw in the logic being used:  _"If you are dissatisfied with the way our economy is going, you must support these protesters."_  Yes, I am dissatisfied, but no, that does not mean I must support these numskulls.
> 
> Another variant apparently posits that if all the solutions tried so far have yielded negative results, then this must be the solution.  Uh, no.
> 
> And the final insult to logic is the exasperated utterance, _"Well, we have to do something."_  No, we do not.  If we are on fire, pouring gasoline on ourselves is _'doing something'_, but it's not very smart.  We do not have to do anything if we cannot do the right thing.


I appreciate this point of view and it makes sense.

If it is ok if I could illustrate -forgive me if it is trite- a loved one of yours is caught in a flash flood which threatens to sweep them against buildings.  They are further trapped in their vehicle while serious water ingress threatens to drown them.  The rescue services have been rendered temporarily inoperable by systematic managerial avarice and incompetence.  You cannot open the door.  There is nobody to help.  Your loved one will perish.  All that is to hand is some potentially hazardous mechanical implement (a cutting torch or device?)  You do not even know how to use it and could maim or kill your loved one in the attempt.

Surely your ineptitude with this device is not a factor?  Surely you choose to do something?  Anything rather than nothing, yes?

I think there are few cases where doing nothing is better than doing something, whatever that something might be?  I do not know, I have not thought them all through.  Most real life cases, ignoring the problem or muttering to oneself about the injustice is no remedy.

These protestors are rarely experts and cannot know whatever the "right thing" might be.  I think they are protesting, and protesting is not trying to do something in this case in the realms of economic solution provision, rather it is attempting to draw attention to those in whose hands power resides to the fact that something does need done urgently; that maintenance of the status quo is simply horribly insufficient.  That is just my view.


----------



## MA-Caver (Oct 10, 2011)

Omar B said:


> I totally get you man.  I was making  a generalization.


I know dude, but somehow I still felt the need to clarify. :asian: Circumstances where I'm living now, is a trap. I go out looking for a job I get accused of screwing around, I go out to help some people/friends who need it and I have the time to do so, I still get accused of screwing around. Been accused of NOT looking even though I am whenever it's possible. It's frustrating as hell and my head hurts from banging on the wall, keyboard and any other thing that is within reach. 



Bill Mattocks said:


> Here is a basic flaw in the logic being used:  _"If you are dissatisfied with the way our economy is going, you must support these protesters."_  Yes, I am dissatisfied, but no, that does not mean I must support these numskulls.
> 
> Another variant apparently posits that if all the solutions tried so far  have yielded negative results, then this must be the solution.  Uh, no.
> 
> And the final insult to logic is the exasperated utterance, _"Well, we have to do something."_  No, we do not.  If we are on fire, pouring gasoline on ourselves is _'doing something'_, but it's not very smart.  We do not have to do anything if we cannot do the right thing.



In order for evil to flourish good men need do nothing. As you say "we have to do something"... but saying we don't HAVE to is leaving things to run their course and a lot more people hurt. Question is just what IS the "right thing"? Doing nothing? Get up in the morning go to work every day of the week and do the yard work on the weekends then do it all over again? Fine for those who HAVE work to go to. A home to do yard work in (if applicable), triple A credit or whatever that so called "credit score" says is a good number to have. Just mosey on through life and if the government is screwing things up financially and letting good healthy young men go off to a far-away land to die for a bunch of people who'd rather NOT have them there in the first place... well to me that's just burying your head in the sand and hoping nobody sees your *** up in the air and decides that it might be fun to screw with it next. Our beloved Constitution says we have the right to stand up and ***** and moan if we're not happy with the government at present. Our founding fathers wrote that line in specifically because they got tired of being called traitors when they attempted the same thing in their own home country before crossing the ocean and leaving everything else behind because everything else behind became intolerable. Then a lot of them fought and died when family, friends followed them over the ocean and tried to impose the same thing because they still believed in the way things were back home. 
We're not the only ones dissatisfied with how governments are doing things. As per my link in an earlier post on this thread we can see how it is growing. It was inevitable that it happening here too. 



