Thread: This Is What Occupiers Are All About.

1.) They are just a collection of personal complaints and failures who want to blame other people, and blame "The System." But, there has always been some kind of unjust "System" in place which limit personal activities. The smart people figure out how to beat the system.

2.) They have way too much time on their hands, and since they are the Gen X/Gen Y they have been bred to think they are entitled to a lot of things without earning those things. The Latino, Oriental, and Eastern European immigrants know how to work, unlike the White Occupiers.

3.) Even if ideal economic, ideal social, and ideal political conditions existed here in America, most of the Occupiers would be able to get nothing more than low skilled and menial jobs with their dreadlocks, orange pants, facial piercings, bad teeth from drugs, and poor English comprehension skills.

4.) They have no real sense of leadership in their ideology, thinking that consensus should rule, and just going along with "the flow" of least resistance. They cannot be depended upon for strong spines or resolute character relating to principles worth pursuing. They only get all worked up and start beating on plastic containers when they "feel" a certain way about an issue. They cannot make committments to rational decisions.

5.) They actually are hurting the "99%" by draining resources from the public sector which must monitor, arrest, and repair the consequences of their destructive activities. They do not understand the meaning of the English word, "consequences." Notice how their verbal presentations are always given in terms of what other people have done to harm them apart from any of their own personal failures and poor decisions which have resulted in their currently experienced "consequences."

6.) They live in a mental world of La-La Land. No time in the History of Humanity has social justice, democracy, or economic equity ever existed apart from a few small, brief, and fragile groups, and certainly not within a large nation.

These people are useful, though. They are revealing the thinking errors which we all are subject to without careful review and vigilance. I am waiting for them to "occupy" my street. I have a garden hose. Lol.

This doesn't really feel like thescienceforum I know. Keep in mind Occupy is a Global Movement (At least in the context that most of western-society has occupy movements going on), they are pockets of movements with similar causes that are fighting for their own personal freedoms. Your claim about '1)' isn't very truthful, the smart people usually banner under defiance, as history has shown. A lot of the Occupy movements are about proper representation that cannot be bought, but rather is provided by majority vote. Seeing as how, especially from what I know of Canadian Occupy, a lot of the outrage is in the context that the government doesn't represent the people as much as it should.

2) Sounds almost irrelevent to job availability, representation, and monetary equality. It honesty it kind of just sounds like an unfounded statement bordering on partisanship.

3) I see a lot of people that you would consider "normal" or at least employable at Occupy protests.

4) Parts are truthful, the context, and most of that opinion is way out of line. Many people do follow off of ignorant principles they can use and excuse... But a lot of people are also aware of the issues. It has been shown time and time again the sheep follow the intellectuals during revolt. Though there is no united banner to stand under I can agree it will be an issue.

5) Depends on whether occupy works or not. If they get the better deal for the "99%" whats millions of dollars to billions of dollars on top of preferred representation?

6) Unfortunately for your argument, things can only get better when people make a stand.

I say that, while also being very critical of Occupy, as I believe it is riddled with Hypocrisy.

Originally Posted by stander-j

This doesn't really feel like thescienceforum I know. Keep in mind Occupy is a Global Movement (At least in the context that most of western-society has occupy movements going on), they are pockets of movements with similar causes that are fighting for their own personal freedoms. Your claim about '1)' isn't very truthful, the smart people usually banner under defiance, as history has shown. A lot of the Occupy movements are about proper representation that cannot be bought, but rather is provided by majority vote. Seeing as how, especially from what I know of Canadian Occupy, a lot of the outrage is in the context that the government doesn't represent the people as much as it should.

2) Sounds almost irrelevent to job availability, representation, and monetary equality. It honesty it kind of just sounds like an unfounded statement bordering on partisanship.

3) I see a lot of people that you would consider "normal" or at least employable at Occupy protests.

4) Parts are truthful, the context, and most of that opinion is way out of line. Many people do follow off of ignorant principles they can use and excuse... But a lot of people are also aware of the issues. It has been shown time and time again the sheep follow the intellectuals during revolt. Though there is no united banner to stand under I can agree it will be an issue.

5) Depends on whether occupy works or not. If they get the better deal for the "99%" whats millions of dollars to billions of dollars on top of preferred representation?

6) Unfortunately for your argument, things can only get better when people make a stand.

Are you able to cite any point or place in History when a Government did indeed adequately "represent the people?" Go ahead, and inform me. Keep in mind the "Global Occupy Movement" has nothing to do with the mindless little complaints of the White North American Occupiers. You called it "Outrage at Context." Lol. "Context." Let's protest because of "Context."

None of them are really getting abused or hurt beyond a light beating or a bit of noxious chemicals. But, the Occupiers on other countries are getting maimed and killed. The Canadians are not even able to make the news, being so lame.

