[Pilgrim37]

(10-18-2011 11:09 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

In Phoenix.. seems overkill...

Hahaha...that's hilarious.

[tenderman100]

I don't know...considering who these people are maybe we should have MORE of a police presence.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...inion_main

Quote:

". . .the Occupy Wall Street movement reflects values that are dangerously out of touch with the broad mass of the American people—and particularly with swing voters who are largely independent. . .

“Our research shows clearly that the movement doesn’t represent unemployed America and is not ideologically diverse. Rather, it comprises an unrepresentative segment of the electorate that believes in radical redistribution of wealth, civil disobedience and, in some instances, violence. Half (52%) have participated in a political movement before, virtually all (98%) say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and nearly one-third (31%) would support violence to advance their agenda.

". . .What binds a large majority of the protesters together—regardless of age, socioeconomic status or education—is a deep commitment to left-wing policies: opposition to free-market capitalism and support for radical redistribution of wealth, intense regulation of the private sector, and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from going overseas. "

No...that can't be....can it?

[thegmanifesto]

(10-18-2011 01:54 PM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

I don't know...considering who these people are maybe we should have MORE of a police presence.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...inion_main

Quote:

". . .the Occupy Wall Street movement reflects values that are dangerously out of touch with the broad mass of the American people—and particularly with swing voters who are largely independent. . .

“Our research shows clearly that the movement doesn’t represent unemployed America and is not ideologically diverse. Rather, it comprises an unrepresentative segment of the electorate that believes in radical redistribution of wealth, civil disobedience and, in some instances, violence. Half (52%) have participated in a political movement before, virtually all (98%) say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and nearly one-third (31%) would support violence to advance their agenda.

". . .What binds a large majority of the protesters together—regardless of age, socioeconomic status or education—is a deep commitment to left-wing policies: opposition to free-market capitalism and support for radical redistribution of wealth, intense regulation of the private sector, and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from going overseas. "

No...that can't be....can it?

tenderman -

You need to go easy on this right wing cheerleading.

Of course the wall street journal is saying this.

"in some instances, violence"

Come on guy.

The thing has been going on for over a month and has been extremely peaceful.

Surprisingly so, considering the circumstances.

[Roosh]

Theme song for OWS? Here's the rare rap song with a message:

[kbell]

Ever think that this entire movement could be to force police forces to act. This would indirectly cause a police state by prevent future riots . Course this could be me just being over imaginative too.

[tenderman100]

(10-18-2011 01:59 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

tenderman -

You need to go easy on this right wing cheerleading.

Of course the wall street journal is saying this.

"in some instances, violence"

Come on guy.

The thing has been going on for over a month and has been extremely peaceful.

Surprisingly so, considering the circumstances.

First of all the research was done, and the article written by, Doug Schoen who is a DEMOCRATIC POLLSTER. Hate to break it to you but the WSJ publishes articles from all sides of the political spectrum.

John Kerry has had op eds.

Second, this is about ascertaining what these people REALLY think. What they REALLY think is independent...VERY independent...of whatever "right wing cheerleading" is going on (whatever that is).

Third. I am not a right winger. I consider myself a libertarian with rather progressive social values (for example, I have no problem with abortion, birth control, and find religion, generally, to be an anathema).

Fourth, and finally, OWS is a fucking joke. The youtube vidoes I have posted just scratch the surface. These protests are full of deadbeat unionist drug addled incoherent moronic anti-semites. If equivalent kinds of stupid nonsense came out of Tea Party rallies, that movement would have been dead long ago. These OWS yahoos don't muster arguments, they simply complain and moan.

So if I were you, apply some logic. Remember logic is what sets apart players from the lizards.