JohnEdward said:


> Hey if conservatives are calling it class warfare, and the democrats  doing nothing to change things, both sides not wanting change, not  speaking against the protest, and the media pushing that agenda, doing  the bidding, it is an obvious slap in the face things need to change.  Thank God some people have the nuts to due the American thing, to  exercise their freedom to protest (peacefully) against the condition of  this country and the government. It is long over due, organized or not,  morons or not.  At one time this country was taxed on tea, that caused a  momentous revolution, changing and giving birth to this country.  Something we have forgotten.
> *Thomas  Jefferson 3rd President (1801-1809) said, periodic revolution, &#8220;at  least once every 20 years,&#8221; was &#8220;a medicine necessary for the sound  health of government.&#8221;*


 I thought I remembered the quote just not exactly. Either way... it does take balls to stand up and say "I protest!" Thing is... it shouldn't have to take balls to stand up and say "I don't like what's going on here." Bravery against the face of government shouldn't exist at all. If people are calling those who are protesting "brave" then what does that say about them? They're scared to do the same thing even though they feel the same frustration, anger, resentment that the protesters are.  To me, that says a helluva lot right there about how the government is getting control over the people. "Fear, will keep the local systems in line..." ~ Grand Moff Tarkin. 
People are growing tired of it, promises promises every 4 years and nothing changes except the face on the screen. Question is are these so called imbeciles willing to die for what they're protesting ... whatever the hell it is?  



Bill  Mattocks said:


> Not every problem has a government solution.   Government may have gotten us into this problem, but that does not mean  that government can get us out.
> 
> In the meantime, these protesters are imbeciles of the first water.  The  fact that we have problems does not grant them legitimacy.  Another  group that sees we are in trouble, thinks they know the reason, and  offers protest to speak about it is Fred Phelps' _"God Hates Fags"_ group.  They, likewise, have not _'drunk the koolaid'_.  Just because a group is protesting and offensive does not mean they have a legitimate point.
> 
> The concept _"Look, these guys are different and bold!  We must listen to them and show them respect,"_  is not logical, it's based on pure emotion.  I reject it.  Lots of  morons are different and bold and not worthy of respect.


True that... remember the media once getting all the interviews on tape/disk/whatever!! are going to be awfully damned selective about who they're going to show saying whatever. "No, this guy is making a helluva lot of sense, so we'll cut him from the segment/clip, but that guy who couldn't string 3 words together... lets put him after the ditzy blonde chick in the hot tight jeans who had difficulty putting two words together."  



JohnEdward said:


> Bill  I understand, not every problem is solved by the government. That isn't  the problem, it is the government making problems.


 This I have to slightly disagree with you John... remember those making the problem were voted into office by the ones who are complaining so they're just as responsible for the problem. Again our Constitution says we can vote them out... but we don't. It's like the gasoline analogy... unless you pull that sealed can of gasoline out of the burning room... eventually it's going to go boom!


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

This isn't directed at anyone specific. This is a general statement.
Here's the thing.  If you are actually busting your *** looking, and by looking I mean putting serious time in, looking at everything you can, reaching outside the box, have your resume polished, and when you get interviews show up trying to get the job then you have nothing to be sorry/sad/ashamed of. Only you know if this is true.  I know a lot of people who are claiming they can't find work who check the sunday paper in under 5 minutes then go back to WOW, Farmville, etc.  
This isn't directed at anyone specific. This is a general statement.
In the same time 1 of them claimed no one was hiring, a friend of mine took on their 3rd part time job. One person found 3, another couldn't even crack the want ads.  -Those- are the people I hold in contempt.  Not the folks making real efforts. I'm not going to post this disclaimer every time I say 'lazy slackers'.  People know who they are, so if it doesn't apply to you, stop getting noses out of joint.  
This isn't directed at anyone specific. This is a general statement.


----------



## MA-Caver (Oct 10, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> This isn't directed at anyone specific. This is a general statement.
> Here's the thing.  If you are actually busting your *** looking, and by looking I mean putting serious time in, looking at everything you can, reaching outside the box, have your resume polished, and when you get interviews show up trying to get the job then you have nothing to be sorry/sad/ashamed of. Only you know if this is true.  I know a lot of people who are claiming they can't find work who check the sunday paper in under 5 minutes then go back to WOW, Farmville, etc.
> This isn't directed at anyone specific. This is a general statement.
> In the same time 1 of them claimed no one was hiring, a friend of mine took on their 3rd part time job. One person found 3, another couldn't even crack the want ads.  -Those- are the people I hold in contempt.  Not the folks making real efforts. I'm not going to post this disclaimer every time I say 'lazy slackers'.  People know who they are, so if it doesn't apply to you, stop getting noses out of joint.
> This isn't directed at anyone specific. This is a general statement.