Would you want someone with facial piercings, orange pants, bad teeth, and very poor English comprehension skills serving you dinner or doing your colonoscopy? Well ... ? Lol.

You tried to specify, "Things can only get better when people make a stand." From what experience or from what source have you attained this view? Is this nothing more than a chatty little intuitive notion ... ?

Lol

Originally Posted by JoReba

Originally Posted by stander-j

This doesn't really feel like thescienceforum I know. Keep in mind Occupy is a Global Movement (At least in the context that most of western-society has occupy movements going on), they are pockets of movements with similar causes that are fighting for their own personal freedoms. Your claim about '1)' isn't very truthful, the smart people usually banner under defiance, as history has shown. A lot of the Occupy movements are about proper representation that cannot be bought, but rather is provided by majority vote. Seeing as how, especially from what I know of Canadian Occupy, a lot of the outrage is in the context that the government doesn't represent the people as much as it should.

2) Sounds almost irrelevent to job availability, representation, and monetary equality. It honesty it kind of just sounds like an unfounded statement bordering on partisanship.

3) I see a lot of people that you would consider "normal" or at least employable at Occupy protests.

4) Parts are truthful, the context, and most of that opinion is way out of line. Many people do follow off of ignorant principles they can use and excuse... But a lot of people are also aware of the issues. It has been shown time and time again the sheep follow the intellectuals during revolt. Though there is no united banner to stand under I can agree it will be an issue.

5) Depends on whether occupy works or not. If they get the better deal for the "99%" whats millions of dollars to billions of dollars on top of preferred representation?

6) Unfortunately for your argument, things can only get better when people make a stand.

Are you able to cite any point or place in History when a Government did indeed adequately "represent the people?" Go ahead, and inform me. Keep in mind the "Global Occupy Movement" has nothing to do with the mindless little complaints of the White North American Occupiers. You called it "Outrage at Context." Lol. "Context." Let's protest because of "Context."

None of them are really getting abused or hurt beyond a light beating or a bit of noxious chemicals. But, the Occupiers on other countries are getting maimed and killed. The Canadians are not even able to make the news, being so lame.

Would you want someone with facial piercings, orange pants, bad teeth, and very poor English comprehension skills serving you dinner or doing your colonoscopy? Well ... ? Lol.

You tried to specify, "Things can only get better when people make a stand." From what experience or from what source have you attained this view? Is this nothing more than a chatty little intuitive notion ... ?

Lol

At no point did I say that any government has ever adequately represented all peoples, nor did I imply it. I also didn't call it "Outrage at context". What I did call say was "a lot of the outrage is in the context that the government doesn't represent the people as much as it should," therefore implying the context of the outrage is misrepresentation.

What you missed about my statement about what occupiers physically look like is that not all of them are your stereotypical new-age hippie type. I am saying that a lot of them look like you and I, and therefore their physical appearance would not hinder them from attaining a job in a perfect society which is what you posed. Even so, your logic in that statement was fallacy, seeing as in a perfect society physical appearance wouldn't matter.

To your final retort. Give me one situation in the entire history of the world, where societal apathy towards a certain view, did not help in influencing a new view on the subject. In regards to when it has: The Algerian Revolution, The Anti-Apartheid Movement, Indian Revolution, the French Revolution, the British Civil War, the American Revolution. I'll give you hint... There have been a lot of revolutions.

Originally Posted by stander-j

Originally Posted by JoReba

Originally Posted by stander-j

This doesn't really feel like thescienceforum I know. Keep in mind Occupy is a Global Movement (At least in the context that most of western-society has occupy movements going on), they are pockets of movements with similar causes that are fighting for their own personal freedoms. Your claim about '1)' isn't very truthful, the smart people usually banner under defiance, as history has shown. A lot of the Occupy movements are about proper representation that cannot be bought, but rather is provided by majority vote. Seeing as how, especially from what I know of Canadian Occupy, a lot of the outrage is in the context that the government doesn't represent the people as much as it should.

2) Sounds almost irrelevent to job availability, representation, and monetary equality. It honesty it kind of just sounds like an unfounded statement bordering on partisanship.

3) I see a lot of people that you would consider "normal" or at least employable at Occupy protests.

4) Parts are truthful, the context, and most of that opinion is way out of line. Many people do follow off of ignorant principles they can use and excuse... But a lot of people are also aware of the issues. It has been shown time and time again the sheep follow the intellectuals during revolt. Though there is no united banner to stand under I can agree it will be an issue.

5) Depends on whether occupy works or not. If they get the better deal for the "99%" whats millions of dollars to billions of dollars on top of preferred representation?

6) Unfortunately for your argument, things can only get better when people make a stand.

Are you able to cite any point or place in History when a Government did indeed adequately "represent the people?" Go ahead, and inform me. Keep in mind the "Global Occupy Movement" has nothing to do with the mindless little complaints of the White North American Occupiers. You called it "Outrage at Context." Lol. "Context." Let's protest because of "Context."