[G.L.Piggy]

I sympathize with OWS on two fronts:

1. Get the government out of college financing and allow the bankruptability of student debt.

2. Remove policies and regulations that foster moral hazard in our banking system. FDIC, Basel I and Basel II to start. Deposit insurance basically allowed banks to make risky loans with their money since they knew that if they went under deposits would be covered. The Basel agreements - which are international but allow individual nations to adopt their own capital requirements for loans - allowed U.S. banks to lower the capital requirements for mortgage loans. Whereas a bank had to have a certain level of capital in their accounts to back a car loan or a business loan, Basel II allowed them to have less capital backing AA and AAA mortgage-backed securities. And, as we know, the government-created oligarchy of Fitch, Moody and S&P rated toxic baskets of sub-prime and prime mortgages with these AA and AAA ratings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basel_II

[Roosh]

[Roosh]

[The_CEO]

Those darn socialist regulators, strangling the free market again...

"Citigroup agreed to pay $285 million to settle charges that it misled investors in a $1 billion derivatives deal tied to the United States housing market, then bet against investors as the housing market began to show signs of distress, the Securities and Exchange Commission said Wednesday."

[thegmanifesto]

(10-18-2011 09:37 PM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

(10-18-2011 01:59 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

tenderman -

You need to go easy on this right wing cheerleading.

Of course the wall street journal is saying this.

"in some instances, violence"

Come on guy.

The thing has been going on for over a month and has been extremely peaceful.

Surprisingly so, considering the circumstances.

First of all the research was done, and the article written by, Doug Schoen who is a DEMOCRATIC POLLSTER. Hate to break it to you but the WSJ publishes articles from all sides of the political spectrum.

John Kerry has had op eds.

Second, this is about ascertaining what these people REALLY think. What they REALLY think is independent...VERY independent...of whatever "right wing cheerleading" is going on (whatever that is).

Third. I am not a right winger. I consider myself a libertarian with rather progressive social values (for example, I have no problem with abortion, birth control, and find religion, generally, to be an anathema).

Fourth, and finally, OWS is a fucking joke. The youtube vidoes I have posted just scratch the surface. These protests are full of deadbeat unionist drug addled incoherent moronic anti-semites. If equivalent kinds of stupid nonsense came out of Tea Party rallies, that movement would have been dead long ago. These OWS yahoos don't muster arguments, they simply complain and moan.

So if I were you, apply some logic. Remember logic is what sets apart players from the lizards.

How many days have you spent observing the protesters?

[Pilgrim37]

Good in depth interview on Obama ,politics links with high finance and lobbyists:

And a good interview on how the real estate bubble works like a Ponzi scheme and affects the rest of the economy:

[Giovonny]

I sympathize with the 99% that gets fucks in the ass. I support their cause. I am one of them.

I just wonder if these protests will actually accomplish anything?

While these protests have been going on, Wells Fargo raised there fees.

I don't think protesting is enough. Protesting doesn't hurt their bottom line. It doesn't even really hurt their business.

We need more aggressive tactics. "Civil disobedience" or something like that. I don't know? Everybody should pull their money out of the banks or something crazy like that. Burn down bank branches, kidnap high level bankers, assassinate politicians, etc. Ok, maybe I'm going to far, but we have to hit them where it hurts. I don't think standing on the sidewalk holding signs really scares anyone. We need gorilla warfare.

Unfortunately, I might take a violent revolution to actually see any changes. Over the course of history, isn't that the only thing that has created change?

I know Gandhi and MLK would not agree with me.

When people get hungry, they become dangerous. What would you do if you couldn't afford to feed your family?

I hope it doesn't come to this. Hopefully, someone smarter then me can find a peaceful solution.

[Smitty]

(10-19-2011 01:15 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

I sympathize with the 99% that gets fucks in the ass. I support their cause. I am one of them.

I just wonder if these protests will actually accomplish anything?

While these protests have been going on, Wells Fargo raised there fees.

I don't think protesting is enough. Protesting doesn't hurt their bottom line. It doesn't even really hurt their business.

We need more aggressive tactics. "Civil disobedience" or something like that. I don't know? Everybody should pull their money out of the banks or something crazy like that. Burn down bank branches, kidnap high level bankers, assassinate politicians, etc. Ok, maybe I'm going to far, but we have to hit them where it hurts. I don't think standing on the sidewalk holding signs really scares anyone. We need gorilla warfare.

Unfortunately, I might take a violent revolution to actually see any changes. Over the course of history, isn't that the only thing that has created change?