Thanks Bob, (and nods to Omar again). 

On a separate note: This I found on FB earlier today with the comment "this man speaks my heart". 
(Warning, it's Carlin uncensored so if you know Carlin and are offended by language then don't read it). If it's inappropriate then I apologize in advance and will respect removal of this post. :asian:


----------



## Twin Fist (Oct 10, 2011)

Carlin was a moronic burnt out hippy

two words totally destroys that little rant

steve jobs

two more words

bill gates


----------



## Empty Hands (Oct 10, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> Carlin was a moronic burnt out hippy



Burnt out hippy?  Heh.  Carlin was _angry_.  And very intolerant of ********.  



Twin Fist said:


> two words totally destroys that little rant
> 
> steve jobs
> 
> ...



Clearly someone wasn't paying attention in statistics class.

The greatest predictor of lifetime wealth is the wealth of the family you were born into.  Case in point, Bill Gates was born into a wealthy and influential family - his father was a very prominent lawyer in the Seattle area.

Jobs was adopted and his family was not particularly wealthy.  You would have hated him though.  Dropped acid - said it was one of the 2-3 most important things he had done in his life.  Went to India and became a Buddhist.  Hung around a Hare Krishna temple.

Some people win the lottery too.  Outliers are not a sound basis for judging an economy.


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

BTW, Twin Fists (wish I had a name, for the sake of respect), Carlin is talking about the "American Dream." Owning a home, living comfortably not struggling financially, kind of like that thing we had for a short time, hmmm....a middle class. The American Dream can either be having a good job (pays well for a middle class life) or running your own business. Just not being an entrepreneur. He is talking about the limited and control of opportunity for their best interests. Not that an opportunity doesn't exist. It does and not for everyone anymore. That is clear. 


*** Now, I have watched many small businesses fail more than succeed. It isn't easy, and some people who do get it off the ground it takes 5 years as it use to take 1 to make a good profit. That is relative to the person and type of business. But, the average is now 5 years. If you haven't folded with in that time, your likely to succeed for at least several more years.  Many small businesses folded under Clinton and since than it has been more difficult then ever. Then there is the capital needed to start it up and most people don't have that. So many people as an alternative to starting their dream business get trapped in the direct marketing vortex, ending up making people above them richer, and them always struggling. Hard knocks.  Some don't, some find the money, second mortgage, loan sharks, put the kids and the dog up for collateral (kidding). Because it takes thousands of dollars to get a decent small business going. And then those who are moderately successful, very much like what Jobs and Gates found out, their grow would be limited by big business.  IBM would work really hard and do everything in their power to kept them from being successful, to squelch any competition. Both men had something most other people in their shoes didn't, a new technology they could take in different directions and into new markets where IBM didn't have a foot print, or controlled. 

Per Jobs and Gates. Yep, in the 1970s. Never would be able to do it today. And no one since.   Ever try and get your first product on the grocery self. as an example. Talk about no opportunity, dang the big food manufactures, like ConAgri, will see you don't get your product on the self, competition is fierce.  

Not every small business person hits a home run, or ever gets a hit or on base.


----------



## Twin Fist (Oct 10, 2011)

bull ****

there are people in my nursing school class that were born as poor as it gets, through financial aid and students loans they will become nurses,a nd as an RN? very solidly in the middle class, earning from $30-$50 an hour

ANYONE can succeed.

hell, i am 45 and in nursing school and i am going to graduate, because i work HARD at it


and i was born poor as hell.

