• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The 53%: We are NOT Occupy Wall Street

See, I don't agree with this either. Many civil rights protests led to big changes of civil rights during the 50s and 60s. And it is hard to contend that Ghandi's protests made no difference. Heck, even some protests in recent years have at least helped bring attention to the problem, without any violence or even resistance to arrest needed. The difference is that those protesting knew exactly what they all wanted, or at least the vast majority.

I know what you mean, but that was also a different time. Now that the media largely controls the public perspective, it's hard to have your voice truly be heard. Plus, if said protest doesn't go in line with their agenda, they can easily smear it. The media has vastly changed since then as well.

When Rosa Parks refused to go to the back of the bus it was to protest laws that treated blacks as second-class citizens. There was no need to look for her message or to muddle through what a "reasonable" solution was in that case. Sure, there aren't a lot of protests that are that simple, but the majority of protests that really make a difference are those in which the people have a clear, single message and a reasonable solution (repeal Jim Crow laws, gay marriage, women's right to vote). Even worker strikes and sit-ins that have worked have had clear messages (higher pay, more benefits, better working conditions). And the same thing works at least to a small extent with the corporate world.

That's true, but those are also at a smaller level. I don't see OWS getting wall street or the government to change their practices.

I will give one big example that comes to mind in recent history. The Dixie Chicks. Whether you agree with the boycott of them by country music fans in this country or not, you have to at least admit that the protest worked against them. They have not had a country hit in this country since the boycott started.

The Dixie Chicks thing was just silly to me. Seeing clips of people destroying their cds as if that somehow hurts the Dixie Chicks. Those people paid for those cds and are essentially flushing their money down the toilet. The Dixie Chicks are still around too. Granted, they aren't as successful as they used to be, but they are still out there and doing fairly well from what I've seen.
 
I know what you mean, but that was also a different time. Now that the media largely controls the public perspective, it's hard to have your voice truly be heard. Plus, if said protest doesn't go in line with their agenda, they can easily smear it. The media has vastly changed since then as well.

Yes, they were a different time.

But they were also more focused. Protests do not work for general problems/complaints. And they certainly do not work when you are talking about a large group literally occupying a major city. The only pocketbooks the current protests are hurting are taxpayers, since they are causing cities to have to spend more money on cleanup and law enforcement, even if you don't count the LEO actions directly against protesters, as a whole.

That's true, but those are also at a smaller level. I don't see OWS getting wall street or the government to change their practices.

Which is basically what I am saying. Protests do not work on a large scale like this, so it is pointless to try. It would be much better to band together, get some actual leadership, find out what people want, and work at developing reasonable solutions to push for to the problems.

Small scale protests do work though. There are many examples of small scale protests being effective, as long as they are something that many people can agree with.

As for me, I would probably join a small-scale protest about the greed of Wall St. and its connections to our government. As long as there was an actual message and a reasonable goal to doing it. I am not wasting my time with general complaints protests. And I do not condone any violence or even yelling/threats against police officers. Protesters should fight their battles in court, not with the police. And they need to understand that their actions are affecting more than just those who they are protesting when such things go on for so long, on such a huge scale.

The Dixie Chicks thing was just silly to me. Seeing clips of people destroying their cds as if that somehow hurts the Dixie Chicks. Those people paid for those cds and are essentially flushing their money down the toilet. The Dixie Chicks are still around too. Granted, they aren't as successful as they used to be, but they are still out there and doing fairly well from what I've seen.

I agree with the whole destroying CDs you have already paid for, that is pretty stupid. I even said so when it was being done. (I was on the carrier in the Gulf when the comment was made and most of those protests were being done.)

They were hurt big by the following boycott of their music though. Prior to the "incident", they were top of the charts in country music, including earning big country awards for the album they had just released, Home. They lost at least half of their original fans, if not more, here in the US. (I can't be counted, since, although I liked some Dixie Chick songs, I honestly didn't care for them overall. I am a Reba fan.) They are not doing great. They have released only one album since the comment, which was more of a political statement, than anything else. Then, they took a break and now, there are only 2 in the group and they changed their name. I don't see them coming back.
 
.......snip
roguenuke said:
I will give one big example that comes to mind in recent history. The Dixie Chicks. Whether you agree with the boycott of them by country music fans in this country or not, you have to at least admit that the protest worked against them. They have not had a country hit in this country since the boycott started.

