• 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!

Anti-Tech Protesters Target VC With Vulgar Flyer

j-mac said:
Several reports of this incident have made the news, all trying to re-categorize the protesters as something other than leftist OWS types. This is not far different than the discussion on another thread concerning the Mozilla exec forced to resign.

What are your thoughts as to this type of bullying by the extreme left?
Click to expand...

Its not a left/right issue its about people being priced out of their homes and apartments, no one likes that regardless of politics.
 
What if...? said:
I disagree that everybody who tries really hard can have a billion too.

There can never be enough billions for everybody to be a billionaire.

And the overall reason for the protest is gentrification. Not wealth inequality.

If people with money decide they want your neighborhood for them and their "peers", they get it. This makes it more expensive for those "without". Forcing them to move farther from work, etc.

The flyer posted is stupid. Much of these kinds of protests are stupid.

But they're bitching about gentrification. Which causes real problems for real people.
Click to expand...

Gentrification is the term used by the S.F. city council as they lick their chops preparing for the increase in tax coffers that the techies are bringing up from San Jose and the silicon valley.

The lifelong inhabitants of The Mission, Nob Hill, Russian Hill, Chinatown, Broadway, and The Embarcadero (neighborhoods in The City) see it as economic eviction.

Unlike most areas, where the rich move in while the poor move out, the citizens of The City are extremely attached to their roots. They will unite and fight until the techies figure out that it's too cold there and move to somewhere else.

Mark my words.
 
j-mac said:
Several reports of this incident have made the news, all trying to re-categorize the protesters as something other than leftist OWS types. This is not far different than the discussion on another thread concerning the Mozilla exec forced to resign.

What are your thoughts as to this type of bullying by the extreme left?
Click to expand...

All protected under the 1A.
 
Ikari said:
And the property damage here is? If the protestors damage private property, they are liable for it.
Click to expand...

So you don't see the fact that they temporarily rendered those buses unusable to be damage?? Seriously?? Paying for the damage they did does not mean that it was acceptable to do, in fact the fact that they should pay for it shows that it was in fact an illegal act. You don't get to burn down someone's house and then simply pay to have it rebuilt and walk away scott-free. You still broke the law and you should still be brought to justice for your actions.
 
faithful_servant said:
So you don't see the fact that they temporarily rendered those buses unusable to be damage?? Seriously?? Paying for the damage they did does not mean that it was acceptable to do, in fact the fact that they should pay for it shows that it was in fact an illegal act. You don't get to burn down someone's house and then simply pay to have it rebuilt and walk away scott-free. You still broke the law and you should still be brought to justice for your actions.
Click to expand...

That's why I said if they did cause property damage, then they are liable for it. Was that not clear? Befuddled somehow? I apologize if so.
 
j-mac said:
Several reports of this incident have made the news, all trying to re-categorize the protesters as something other than leftist OWS types. This is not far different than the discussion on another thread concerning the Mozilla exec forced to resign.

What are your thoughts as to this type of bullying by the extreme left?
Click to expand...

It's utterly ridiculous, self-defeating, and threatening. I remember watching TV when Rose was an intern, later turned co-host at Tech TV. This was a young man that earned every bit of respect and money he got. He went from being an intern at a small TV station to becoming a powerful force in the new web.

These protesters did not know who this guy is.
 
Last edited:
Ikari said:
I'd agree that it's a rather pointless protest. But you get those in a free society where assembly and protest are protected. A consequence of freedom, we have to accept that silliness will ensue and so long as one acts within their rights, that's that. We can't really do anything against it.
Click to expand...

sure i can i can exercise my speech and critisize them.
 
ludin said:
sure i can i can exercise my speech and critisize them.
Click to expand...

Alright, fair enough. If you think it's worth your time, then by all means proceed.
 
Ikari said:
Alright, fair enough. If you think it's worth your time, then by all means proceed.
Click to expand...

it is evdently worth your time to support them.
 
ludin said:
it is evdently worth your time to support them.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily support them. I just think that, in general, assembly and protest must be upheld to their fullest.
 
Ikari said:
That's why I said if they did cause property damage, then they are liable for it. Was that not clear? Befuddled somehow? I apologize if so.
Click to expand...

So do you think that a protestor who causes damage should be arrested for their actions or just pay reparations?? When you make a comment that only addresses part of the equation of justice, most folks will assume that you are ignoring the rest of it. Protesting does not grant anyone the right to harm anyone or anything and doing so is grounds for criminal prosecution, a result that you never mentioned. So how about it, should a protestor who causes material damage/harm be charged and, if found guilty, convicted of the crime or do you think that the 1st Amendment protects them?
 
Ikari said:
I don't necessarily support them. I just think that, in general, assembly and protest must be upheld to their fullest.
Click to expand...

Of course - WBC is the poster child for such rights.
 
Ikari said:
I don't necessarily support them. I just think that, in general, assembly and protest must be upheld to their fullest.
Click to expand...

And if an angry mob showed up at my house with literature publishing my address, you can bet your ass I'll call the cops. Your right to protest be damned. I'm not placing my safety (or my family's safety) in the hands of a horde of angry barbarians.
 
Kreton said:
There is no shortage of instances where right leaning people found plenty of ways to protest certain people moving into their towns and neighborhoods.
Click to expand...

I've never seen or read anything like that my entire life.

As a matter of fact the only people who protested others moving into their towns/communities were the southern democrats who sympathized and supported the KKK.

Democrats have always been hatemongers, and as far as I'm concerned nothing has changed - now instead of democrats hating blacks and other minorities they now hate capitalists, white people and anyone that doesn't share their hate filled politics.
 
