Occupy Wherever

[lifelikefeel]

If you were given the opportunity to address the mobs of protesters at a site of any of the seemingly dozens of "Occupy...." locations (ie. Wall Street, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco, etc.), what would you say to the "99%"?

Also, where do you think this is all leading? Riots? Revolution? Resolution? Police brutality? Random acts of kindness? More division? More unity? World peace? World war? More awareness for the issue of social justice? The Detroit Lions winning the Super Bowl? What are your thoughts?

[sshuffield70]

With all due respect, the one choice that's not up there..."Not a damn thing!"

[Cashmouthy]

You are exactly right Sshuffield70- exactly nothing...They are too lazy to work, they won't continue the rally as a political movement. Heck they are getting paid $600 a week to be there. The ads are on craigslist. Paid by unions and far-left organizations like Move on .org They are fake grass roots rallies..Astro-turf protesters. They will just go home to there po-dunk towns and get high as they tell their loser friends that "I was a protester man...who wants to touch me...."

[CardSharks8689]

I didn't vote. Because one of the options I was hoping for doesn't exist in the poll. I think this will end completely neutral. There are no winners in a war, a strike, a protest, or a fight.

I seriously believe unions going on strike can cripple the economy, even for just a short period. Unions walk off the job as if they were throwing a temper tantrum and giving the company a punch in the face, and stand outside and wait for the moment that something bad happens, as they think something bad happening (financial disaster or environmental disaster) will wake up the company and the union thinks they will get their demands met faster, when in reality, the money doesn't exist, and the company will act as if they would say to the union "Nice try, you failed."

Fighting and protests don't work. 'Nuff said.

[billycw]

I do think they are so many people who think they are entitlted to things that others worked for. Actually, this has been a long slow process that sadly arose from protests in the 60's. Nothing wrong with protesting a war that was more about money than just resolution. But the culture that started with the beatniks in the 50's spread through the drug culture that flourished en masse in the 60's. Recall drug humor was supposed to be funny until the mid 80's.
Truth be told, for every Vietnam protester who strongly believed they could change the outcome, they were about 5 more who rode along and were more concerned with sex and drugs. We got great Rock from that period,but musicians just permeated the self indulgence. Looking back, those peaceful demonstrations didn't stop the War. Made people more aware, but the real reason the US got out of Vietnam was money. As it always has been.
So, when people sit around and protest, they get attention from many types of people.Some will ignore them, some will join them. But the real people who matter are the ones with the power. Unless you reach them, nothing changes. Those with power don't care about who dies, who needs food, who needs help. It's only a rare politicain that leads change socially who doesn't care a great deal more about himself.

Protesting makes people feel satisfied they are doing something. But be honest....when was the last time you as an individual cared anbout someone walking a picket line if it doesn't directly affect you? This is what America has become....the reign of the self-entitled. This is why we have the Tea Party. I'm sorry to say, but Occupy Whatever will cause violence in some places, peace in others and traffic jams in most. Nice that people are voicing their opinions....but unless they plan to go further and put heat on their political reps, this will all be a waste of time. Better to work for something if you can instead of sitting around and complaing about what you haven't got. Rarely in America does this work.

[espnews26]

http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/u...rporations.jpg

[Cashmouthy]

I learned that the real 99% was the Tea Party and that these protestests represent the 2-4% that are either on drugs,lazy,uneducated, paid by unions to be there, paid by far left groups to be there, this is called astro-turf because it is fake grassroots-go to craiglists to get the $600 per week to lay around the street of America's cities, or they are just misguided. I am not invoved with either one, but at least the Tea Party people were clean- I saw them picking up after themselves at every one of the rallies that was covered on MSNBC, the accusations about them turned out to be lies, like they were racists or stupid and they were made up of all races-this just looks like pot smoking suburbanite white kids that listened to Professor Far-left too long in sociology class at the University of Daddy Went There and are getting paid to get high and they will get a college credit for telling the professor they were political protesters last fall, the Tea Party had some goofy people dressed like fouding fathers but for the majority of them they were mostly college graduates, business owners, and concerned for everyones health and welfare, were as these people, the "occupiers" -are only concerned about Welfare checks and free social programs, I heard this said by those knuckheads repeatly. Give me something except a job. I heard that repeatly, they want to be given money, given health care, given, given given, If you don't even care enough about your life to work and get health insurance, why should the rest of us care if you don't, on that note, why should we all have to pay for you if you don't care enough to work and get health insurance. As a society, we take care of the sick,elderly and disabled, they aren't the ones that are out there, it is the uber-lazy entitled culture that has sprung up. They are the ones who the politicians are really talking about when they try to guilt you into universal healthcare. We already take care of the ones that need it but they are used as pawns to get it for the worthless in our midst. They want to be modern slaves on Uncle Sam's plantation but of course we have to work for Uncle Sam to have the money to support these volunteer slaves. Where did survival of the fittest go in this culture. Survival of the fittest is real social justice. I say unto thee, take care of the sick and elderly but as for a healthy man if he doesn't work then he doesn't eat-Jesus. He is still right. And the Lions will be a wild card playoff team that loses in the first round. Lack of experience is a major factor in playoff games and they will feel the pressure and collapse.