this "the american dream is dead" is bull ****


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

I got my first DBA when I was 18. I'm 41 now.
I've had 4 registered DBAs, as sole proprietorships, and partnerships.
1 became a corporation in 2001.
1 is likely going LLC next year.
From those came SilverStar WebDesigns Inc (2001) and Hubbard Photography (2009).
The later kinda spun off from the former.
SilverStar owns and operates a couple of communities, including this one.
Spun off it's web hosting unit a year and a half ago.
I joke that I get paid to watch Scooby Doo. It's a half-truth exaggeration.  My work day is very flexible, the trade off is large pay outs.
Some months, I scrape by, others I run quite well off. 
I took a 5 figure hit in leaving the hosting industry, offset somewhat by a smaller 5 figure kick from continuing to operate as server admin and back end support + royalties.
I'm not rich.
I want to be.
4 times in college, 4 times dropping out. 
Lots of dead end jobs. 2006 I worked at the mall, have done 3 stints at McDonalds.
Also cut grass and clear snow when I get a paid op.
I manage these communities, do web design, consult, photograph, graphics work, and more.
I've got enough flex from all these that it allows me to spend time with my 89 year old grandfather, help out my mother and do the occasional day trip to meet new folks, shoot out of town or just relax.
It allowed me to be there with my uncle last year as he lost his battle with lung cancer...and allowed me to get me grandfather there to see his son for the last time.
I'm not financially rich. I'd like to be.
But, sometimes, there are more important things.
As to getting in the markets...one of my former clients is fighting that same battle now.  Managed to get into Whole Foods and HEB (I think). They make Kefir. 
Another guy I know, published his books himself rather than fight for shelf space in the chains.
I've seen this little dumb game become huge on Facebook. Maybe you've heard of it? Farmville.
I know a gal who made a mint making themes for Myspace before she was 18.
There are thousands of similar tales.
But most people don't have it in them to do what it takes, so they claim it's no longer possible.
While they're doing that, the next generations wiz kids are making it happen.

You can succeed. It's not easy, it takes hard work, it takes pain, but it can be done. 

We have more -new- millionaires now than 20 years ago. What's that tell you?


----------



## Twin Fist (Oct 10, 2011)

hell, my friends mother started as a candy striper, got the hospital to send her to nursing school, then to RN, then to get her BS in nursing administration, then her masters in hospital admin, and now she makes, here in buttsnort east texas, almost 150K a year. 

and she did it all while raising a kid.

anyone tells me the dream is dead, is either stoned, stupid or too lazy to do it


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 10, 2011)

Steady now, John.  You and I both know it is possible to be born the lowest of the low and climb out if you try hard enough, on both sides of the Atlantic.  But I've said before on these fora that I'm not so sure that people from poor backgrounds like mine would be able to make these days as the barriers to entry to the 'Middle Table', for those with ability, have grown.  Likewise in the States I am sure.  

If you are lucky and will not quit no matter how many times you get hit in the face with a wet fish then you can make it out of the poverty trap even now but I certainly don't think it's getting any easier.


----------



## Twin Fist (Oct 10, 2011)

******** Mark

when i was young, it was HARD to go to college, now? now it is a joke to go with all the free money the government gives people to go to school

anyone that fgails in todays america didnt try hard enough i am not smart, or special at all, and i graduate in 2 months and i will never be out of work again


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 10, 2011)

ROFL ... well that's *me* told :lol:

Part of the problem over here in Britain is that in the past thirty years degrees have been so devalued that people who really are not bright enough have been getting them.  Employers are not stupid either and they know that there has not been some miraculous improvement in general intelligence between when I graduated the first time (when 2 - 5 % of the population were bright enough) to now (where the government is pushing for 50% to go to university).

Couple that with the huge increase in fees and the way that education is now 'funded' and it's not a winning equation.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 10, 2011)

By the way, I do get what John is saying about how there is still a prize to get if you push hard enough.  I worked 'pumping gas', delivering papers, laying tarmac and ran a mail order mini-business whilst I was at University the first time round and had been 'working' as a milkman's assistant and on market stalls since I was 9.

Of course those last two would be illegal child exploitation now even tho' on the market work I got to keep 50% of the profits (less stall rental) I made for the stall owner :grr: (growling at the disincentive that is to young 'entrepreneurs').


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> You can succeed. It's not easy, it takes hard work, it takes pain, but it can be done.
> 
> We have more -new- millionaires now than 20 years ago. What's that tell you?



My * comment was a tangent. All I was saying not in relation to Carlin' s comment.  That in 1950 my father had more than I do now, and less education. He was middle class  income with a high school education, who bought land to farm. Can't do that today. All his brothers and sisters were middle class, worked jobs that they didn't fear losing and had pensions. Some ran their own business, they didn't have to put everything they owned up to start it. They didn't have to try all sorts of different ones.  They didn't have to retire and take another job. They didn't have to worry about medical bills ruining their lives, or homes taken away, or working from job to job getting laid off because it saved the corporation money. That was their parents generation, who after the Great Depression decided to change things. Prior to the Great Depression, their wasn't much but farms and lots of poor immigrant families barely surviving. 


More Millionaires - thank Gates for many of them, and the stock market- if you know what I mean.  You have to have money to make money, and few like I said hit home runs.   Millionaires 20 years ago. Well that is relative. When I graduated from college back in the day, 20,000 job was a equal to what is 200,000 job today. There was more of them jobs than today. Millionaires in that sense are what is left of a health large middle class. Hell, pro-sports figures are multi-millionaires in basketball and football, but not soccer.  Those high sports salaries are nothing compared to what the owners make, or a CEO of a large corporation. It clearly isn't what the average income is.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

People, including me, point at Gates and Jobs.
I've read 3 biographies on Gates.
He pretty much earned it. Yeah, born into a money family, but how much of that money went into Microsoft? 
Jobs earned it too.
I've read several bios on him, look forward to reading the official one in a few weeks.

Gates, Allen, Jobs, Woz, Hewett, Packard, Bushnel, and a number of others. They earned it.
So did Dell.
So did Schultz.
So did that nerd who started a little site called Facebook, the same time we started Martial Talk.
(Bitter? Yeah, a little)

Gates would work all night, non stop. You'd find him out cold on his office floor having worked through the night.
How many of those complaining about their lot have done that?
Jobs made it all personal.
Got bounced off a wall at least once by a developer as a result.
How many of those complaining ever had that happen?

You don't get rich working 9-5, mon-friday.  You don't get rich waiting for it to happen.

Those 'old money' rich? 12 hr 6 day work weeks were normal.

Hell, why's a doctor earn more than a burger flipper?
How many burger flippers you know willing to work 36 hours straight and put in an 80 hour week?
None here.


----------



## Empty Hands (Oct 10, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> How many burger flippers you know willing to work 36 hours straight and put in an 80 hour week?
> None here.



I work that hard.  Harder even.  I'll be comfortable, but I'll never be rich.  Hard work is necessary, but not sufficient.  Luck is necessary too.

Like the luck needed not to get, say, ALS.  Hard to pull yourself up by your bootstraps when you can't move your hands.  Or breathe on your own.  Or speak.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> My * comment was a tangent. All I was saying not in relation to Carlin' s comment.  That in 1950 my father had more than I do now, and less education. He was middle class  income with a high school education, who bought land to farm. Can't do that today. All his brothers and sisters were middle class, worked jobs that they didn't fear losing and had pensions. Some ran their own business, they didn't have to put everything they owned up to start it. They didn't have to try all sorts of different ones.  They didn't have to retire and take another job. They didn't have to worry about medical bills ruining their lives, or homes taken away, or working from job to job getting laid off because it saved the corporation money. That was their parents generation, who after the Great Depression decided to change things. Prior to the Great Depression, their wasn't much but farms and lots of poor immigrant families barely surviving.
> 
> 
> More Millionaires - thank Gates for many of them, and the stock market- if you know what I mean.  You have to have money to make money, and few like I said hit home runs.   Millionaires 20 years ago. Well that is relative. When I graduated from college back in the day, 20,000 job was a equal to what is 200,000 job today. There was more of them jobs than today. Millionaires in that sense are what is left of a health large middle class. Hell, pro-sports figures are multi-millionaires in basketball and football, but not soccer.  Those high sports salaries are nothing compared to what the owners make, or a CEO of a large corporation. It clearly isn't what the average income is.



If I had bought 100 shares of Apple in 1985 (at $30 a share), it would have cost me $3k.
Today those 100 shares would be worth over $30k.
If I had bought 100 shares of Microsoft in 1985, I'd have a similar growth.
If I'd bought a pound of gold in 1985, it would have cost me about $4k.
Today it would be worth almost $30k.
A $10k investment, grown to almost $100k.
I wish I'd had the wisdom then to do so.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> I work that hard.  Harder even.  I'll be comfortable, but I'll never be rich.  Hard work is necessary, but not sufficient.  Luck is necessary too.
> 
> Like the luck needed not to get, say, ALS.  Hard to pull yourself up by your bootstraps when you can't move your hands.  Or breathe on your own.  Or speak.



Truth.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 10, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> You don't get rich working 9-5, mon-friday.  You don't get rich waiting for it to happen.
> 
> Those 'old money' rich? 12 hr 6 day work weeks were normal.