From wikipedia:
As of 2009, they have won 13 Grammy Awards, with 5 of them earned in 2007 including the coveted Grammy Award for Album of the Year for Taking the Long Way. As of July 2010, with 30.5 million certified albums,[3] and sales of 26,733,000 albums in the U.S., they have become the top selling all-female band in the U.S. during the Nielsen SoundScan era.[4]
Who needs a number one hit when you have these stats?
 
Last edited:
But they were also more focused. Protests do not work for general problems/complaints. And they certainly do not work when you are talking about a large group literally occupying a major

I would disagree...the issues that are being discussed right now in the media was non-existent for years. I also think the Tea Party didn't put out a real message beyong "don't tax me bro" until they got co-opted by Republicans. Now the people that protested bailouts......want less regulation on wall street and tax breaks for wall street.

In the words of the ESPN staff....come on man!
 
Recent figures show that unemployment amongst college graduates today is still 4.7-5% and that they start at well above the median income. And funny but for a country with 'no jobs' we still have illegal immigrants pouring in and finding work. We have 114 legal immigrants an HOUR coming into this country and finding work. Yes...sometimes that is (gasp) menial labor and entry level work. Sometimes you have to work two of those jobs to make ends meet. Welcome to the real world. Next?

Well the illegal immigration is actually slowing down. The wages for a lot of those jobs are artificially low, it would be hard to make a living; but you could for a short term get by. The real reason for those wages was that they hadn't adjusted in decades and what they paid someone 5 bucks in the 70's for, they still want to pay 5 bucks today. Without illegal immigration those wages would have increased and for certain jobs we would have hired an engineer to come up with a machine.

Regardless, high sustained unemployment and a very tough market mean that people pay not be finding the jobs. The contention that these OWSers should just go home and get a job is countered by "what jobs!".
 
Who needs a number one hit when you have these stats?

That's the thing with show biz, artists are only as good as the last thing they put out.


Billy Joel: The Entertainer said:
I am the entertainer,
I bring to you my songs.
I'd like to spend a day or two.
I can't stay that long.
No, I've got to meet expenses.
I got to stay in line.
Gotta get those fees
To the agencies.
And I'd love to stay,
But there's bills to pay,
So I just don't have the time.

.....

I am the entertainer,
The idol of my age.
I make all kinds of money,
When I go on the stage.
Ah, you've seen me in the papers,
I've been in the magazines.
But if I go cold,
I won't get sold.
I'll get put in the back
In the discount rack,
Like another can of beans.
 
.......snip


From wikipedia:
Who needs a number one hit when you have these stats?

Most of those sales came either before the "incident", or from fans in other countries after the "incident".

And most country music fans do not count the Grammys as great awards. Especially since the 5 Grammys that they got after the incident were seen as a political statement, not actually deserved rewards based on the actual music. Even some music industry people admit this is probably true.

Grammy Sweep by Dixie Chicks Is Seen as a Vindication - New York Times

Had they not made the comment and gotten the subsequent boycott, they would have been doing even better, probably by a huge amount. Their success in country music was rising at the time of the comment, not falling. Many people loved them.

For the record, I still own one of their CDs and listen to some of their songs. I just will never buy anything else that gives them money again because I found the comment disrespectful (especially the part about them being "here on the good side with y'all") and their subsequent reactions to the backlash petty and immature.
 
I would disagree...the issues that are being discussed right now in the media was non-existent for years. I also think the Tea Party didn't put out a real message beyong "don't tax me bro" until they got co-opted by Republicans. Now the people that protested bailouts......want less regulation on wall street and tax breaks for wall street.

In the words of the ESPN staff....come on man!

Was not a tea party supporter, still not. I don't agree with them either. In fact, I am much more aligned with the OWS movement. I just don't agree with their methods. They are coming off as whining, complaining, immature assholes who don't have a clue about how to truly deal with the problems.
 
Most of those sales came either before the "incident", or from fans in other countries after the "incident".

And most country music fans do not count the Grammys as great awards. Especially since the 5 Grammys that they got after the incident were seen as a political statement, not actually deserved rewards based on the actual music. Even some music industry people admit this is probably true.

Grammy Sweep by Dixie Chicks Is Seen as a Vindication - New York Times

Had they not made the comment and gotten the subsequent boycott, they would have been doing even better, probably by a huge amount. Their success in country music was rising at the time of the comment, not falling. Many people loved them.