[flora1941]

I must say I agree with you in this matter. This "Occupy Wall Street" group are a bunch of lazy young people that don't want to work or contribute anything worthwhile to this country. What I have seen on the news is that they are loud, crude, rebellious lazy bums. I think this is a far left movement trying to stir up a bunch of problems.
You are right abou the tea party, (although, if we had had a chapter in our rural area, I would have joined) they were well-behaved, cleaned up behind themselves, and they did not get rowdy.
Many of these people that have money have worked hard and lived frugally to get it. I do not expect them to support me. My husband and I worked hard all of our lives and paid into ss all of those years. We also saved, but when I was being treated for cancer, we went through our savings, so now we live on ss. I do not feel bad about this because it is our money. But, again, we are living frugally, and I do not expect Wall Street or any group of people to support us. Nor, do I want them to.
THE PEOPLE OUT THERE RIOTING need to get a job and grow up.

[CardSharks8689]

I totally agree that the Occupy groups are just lazy kids who have nothing better to do with their time, and refuse to work. We all know the state of today's youth these days. Kids care more about computers, video games, drugs, and other addictives. If I were to support anything, I would support a ban on airing commercials advertising for video games, limiting such airings to the late night hours - during a time when kids/teenagers should be in bed.

As for junk food and sweets causing the obesity problem, there is one thing I do support - an extra tax that would make the price of such junk food more expensive. People will only buy junk food if the price is right. And right now, it is way cheaper than the more healthy stuff. I think they should reduce the prices of the more healthier stuff and raise the prices of the bad stuff. An add-on tax would be a step in the right direction. I heard that some countries have adopted such tax, so why not the U.S. or even Canada? Plus, cartoons with commercials advertising for crappy foods and video games involving a lot of fighting is a bad idea. As much as I enjoyed waking up to cartoons on Saturday mornings back in the day, I don't miss them at all. They should remove shows such as Hannah Montana, That's So Raven, and other young peoples' shows from the ABC Saturday morning lineup. TV should be more about informative programming, as well as sitcoms involving real people, reality shows, game shows, and even shows that would send a message in a humourous or dramatical way.

I do have to admit, I was robbed a few weeks ago, and I feel that shows such as CSI may be partly to blame. Such shows are a bad influence and should be off the air. I'm sorry to those CSI fans out there, but I do not support such crime-related shows anymore.

[M2nFarisFan]

^ In that same thread, I think the government should provide funding to help young people find work. Most employers nowadays are so enamored with cutting bottom lines that they simply refuse to pick up entry-level positions, instead insisting that everyone have advanced degrees and/or experience. Most of the "Occupy" crowds are jobless young people, but even though I put in full time effort and pay my fair share of taxes, I sort of agree with the philosophy behind it.

There is an elite in this country (and in Canada for that matter) and the entry to it is invitation-only, in a sense; you either have to have some unique, immensely fetishistic talent or skill, or hit the lottery to be in it. 30 years of NAFTA, trickle-down, and inherent socialism have pulled this bridge to the top away. The worst part is that it will likely be my generation that won't have the experience, the financial standing, or the Social Security to remedy it. Most of the people I went to high school with have found well-paying work, but I'm willing to bet 19 out of 20 are making less with a college degree than their parents did with simple high school work. Once again, there are limits. Go to any employer's website and see the openings - there are none that say "entry level, 0-2 years experience". It may simply be "economic limitations", but it's the company's way of "passing the buck" to someone else. Thank God for the government, at least where I live....they have been willing to train college graduates, albeit a small number of them, with skills necessary to work in this world.

[lifelikefeel]

The government, enabled by what they seem to think is an endless amount of tax money - a budget which they can never seem to be able to balance - already provides lots of resources to help, not only young people, but all people find jobs. They're called public educational institutions, unemployment centers, and public libraries to mention a few. I can't tell you how many times I've been in a public library and have had to wait my turn to do some jobsearching due to many of the computers being occupied by a bunch of gamers trying to virtually kill off one another, and Facebookers. Gives me the impression that they could care less about working or studying, but can always find the time to goof off, chat online, or occupy wherever and whine about the so-called rich not sharing their hard-earned cash with the lazy and unambitious.

In one of my last jobs in which I compiled over 10 years experience, I was forced out so that they could hire someone at an entry level of pay, thus cutting their bottom line.

Technology has impacted a lot of those "simple" jobs of yesteryear as machines, robots, and computers are just more efficient and accurate in their work than their human counterparts, and mechanized labor never complains about not getting enough pay or having to work long hours... I see a fair amount of entry level positions available on job boards that don't quite seem to get filled as though there are just not enough qualified applicants, perhaps due to the failing U.S. educational system - and let's face it, throwing more and more money at it hasn't and isn't going to solve the problem.

The very fact that government apparently needs to train college graduates so that they have necessary work skills speaks volumes that our educational system in the U.S. is failing our country. Maybe we should file a class-action lawsuit against educational institutions who continue to give out diplomas and degrees like Halloween candy to folks who are ill-prepared for the modern workplace. Alternatively, kids could stop being concerned about partying, gaming, texting, and Facebooking and actually try to learn something rather than just getting by. I don't have any kids but if I did, I'd definitely home-school them.

[whammy850]

Where did survival of the fittest go in this culture. Survival of the fittest is real social justice. I say unto thee, take care of the sick and elderly but as for a healthy man if he doesn't work then he doesn't eat-Jesus.

You just referenced Darwin in one sentence, then Jesus in the very next. This is why I don't claim one political party or the other. I'm slightly biased conservative, but how is it that survival of the fittest is your business model, but you refuse to believe it exists in nature?