None of them are really getting abused or hurt beyond a light beating or a bit of noxious chemicals. But, the Occupiers on other countries are getting maimed and killed. The Canadians are not even able to make the news, being so lame.

Would you want someone with facial piercings, orange pants, bad teeth, and very poor English comprehension skills serving you dinner or doing your colonoscopy? Well ... ? Lol.

You tried to specify, "Things can only get better when people make a stand." From what experience or from what source have you attained this view? Is this nothing more than a chatty little intuitive notion ... ?

Lol

At no point did I say that any government has ever adequately represented all peoples, nor did I imply it. I also didn't call it "Outrage at context". What I did call say was "a lot of the outrage is in the context that the government doesn't represent the people as much as it should," therefore implying the context of the outrage is misrepresentation.

What you missed about my statement about what occupiers physically look like is that not all of them are your stereotypical new-age hippie type. I am saying that a lot of them look like you and I, and therefore their physical appearance would not hinder them from attaining a job in a perfect society which is what you posed. Even so, your logic in that statement was fallacy, seeing as in a perfect society physical appearance wouldn't matter.

To your final retort. Give me one situation in the entire history of the world, where societal apathy towards a certain view, did not help in influencing a new view on the subject. In regards to when it has: The Algerian Revolution, The Anti-Apartheid Movement, Indian Revolution, the French Revolution, the British Civil War, the American Revolution. I'll give you hint... There have been a lot of revolutions.

What a marvelous concept, that of "helping to influence a new view on a subject!"

Chatting about world issues and the self induced induced emotional upsets of Occupiers certainly has material results, doesn't it ... ? That is how [problems are resolved. Chatting and sharing ... Supposing and identifying how things seem ... Especially when there is a "Context" which helps us know how "things seem" ...

If no Government has ever adequately represented its people, if no society has ever had complete justice, and if no successful history of socialist redistribution of wealth have ever existed, then why would one expect those things to happen in the future? Can you fill me in on that a little bit ... ?

I see you do admit most of the Occupiers have grooming and health issues, because you stated, "Not all of them look like that." Of course, they can blame the Large Corporations for their personal problems. Correct ... ?

If a revolution in Canada does occur, where will you be in it? In your apartment ... ? Lol.

I've said my piece. Your arguments have gone from ignorance, to arrogance, to Trolling and Hateful speech. I'll let Mods, and the other users who are more experienced, on this forum decide how to deal with this.

Originally Posted by JoReba

1.) They are just a collection of personal complaints and failures who want to blame other people, and blame "The System." But, there has always been some kind of unjust "System" in place which limit personal activities. The smart people figure out how to beat the system.

2.) They have way too much time on their hands, and since they are the Gen X/Gen Y they have been bred to think they are entitled to a lot of things without earning those things. The Latino, Oriental, and Eastern European immigrants know how to work, unlike the White Occupiers.

3.) Even if ideal economic, ideal social, and ideal political conditions existed here in America, most of the Occupiers would be able to get nothing more than low skilled and menial jobs with their dreadlocks, orange pants, facial piercings, bad teeth from drugs, and poor English comprehension skills.

4.) They have no real sense of leadership in their ideology, thinking that consensus should rule, and just going along with "the flow" of least resistance. They cannot be depended upon for strong spines or resolute character relating to principles worth pursuing. They only get all worked up and start beating on plastic containers when they "feel" a certain way about an issue. They cannot make committments to rational decisions.

5.) They actually are hurting the "99%" by draining resources from the public sector which must monitor, arrest, and repair the consequences of their destructive activities. They do not understand the meaning of the English word, "consequences." Notice how their verbal presentations are always given in terms of what other people have done to harm them apart from any of their own personal failures and poor decisions which have resulted in their currently experienced "consequences."

6.) They live in a mental world of La-La Land. No time in the History of Humanity has social justice, democracy, or economic equity ever existed apart from a few small, brief, and fragile groups, and certainly not within a large nation.

These people are useful, though. They are revealing the thinking errors which we all are subject to without careful review and vigilance. I am waiting for them to "occupy" my street. I have a garden hose. Lol.

The supreme irony is that the system you are defending is exploiting you as surely as it is exploiting the protesters. They are just smart enough to realize it. Or have you "beaten the system"? Be kind enough to correct our "thinking errors" and fill us in if this is the case.

If it isn't or you "choose" not to, it will not help your credibility. You understand "consequences" I assume.

Originally Posted by stander-j

I've said my piece. Your arguments have gone from ignorance, to arrogance, to Trolling and Hateful speech. I'll let Mods, and the other users who are more experienced, on this forum decide how to deal with this.

You will never stop being a loser. Edit: Well, that's not really true. You may yet hit rock bottom and turn your life around.