For the record, I still own one of their CDs and listen to some of their songs. I just will never buy anything else that gives them money again because I found the comment disrespectful (especially the part about them being "here on the good side with y'all") and their subsequent reactions to the backlash petty and immature.

To be honest, it's hard for me to relate with people who don't listen to music based on political views. I'm not a country fan, so I couldn't get into the Dixie Chicks from the get go. However, I can't think of a single musician that I like where I would stop liking simply because they had differing political beliefs. Hell, I listen to Charles Manson music every now and then and it has nothing to do with him, but with his talents as a musician.
 
To be honest, it's hard for me to relate with people who don't listen to music based on political views. I'm not a country fan, so I couldn't get into the Dixie Chicks from the get go. However, I can't think of a single musician that I like where I would stop liking simply because they had differing political beliefs. Hell, I listen to Charles Manson music every now and then and it has nothing to do with him, but with his talents as a musician.

I don't think people should get music/entertainment awards based on their political beliefs/principals.

I honestly don't care if people find me petty, I just don't want to give my hard earned money to people I don't agree with. It is a lot easier to do with music than most other entertainment industries, but I still will do it for other things as well. Now, as I said, I will listen to some of their songs now, I just don't pay for it. And I will watch movies with actors/actresses that I find politically distasteful, but that distaste honestly does play into whether I will own a movie certain movie with them in it or not.

Right or wrong though, it is a form of protest.
 
I don't think people should get music/entertainment awards based on their political beliefs/principals.

I honestly don't care if people find me petty, I just don't want to give my hard earned money to people I don't agree with. It is a lot easier to do with music than most other entertainment industries, but I still will do it for other things as well. Now, as I said, I will listen to some of their songs now, I just don't pay for it. And I will watch movies with actors/actresses that I find politically distasteful, but that distaste honestly does play into whether I will own a movie certain movie with them in it or not.

Right or wrong though, it is a form of protest.

I don't think you or anyone else who cares that much about politics are petty. I just personally don't understand it and can't really relate to it.
 
Well the illegal immigration is actually slowing down. The wages for a lot of those jobs are artificially low, it would be hard to make a living; but you could for a short term get by. The real reason for those wages was that they hadn't adjusted in decades and what they paid someone 5 bucks in the 70's for, they still want to pay 5 bucks today. Without illegal immigration those wages would have increased and for certain jobs we would have hired an engineer to come up with a machine.

Regardless, high sustained unemployment and a very tough market mean that people pay not be finding the jobs. The contention that these OWSers should just go home and get a job is countered by "what jobs!".
Funny...but people manage to find jobs every day in this country. A good chunk of them can just take their ass back to school. If it is a pro jobs rally...great...then they should have targeted labor as well as industry. See...thats part of the problem with the vague general nature of this protest. What exactly are they whining about again? What change are we talking about? Influence on politicians? The tendency of politicians to favor corporations? Jobs? High student loans? A change to communism? **** the po-lice? Sad they got into home loans they couldnt afford? Pick something.
 
Funny...but people manage to find jobs every day in this country. A good chunk of them can just take their ass back to school. If it is a pro jobs rally...great...then they should have targeted labor as well as industry. See...thats part of the problem with the vague general nature of this protest. What exactly are they whining about again? What change are we talking about? Influence on politicians? The tendency of politicians to favor corporations? Jobs? High student loans? A change to communism? **** the po-lice? Sad they got into home loans they couldnt afford? Pick something.

If it's pro jobs - I would expect corporations and Wall Street to support OWS and their ability to try and find jobs and be down there gathering up applications and resumes.
 
LOL, i gotta ask whoa afthe heck id you serve wiath? man athat must have been a jhooked-up unit. bitching was our oens release. :D and we were PROS.
I was raised (literally) by a bunch of old school navy chiefs. You never let the kids see you bitch and when you are with your peers and superiors, you dont bitch, you man-up. Im not implying people didnt on occasion complain...but for the most part...when it came time to do the job...you did the job. I probably saw less of it from my folks because I didnt do it around them.

I have told both of my sons (1 in the army, 1 in the guard) you get 1 time every 4 years to bitch, whine, complain, yell, scream, and say no. If you say yes and re-up...do the job. That means you support the CIC whoever it is and support your boss. Pays dividends long term.
 