I know Gandhi and MLK would not agree with me.

When people get hungry, they become dangerous. What would you do if you couldn't afford to feed your family?

I hope it doesn't come to this. Hopefully, someone smarter then me can find a peaceful solution.

How about just voting with your feet and using a different bank if you're getting "fucked in the ass?"

Or, if you encourage more aggressive tactics - such as civil disobedience and the others you listed - you should elaborate on why that degree of action is necessary. What needs to change? How, as part of the 99%, are you getting screwed? I'm just trying to understand all this anger for corporations who, at the end of the day, don't actually owe you a thing.

[Brian]

(10-19-2011 12:19 PM)The_CEO Wrote:  

Those darn socialist regulators, strangling the free market again...

"Citigroup agreed to pay $285 million to settle charges that it misled investors in a $1 billion derivatives deal tied to the United States housing market, then bet against investors as the housing market began to show signs of distress, the Securities and Exchange Commission said Wednesday."

this is more or less the equivalent of robbing a 7/11 and having your penalty be a percentage of the robbery proceeds instead of being thrown in jail

[Chad Daring]

(10-19-2011 01:15 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

I sympathize with the 99% that gets fucks in the ass. I support their cause. I am one of them.

I just wonder if these protests will actually accomplish anything?

While these protests have been going on, Wells Fargo raised there fees.

I don't think protesting is enough. Protesting doesn't hurt their bottom line. It doesn't even really hurt their business.

We need more aggressive tactics. "Civil disobedience" or something like that. I don't know? Everybody should pull their money out of the banks or something crazy like that. Burn down bank branches, kidnap high level bankers, assassinate politicians, etc. Ok, maybe I'm going to far, but we have to hit them where it hurts. I don't think standing on the sidewalk holding signs really scares anyone. We need gorilla warfare.

Unfortunately, I might take a violent revolution to actually see any changes. Over the course of history, isn't that the only thing that has created change?

I know Gandhi and MLK would not agree with me.

When people get hungry, they become dangerous. What would you do if you couldn't afford to feed your family?

I hope it doesn't come to this. Hopefully, someone smarter then me can find a peaceful solution.

The protests wont change anything, but they're clearly spreading the word. Its going global. The protests are just the first step.

[tenderman100]

(10-19-2011 12:24 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

How many days have you spent observing the protesters?

Days? Observing?

I am sure they are all just lovely people.

How much mental energy did you devote to understanding my logic and my counterargument?

Meanwhile, I have money to make and babes to bang.

[jariel]

I see black people have joined this fight, suckers, just damn suckers.

[Roosh]

[Roosh]

[Gmac]

For those who think the answer is simple, black and white.

"A group of people in the village were unhappy with the rich man because they thought he had too much and they had too little. They decided to take what he had and share it among themselves. They occupied his lawn and demanded he come out. His family too. They chased him away. His family too. The strongest among them took all of the gold and the rest shared all of the food and clothes. But they were still hungry and cold. Their families too.

The next day the workers came to the rich man's factory and worked all day. But at the end of the day they did not get paid. The rich man was gone. The tailor came knocking the following day to deliver the clothes he had made for the rich man and his family. He was happy because he was about to be paid very well. But the rich man was gone. The tailor was sad because he had planned on using his earnings to buy food. He went hungry. His family too. A year later the villagers had moved on one by one. Their families too. There was not enough work and not enough food. The carpenter who once made furniture and built things for the rich man came upon a village where the people seemed busy and happy. He asked the innkeeper whether there was work in the village.

The innkeeper said that there was indeed. He said that a man and his family had come to their village a year before. The man had developed a marvelous invention and started a business that employed many people in the village and those people now had enough money to eat and drink at his inn and visit the local shops and buy things they once could not. The carpenter ventured to the inventor's house to see if perhaps he would have need for the skills of a carpenter. When the door opened, there of course stood the rich man who he had once worked for. The rich man invited the carpenter in. He asked the carpenter to build a new factory for him and offered to pay him well. The carpenter was happy. His family too."

[Roosh]

Hilarious attack ad...