That is a fair point, altho' it ignores a lot of those that 'make it' because they were born into the right 'class' - it's beginning to infect America too, sad to say.  It's much easier to make money when you start with money - the old adage about the first million being the hardest is still a truism.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

True. But if we stole an extra $50B from the 'rich' and gave it equally to the 'poor', how many of them would invest it in their future, and how many piss it away on some fancy clothes, a vacation, a big tv or some beer?

Education's always been cited as a key. In the US, the first 12 years -are- free.
So why do we have under 40% attendance in some schools?

Hard to justify free college when so many refuse to show up to learn the basics.

Some people, just deserve poverty because they fight so hard to be poor.


----------



## JohnEdward (Oct 10, 2011)

Bob, I goofed in my replay. Ignore it. I realize we are talking about two different things and my post isn't accurate or the way I want it to be.  I simply am talking about availability of opportunity and not responsibility of wealth. And that is how I read Carlin.  I haven't read your new posts, which I see you have posted in response. My retraction is based on moment of reflection in the mens room. .


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 10, 2011)

Can't argue with that, Bob, aye.  

I wish the first bit was not true (the 'throwing away' of largesse rather than using it to improve your lot) but sadly it is.  Reading David Eddings book, The Losers, written before he got into the hyper-successful part of his career, resonated all too strongly with my background, allbeit that Eddings was writing about the American experience rather than the British (the principles were still the same).


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> Bob, I goofed in my replay. Ignore it. I realize we are talking about two different things and my post isn't accurate or the way I want it to be.  I simply am talking about availability of opportunity and not responsibility of wealth. And that is how I read Carlin.  I haven't read your new posts, which I see you have posted in response. My retraction is based on moment of reflection in the mens room. .



No worries.

I'm just of the mindset that there's still opportunity.  If I wasn't, we wouldn't be having this chat/debate as I'd have shut down when the first person told me I couldn't possibly succeed. 

As to Carlin, I actually get the opposite read most folks do from that rant. I take it as sarcasm, considering his own success.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

True story.

Most of you know I do model photography.
I occasionally get clients who want to pay for work. I pass this along to the gals I've worked with in the past who have been reliable.
We're working on a couple of calenders, the pay is $100 for non nude, $200 for nude. It's a 2 hr gig.
I have 5 who never replied to my direct invitation to participate.
2 who turned it down, to shoot freebies with someone else.
These aren't 'successful' or 'credited' models, but newbs.
1 is constantly bitching on Facebook about never getting any paid offers.
All messages were read, just not bothered with.
The 1 who turned down a $200 easy money payday is constantly complaining about being broke.

See a trend here?
I know a kid (hes 20) who quit a $10/hr job at Home Depot as a cashier because 'he was bored'.
He's now crying again about how broke he is and how much it sucks to not have a car, etc.

These are some of the reasons why my opinion is what it is.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 10, 2011)

There is a downside of Social Security being enough for people to 'coast' along, bumping in the mud at the bottom but not drowning.  But we really don't, as a society, want to go back to the concept of workhouses do we?  A 'charity' so awful that people committed suicide to avoid it.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

The current system which seems to encourage folks make a career out of it, while others who really need it can't get it, has to change.
I'm ok with helping the needy, but the slackers need a boot in the **** and some old fashioned working up a sweat.


----------



## Big Don (Oct 10, 2011)

I've seen people quit perfectly good jobs for boredom, as well, Bob. One of the ones I know is always bitching about how much CEO's get paid, he was really excited about how much certain actors and pro athletes get paid, though.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 10, 2011)

I truly don't see how tho', Bob, not without a Psi Corps to winnow through the shirkers at any rate .  

It has to be borne in mind that we had the Work Houses and the Industrial Schools when Britain was the richest country in the world (real wealth from the Empire, not the debt based, fractional reserve, fantasy we have now). How can we possibly make things better than the flawed system we have now without crime sky-rocketing  as the more unscrupulous disadvantaged and unlucky take things into their own hands?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

Well....

We can insist that all those on public assistance show up for work assignments.  Count out 1 able bodied chaps.  Hand them shovels.

1st one to sit on his ***, put to rounds in it.

Watch the other 9 dig a ditch the size of the Suez Canal by tea.


----------



## Empty Hands (Oct 10, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> There is a downside of Social Security being enough for people to 'coast' along, bumping in the mud at the bottom but not drowning.