Originally Posted by PhysBang

Originally Posted by stander-j

I've said my piece. Your arguments have gone from ignorance, to arrogance, to Trolling and Hateful speech. I'll let Mods, and the other users who are more experienced, on this forum decide how to deal with this.

You will never stop being a loser. Edit: Well, that's not really true. You may yet hit rock bottom and turn your life around.

If he IS, we don't need you to tell us, how about something less personal and more related to the subject?

What is it that these people want, anyway? Have they endorsed any candidates so far? What are the specific goals they wish to achieve?

Think of it this way, if you are a young adult that decides to go to college the first lie you are told is that there are plenty of jobs in the field that pertains to your degree when you graduate. This lie justify's the huge expense for this college degree. In the mean time, over the years you are in college, the government has given permission for all those corporations the Ok to move out of this country that does not interfere with profit. You get out of college and find that your field that was promised that there would be plenty of jobs are no longer here in the U.S. You are now stuck with college loans that you have no idea how you are going to pay for nevermind that you will have to accept a job that you didn't go to college for in the first place.

If you did manage to get a job with your degree and was employed for awhile and decided to buy a house prior to 2008 it was good for a short time. You lost your job since the company decided to move overseas. The housing crash created a situation where you could not sell your home since its value has been lowered and you are no longer making what you used to make. A home should have allowed a profit in a stable market so if you lost your job, you could sell and still be okay.

However, since none of the players involved played by the rules that were in place prior to Clinton, everyone make a profit while the person that brought the house and the college degree got screwed over. Wallstreet and our government have turned everything into a gambling casino where poker is the top preferred game to play and it is the American Citizens money they have gambled with without the citizens actively playing in the game. We lose and they win over and over again and that is why Occupy Wallsteet is pissed off.

Originally Posted by JoReba

1.) They are just a collection of personal complaints and failures who want to blame other people, and blame "The System." But, there has always been some kind of unjust "System" in place which limit personal activities. The smart people figure out how to beat the system.

The only way to "beat" the system is to be on the winning side of it, but that isn't really a victory. The total amount of GDP produced in a system of polarized wealth will never even come close to what would be produced with a flatter distribution.

Do you understand the concept?

Suppose you're making a pizza, and you have the ability to decide both

1) - What percentage of the pizza goes to whom

2) - How big the pizza will be in total.

Someone discovers that can increase #1 (what percentage of the pizza will go to them), but the only way to do it is to decrease #2 (how big the pizza is in total). The 1% of the USA everyone is complaining about are who they are because they did exactly that. They've artificially diminished the supply of things like jobs, oil to drive our cars, and real estate in a way that almost indisputably lowers the USA's Gross Domestic Product, but also forces what little wealth remains into their hands.

If you don't join them, you have to accept poverty. If you do join them, you're helping our nation to fall. In such an environment, all patriots would be poor, and all traitors would be rich (the successful ones anyway.)

3.) Even if ideal economic, ideal social, and ideal political conditions existed here in America, most of the Occupiers would be able to get nothing more than low skilled and menial jobs with their dreadlocks, orange pants, facial piercings, bad teeth from drugs, and poor English comprehension skills.

Most of them would be happy with such jobs, so long as minimum wage laws don't get undermined by globalization. Occupiers aren't mad that they can't live in a mansion. They're mad that they have to work 60+ hours a week just to afford a 1 bedroom apartment and some cheap, crumby food and no healthcare.

5.) They actually are hurting the "99%" by draining resources from the public sector which must monitor, arrest, and repair the consequences of their destructive activities. They do not understand the meaning of the English word, "consequences." Notice how their verbal presentations are always given in terms of what other people have done to harm them apart from any of their own personal failures and poor decisions which have resulted in their currently experienced "consequences."

Destroying a few lawns isn't going to break the bank. That's just bull$hit being spewed by the right. It's a negligibly small cost being inflated by people who should know better, because they know idiots who can't actually do math will believe it blindly.

6.) They live in a mental world of La-La Land. No time in the History of Humanity has social justice, democracy, or economic equity ever existed apart from a few small, brief, and fragile groups, and certainly not within a large nation.

Also an easy argument to sell to stupid people. The crime rate has also never been 0%. Should we fire all the police because an absolutely perfect result is unobtainable?

Same argument. You're arguing that because an absolutely perfect society is impossible and won't last forever, therefore nobody should waste any time trying to move society in that direction. Basically you're suggesting that if we can't have an infinity perfect system, then we should have an infinity bad one and be happy with it, right?

Murder rate is down in my city, must be time to fire a buncha cops. Good point, kid.

Originally Posted by Barbi

everyone make a profit while the person that brought the house and the college degree got screwed over.

I'm confused. Are you arguing for birth control or the right to make angry faces at the universe over an economic system which has been in play since Ugg the Elder discovered the wonders of the free market?