Last edited:
If it's pro jobs - I would expect corporations and Wall Street to support OWS and their ability to try and find jobs and be down there gathering up applications and resumes.

Ummm...why....why exactly do corporatins or Wall Street care about jobs? Where is this false idea that jobs in anyway is the goal of Wall Street or corporations.
 
I don't think you or anyone else who cares that much about politics are petty. I just personally don't understand it and can't really relate to it.

Let's get this straight. You don't understand how someone does not like to be forced to give money to people they do not support?
Are you sure that's what you cannot relate to?
 
Funny...but people manage to find jobs every day in this country.

There are some jobs, but that doesn't mean that everyone can find them. Thus is the flaw in your logic. near 10% unemployment means that we have near 90% employment. So sure, people can find jobs. But the high unemployment rate sustained during our recession does mean that even more people than normal will be UNABLE to find a job.

A good chunk of them can just take their ass back to school.

They could, and I don't particularly think that's a bad idea.

If it is a pro jobs rally...great...then they should have targeted labor as well as industry. See...thats part of the problem with the vague general nature of this protest. What exactly are they whining about again? What change are we talking about? Influence on politicians? The tendency of politicians to favor corporations? Jobs? High student loans? A change to communism? **** the po-lice? Sad they got into home loans they couldnt afford? Pick something.

The main contention is the extreme mixing of State and Corporate entity. It's always been that.

OWS & TP.jpg
 
I was raised (literally) by a bunch of old school navy chiefs. You never let the kids see you bitch and when you are with your peers and superiors, you dont bitch, you man-up. Im not implying people didnt on occasion complain...but for the most part...when it came time to do the job...you did the job. I probably saw less of it from my folks because I didnt do it around them.

.
Navy Chiefs! No joke but every Navy Chief I've ever met is tough as nails and cool as shi*. A friend just got married and 3 of her Uncles were navy chiefs. We got trashed and hung out until like 3 in the morning. These guys had like 40 thousand stories of their days in the Navy.
 
Ummm...why....why exactly do corporatins or Wall Street care about jobs? Where is this false idea that jobs in anyway is the goal of Wall Street or corporations.

I know of know significant business that is not always look for good candidates. Are you saying most corporations don't look for job candidates year-round?
 
Let's get this straight. You don't understand how someone does not like to be forced to give money to people they do not support?
Are you sure that's what you cannot relate to?

Um... no. That's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying I can't relate to people who let politics dictate their musical tastes. I thought I was clear before on that, but I apologize if I wasn't.
 
If it's pro jobs - I would expect corporations and Wall Street to support OWS and their ability to try and find jobs and be down there gathering up applications and resumes.
If its jobs, wall street is the last place you start. I dont imagine any of this have thought anything out. At BEST they impact the stock market and hurt the top 1% a little bit. At best. More realistic scenario if it gets to that the 1% absorbs loses (that convert to tax write-offs) and those ****ing morons destroy their own 401ks (or their mommy and daddy's).

Thats the biggest problem behind all of this...the organizers dont give a **** and the morons attending arent smart enough to think ANY of this through.
 
Ummm...why....why exactly do corporatins or Wall Street care about jobs? Where is this false idea that jobs in anyway is the goal of Wall Street or corporations.

PROFIT!!!??? How would the investments that Wall street make increase in value without growth in the entity that they invested? This growth is based on increased production that would be tied to increased employment.
 
The main contention is the extreme mixing of State and Corporate entity. It's always been that.

OWS has a "main contention"? I thought it was 99%, which has nothing to do with mixing of state/corporate entities even if there were such a thing as a "Main contention".
 
Navy Chiefs! No joke but every Navy Chief I've ever met is tough as nails and cool as shi*. A friend just got married and 3 of her Uncles were navy chiefs. We got trashed and hung out until like 3 in the morning. These guys had like 40 thousand stories of their days in the Navy.
NAvy is IMO the only branch that really has the rank structure correct. I watched my E8 brother dress down an O4 for having the balls to go onto his LCAC (Landing/Hovercraft) and addressing his sailors without clearing it with him first. The O4 stormed over to the O6 and complained and the O6's response was "well...next time clear it with the Chief, dumbass"....and walked away. In the Army or AF, enlisted folks wouldnt run the LCACs...they would have a team of officers doing it and **** would never get done.
 
Back
Top Bottom