Social Security isn't like that here.  You can get it indefinitely if you are disabled, which is difficult and time-intensive to prove.  You can get it after you turn 65, but it is based on how much you've paid in your whole life.  You can get unemployment support, but only if you were recently laid off, *not *fired for cause, you must prove the attempt to get a new job, and there is a time limit.  You can get food and housing assistance, mostly if children are involved, but there are again time limits and availability criteria.  Medicare is only for seniors, and the criteria for Medicaid eligibility is extremely strict, and limited only to health care.

Lifelong public assistance doesn't really exist in the US except for a small number of disabled people.  It's a political talking point and myth.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 10, 2011)

Bob, stop appealing to my Inner Fascist :lol:.  You know I'm a grumpy old man quite ready to implement extreme and simple solutions to complicated societal problems if I ever got my hands on the reins of power .  Tempting as it is to take the sword to the Gordian Knot it is never as successful as a solution as would be wished for by it's proposers.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> Lifelong public assistance doesn't really exist in the US except for a small number of disabled people.  It's a political talking point and myth.



[h=3]New Evidence on Intergenerational Correlations  in _Welfare_ *...*[/h]


----------



## Makalakumu (Oct 10, 2011)

The biggest problem with social security is that their never was and never will be a way to control politicians when they are handling other peoples money. I know it won't be there for me. All of the money that is taken out of my check is gone. Gone by gun point! If only we could turn social security into a Ponzi scheme. The believers could keep throwing their money away and the realists could back out and attempt to do something different. Right now there is no choice, it doesn't matter if you know this bus is heading over the cliff, you cannot get off. That's wrong, folks, its armed robbery.

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Oct 10, 2011)

Not going to deny SS needs to be fixed. (ok, tossed IMO)


----------



## Buka (Oct 10, 2011)

In the movie _The Jerk_, Navin Johnson's father tells him what he needs to know when he's about to go out into the world on his own.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Bfe6CgYbH8

That, a job and a CLUE, is all most of these protesting kids need to learn, know and have.


----------



## Big Don (Oct 10, 2011)

Buka said:


> In the movie _The Jerk_, Navin Johnson's father tells him what he needs to know when he's about to go out into the world on his own.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Bfe6CgYbH8
> 
> That, a job and a CLUE, is all most of these protesting kids need to learn, know and have.


You gotta love the classics


----------



## WC_lun (Oct 10, 2011)

I don't see the link between people not taking the jobs you think they should with welfare.  Are they taking public assistance?

The truth is, we as a country are bleeding out money.  The whole piece of pie needs to be looked at, including military and public assistance.  Looked at with eyes serious at really saving money, not forwarding a political idealogy.  That means understanding a decent military is neccesary to keep external threats lower.  It also means understanding that a WORKING safety net is cheaper than the cost of letting that many people not have legal access to what they need to live.  Remember, there was a time in the US when social safety nets where not in place.  It was not pleasant.


----------



## Empty Hands (Oct 11, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> [h=3]New Evidence on Intergenerational Correlations  in _Welfare_ *...*[/h]



Did you actually read the paper?  Nothing in it negates my assertion.  The data set also ends in 1993 - the year 1996 was very significant in terms of US welfare programs and also factors heavily into my assertion.


----------



## Steve (Oct 11, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> Did you actually read the paper? Nothing in it negates my assertion. The data set also ends in 1993 - the year 1996 was very significant in terms of US welfare programs and also factors heavily into my assertion.


Changing AFDC (Assistance to Families with Dependant Children) from a quasi-permanent needs based program to TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families). Emphasis on Temporary. MAJOR change in welfare programs funded by States. While some States opted not to change the name, the funds from the Fed require that program be time limited.

Another major change in '96 was the definition of disability for Social Security and SSI benefits. In the 80's, under Reagan as an aside, the definition of disability was opened up to include drug and alcohol addiction. In 96, this was reversed. So, all of the people who were disabled (ie, unable to work) only because they were addicts were off the Federal roles. There were also sweeping reforms in the way disability is determined for children, and eligibility for federal welfare dollars for non-citizens.

1996 was indeed a big year for welfare reform. 

Not sure how protests led to a discussion of social security led to a discussion of welfare, but there ya go.   Also, for the record, I think more can be done.  But we have to fund the programs.  If they aren't adequately funded, they become rife with fraud.  It's self fulfilling.


----------