[thegmanifesto]

(10-19-2011 09:01 PM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

(10-19-2011 12:24 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

How many days have you spent observing the protesters?

Days? Observing?

I am sure they are all just lovely people.

Zero.

That is exactly what I thought.

[Brian]

let me ask you a question Roosh...

lets say hypothetically speaking you devoted a good portion of your life trying to get laid and bang chicks. lets say you got to be very good about it, coaching others and writing books. you put in the hours getting good at it, getting rejected over and over on the way to crafting your skills. it got to the point where you were in the top 1% of the population in how many chicks you banged. now how would you feel if all the beta losers who couldnt get laid started marching outside your favorite bars and day gaming spots because 'it wasnt fair' that you were getting more chicks then them and they were 'entitled' to getting laid and that was only fair. sure, while you were getting bitched at by lawyer cunts in dc they were smoking weed and playing video games. sure, they have never tried an approach sober or after 11pm. they never bothered to learn 'game' or put themselves out of their comfort zones, but they shouldnt have to because its not fair that 1% of the guys got more bangs then them. would you give them what they wanted to be fair? would you do all the work for a polish 8.5 then on the way back to your place to fuck you decide to pass her off to one of them to even things out? or would you tell the lazy fuckers if they wanted a polish 8.5 of their own to stop making excuses and put in the work???

[Pepini]

(10-20-2011 09:40 AM)Gmac Wrote:  

For those who think the answer is simple, black and white.

"A group of people in the village were unhappy with the rich man because they thought he had too much and they had too little. They decided to take what he had and share it among themselves. They occupied his lawn and demanded he come out. His family too. They chased him away. His family too. The strongest among them took all of the gold and the rest shared all of the food and clothes. But they were still hungry and cold. Their families too.

The next day the workers came to the rich man's factory and worked all day. But at the end of the day they did not get paid. The rich man was gone. The tailor came knocking the following day to deliver the clothes he had made for the rich man and his family. He was happy because he was about to be paid very well. But the rich man was gone. The tailor was sad because he had planned on using his earnings to buy food. He went hungry. His family too. A year later the villagers had moved on one by one. Their families too. There was not enough work and not enough food. The carpenter who once made furniture and built things for the rich man came upon a village where the people seemed busy and happy. He asked the innkeeper whether there was work in the village.

The innkeeper said that there was indeed. He said that a man and his family had come to their village a year before. The man had developed a marvelous invention and started a business that employed many people in the village and those people now had enough money to eat and drink at his inn and visit the local shops and buy things they once could not. The carpenter ventured to the inventor's house to see if perhaps he would have need for the skills of a carpenter. When the door opened, there of course stood the rich man who he had once worked for. The rich man invited the carpenter in. He asked the carpenter to build a new factory for him and offered to pay him well. The carpenter was happy. His family too."

Put two 14 year old kids running 100 yards for the same lunch in three situations:

1 - The faster kid gets first so he eats all the lunch, while the slower starves and start practicing to be faster with an empty stomach.

This is salvage capitalism.

Result:
Next time they run, the slower kid will starve again.

The third time they run, if he still can´t get there first, he will tripp the faster one. And both will end up figthing for the same lunch.


2 - The faster kid gets again faster. But instead of taking all the lunch somebody splites the lunch and gives them the exact same half of the lunch.

This is comunism.

Next time they run the faster kid will still go faster. The slower knowing he doesn´t stand a chance and that the lunch will be split in half won´t even run.

Third time they run, both look to each other waiting to see who goes to get the lunch. They both know the lunch is there and will get the same, wether they compete or not.


3 - The faster kid runs again reaches first. But instead of taking all the lunch he has to give to the slower 15% of it. Only enough for him not starve and have strenght to practice.
Next time they run, the gap between the two decreases, so the slower ones gets 25%. He continues practicing.
Third time they run the faster still gets there first. Because nature made us inequal in skills. But as long as the slower has the mirage of eating all the lunch, or at least a bigger piece, he will continue practicing and trying.

This is social democracy.


In which situation do you think the western hemisphere finds himself in?