emlapal wrote:Trustworthy said:
Like I said any negativity that comes of this is 100% based on ignorance, there is no other explanation and there is nothing that can be said to the contrary.
Yes. Absolutely. As pointed out by myself earlier in this thread and by OLP on FightTheGoodFight.ca this movement is meant to express that people are unhappy with too many of our elected representatives being too much an advocate for corporations and financial interests, and not enough an advocate for the majority, everyday people, and social interests. It is a call for
transparency and
accountability.
If you are arguing against the Occupy movement as a whole, you are arguing against the concepts of
transparency and accountability. Without transparency, every day citizens are ignorant to what really happens in the government. You are essentially arguing
for ignorance, which seems not very rational at all. Trusty's assumption that your arguments are a based on misunderstanding seem pretty solid to me. I challenge you to take a step back, forget about whatever grievances you've heard from individual Occupiers, and tell me how increased
transparency and accountability in our government is a bad thing. It is good for everyone except for the corrupt.
emlapal wrote:Then he said:
it's ok to disagree and have your own opinion
So let me gget this straight...if I may:
I am allowed to have an opinion but if it is different from yours it is completely ignorant and nothing can be said to the contrary. Hmmm...something about that sounds kinda...odd. So what you are saying then is I'm ignorant but you are allowing me to have an opinion anyway? Cool....thanks for that. (So much for open mindedness of the Occupiers).
It's fine to have an opinion, but you've not yet expressed yourself in a way that shows you really understand the underlying concepts here. You're latching onto specific bits and pieces that
some Occupiers agree with and throwing out the whole concept that maybe there's a bit too much corruption in Washington, and maybe we should be addressing
that issue.
emlapal wrote:Sure, you are out there protesting things you dislike but what do you expect to come of it? Really, what are your expectations? Are you expecting the corporations to shut down? Should the CEO's vacate their positions and walk out into the street and hand you piles of money as they tell their 25,000 employees they not longer have jobs because a few thousand whiners don't like how things are going for them?
They expect their elected officials to see what they support and what they do not support, and to be advocates for them. CEOs can do whatever they feel like, but I know many folks are ticked off that the same banking institutions that required bailouts still were able to give their top levels of management soaring salaries, bonuses, and perks -- the same management that allowed so much sub-prime lending to happen under their noses with no consideration about the tremendous risk they were creating.
An individual who takes a loan to buy a house they can't possibly afford just because the bank approves the loan should be blaming themselves in the end -- but at the same time the banks that loaned out trillions of dollars on a bubbling sector hold a lot of the responsibility turning a bubble in one sector into an overwhelming crisis and crushing the
entire economy. The banks should have regulated themselves better, or else the government should have.
emlapal wrote:The truth of the matter is that the Occupiers (hey..I thought libs hated occupiers) are causing more problems then they are helping to resolve...which is zero. Where do we start? How about the millions it is costing taxpayers in overtime pay for the police to control these mobs. Do you have an answer for how you are going to pay that bill?
So anything is
bad now if it costs taxpayers money? I think you're sidestepping but I'll follow you.
I've known a several police officers, stand-up guys working hard to support their families. I'm sure a lot of them appreciate getting some overtime pay -- especially in circumstances where it's not too likely for someone to pull a gun on them. As for how we will foot the bill? Whatever this is costing is just a drop in the bucket compared to the national debt. I would be perfectly happy to pay my fair share, I think taxes need to be increased across the board and spending needs to be decreased. But that is a job for Congress, and I am disappointed that they have not done a better job
emlapal wrote:people who are supposedly protesting greed are getting ripped off by fellow protesters and moreover, their laptops etc. are getting stolen too...you know the laptops made by evil corporations like Dell and Apple. By the way, it must suck for all the Occupiers to have to bow down to the corporations to Tweet, post and email on their corporate made devices, while they are wearing their Nike's and sipping on Starbucks as they wait for the next McDonald's run.
It doesn't suck so much. I'm able to Tweet, post, and email without much hassle, because ISPs are regulated by the FCC, and are required to have transparent network management practices, and to provide for any legal usage to be protected from being blocked and from being unreasonably deferred/deprioritized. In other words, the FCC is protecting the interests of the majority. More of this please!