SMTA said:
Of course - WBC is the poster child for such rights.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about the WBBC?

Seriously? they have like 50 members and they're all from the same family. Furthermore not even conservatives agree with them.

I love how progressives attempt to portray the WBBC as some sort of normal conservative behavior and politics.

Furthermore I have no idea what political affiliation the WBBC holds (if any) - I highly doubt they even vote.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Are you talking about the WBBC?

Seriously? they have like 50 members and they're all from the same family. Furthermore not even conservatives agree with them.

I love how progressives attempt to portray the WBBC as some sort of normal conservative behavior and politics.

Furthermore I have no idea what political affiliation the WBBC holds (if any) - I highly doubt they even vote.
Click to expand...

Do you seriously not understand the impact that they have had on 1A rights?

You are quite clueless, it seems.
 
j-mac said:
Obama and demo's projected that they wanted to use "income inequality" as an electoral theme, and right on que the OWS stooges run with it, and start attacking people of means. And you think they're Republicans? Now that's amusing.
Click to expand...

In the Bay Area this issue goes back to well before Obama. It was a big issue during the previous dot com boom (circa 1997-2001) and gentrification has been an issue since at least the mid-eighties. During the dot com booms the price of housing and other real estate has shot through the roof and has displaced many lower-mid income people as well as many of the artists, musicians etc. who make San Francisco an interesting place to live and visit and attract tourists and visitors from the region. (San Jose is a larger city than San Francisco but it is not a destination for tourists or people seeking entertainment.) There are also major cultural/political differences between the locals and the recently arrived tech workers. The result is that many of the low income people who used to live in SF had to move to the outer 'burbs and now have to commute for 1-3 hours per week and the creative community has relocated to Oakland.

Even Kevin Rose wrote; "that said, I did agree w/ them that we need to solve rising rents, keep the SF culture, and crack down on landlords booting folks out."

Some of the protesters are extremist, off-target and sometimes harm their cause, but it is an issue that has many people concerned, including most political leaders and even many of the tech workers. The issue was being ignored by most politicians until the protests began.
 
Last edited:
ludin said:
fact is as more people move into an area and the more income that comes into the area prices generally go up. just look at ND. the energy boom there has driven housing prices through the roof but their unemployment rate of 2.8% counters that as people are getting paid well enough to afford it.

i never said everyone could be a billionaire, but you can't really do better for yourself standing outside someone's housing carrying a protest sign.
that isn't going to accomplish anything. creating your own idea and or job skills will make it better for yourself.
Click to expand...

Ludin, there's a difference between oil workers making enough to afford their housing and locals who are not in those jobs being able to keep their living arrangements.
 
Fiddytree said:
Ludin, there's a difference between oil workers making enough to afford their housing and locals who are not in those jobs being able to keep their living arrangements.
Click to expand...

The stress is the same.

locals need to improve their job.
the price of having high paying jobs in the area is that housing prices go up as more people move into the area. supply vs demand.
you can't have it both ways.
 
Hard Truth said:
In the Bay Area this issue goes back to well before Obama. It was a big issue during the previous dot com boom (circa 1997-2001) and gentrification has been an issue since at least the mid-eighties. During the dot com booms the price of housing and other real estate has shot through the roof and has displaced many lower-mid income people as well as many of the artists, musicians etc. who make San Francisco an interesting place to live and visit and attract tourists and visitors from the region. (San Jose is a larger city than San Francisco but it is not a destination for tourists or people seeking entertainment.) There are also major cultural/political differences between the locals and the recently arrived tech workers. The result is that many of the low income people who used to live in SF had to move to the outer 'burbs and now have to commute for 1-3 hours per week and the creative community has relocated to Oakland.

Even Kevin Rose wrote; "that said, I did agree w/ them that we need to solve rising rents, keep the SF culture, and crack down on landlords booting folks out."

Some of the protesters are extremist, off-target and sometimes harm their cause, but it is an issue that has many people concerned, including most political leaders and even many of the tech workers. The issue was being ignored by most politicians until the protests began.
Click to expand...

no one is booting them out. if they can't afford the rent then they have to move that is not booting people out.
a landlord has a right to price his apartment at market level. it isn't up to the government to decide what he should charge for apartments.

if his rent is to high for the building that people are moving into then people won't move in and he will be forced to lower it.
more people moving in with high paying jobs will cause the prices to raise this is just basic economics.
 
Fiddytree said:
And if an angry mob showed up at my house with literature publishing my address, you can bet your ass I'll call the cops. Your right to protest be damned. I'm not placing my safety (or my family's safety) in the hands of a horde of angry barbarians.
Click to expand...

If they are on your property, then of course you have legal recourse.
 
SMTA said:
Of course - WBC is the poster child for such rights.
Click to expand...

I have and still do argue for their right to protest. My support for assembly and protest is not broken along partisan lines.
 
Ikari said:
If they are on your property, then of course you have legal recourse.
Click to expand...

The police showed up in this case too, you know.
 
ludin said:
The stress is the same.

locals need to improve their job.
the price of having high paying jobs in the area is that housing prices go up as more people move into the area. supply vs demand.
you can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

Locals can't always improve their jobs, guy. In my home town (which is in the periphery of the boom area), I know single moms that had their rent jack up so much they are hoping that they can become a home owner. That's not an easy task in that housing market. This boom has uprooted a lot of folks that do not or can not have the jobs that pay enough to sustain their living arrangements. There are many parts of North Dakota's economy that cannot keep up with the oil sector and we do not have enough housing to deal with the growth. That's just reality down here.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom