just returned from occupylsx

[Jay794]

The whole thing is stupid, as you said, too many people who don't know why they are there.

There's a reason that "corporations" as they keep getting called, have all the money, because they don't sit around in tents all day, they work for money lol.

Tesco have just recently built 2 massive store in Sheffield & Chesterfield, and yes they are an eye sore, but you can hardly complain about them doing it. If they have the money to grease the right palms then why the hell shouldn't they.

If I had the money to get what I wanted then I'd do it, how many of you can say you wouldn't?

**** the 99%.

If you want to make an impact and make a change, stop people shopping at Tesco, which is never going to happen, Tesco spend millions on buying stuff cheap, in bulk, so the highstreet competition can't compete.

Just watching the South Park episode of "Somethin Wal-Mart this way comes" explains it a lot. We're a mass consumption society, it is the 99% that make these companies big.

I saw an interview yesterday with one of the protesters, and when asked "who they are" he just kept saying "the corporations" he couldn't make a specific business or person lol.

Final solution, napalm the protesters, then they'll only be the 75% lol

As for "professional protesters" GET A REAL JOB!

If you want equality, then you're an idiot, peoples pay reflects their worth to a company. There's a reason that Richard Branson's board of directors isn't on minimum wage.

If you're complaining about being the 99% then do somethin to make yourself more valuable in your job, earn your right to become the 1%

 

[Azza]

If you've got so much time off, why are you not still there? You're not exactly doing any good sitting at your computer are you! You should be ashamed, only a week there as well, if you were actually bothered about the cause you'd be there 24/7! Pathetic!

 

[Tyrone77]

If you're complaining about being the 99% then do somethin to make yourself more valuable in your job, earn your right to become the 1%

You were doing OKish until this last part.

 

[bam0]

If you're complaining about being the 99% then do somethin to make yourself more valuable in your job, earn your right to become the 1%

It is a savage myth that all poor people need to do is work harder and then they'll make it. There are many many factors which mean most people won't ever get the opportunities no matter how hard they work. Equally many in the 1% didn't earn their position, they inherited a good base to start from had social connections or mere chance meant they got an opportunity that others didn't. That's not necessarily begrudge them what they have, but people falsely attribute chance outcomes to their own work and effort, convinced that they've made it on their own through their labours they condemn anyone poorer as simply lazy.

 

[Jonny69]

I was tempted to go see what it's like down there.

I however, remember how much stick I got for attending the march against cuts earlier this year

How would they find out if you don't tell them?

Or just do what I did. Nobody in this thread seems to be bothered that I agree with their sentiments. I just worded it slightly differently to them and I don't look like a hippie. I think if anyone has an anti-capitalist to fear it should be me, since I bang the drum from inside the system.

 

[Xandos]

It wasn't the banks which made people live beyond their needs, it was the people making that decision themselves.

The system where banks lend out money they don't even have only works assuming that they don't invest dangerously, and if as substantial amount of debts aren't defaulted on. Who is in a better position to control these factors, is it the Johnny Average? Why were the banks lending to any and everyone, especially those that could obviously never pay back?

When people talk about benefits here, they say things along the lines of: "Well, whilst we hate the seriously wee-taking ones, we can't blame the majority as that's the system. People will take what they can and live how they see fit, it's the system that is broken". And yet when it comes to the financial crisis suddenly it's the people who have no clue how it works and with very little control whose fault it suddenly becomes? Doesn't smell right to me.

'Corporations' do work for their money, yes, though we are in a system where wealth creates wealth, and the rich/poor divide continues to grow.

 

[Dave M]

It is a savage myth that all poor people need to do is work harder and then they'll make it.

It depends on what you define as 'making it'.

Private jets and Ferraris - no, very few can ever get to that and it's going to be mostly luck that decides it. That said most (not all) will have had to work hard and make sacrifices to get there regardless of their good fortune or contacts.

But to have a comfortable life with the trappings of a modern western country (cars, house, holidays) sure you can. You have to have some skill or talent to exploit (be it good with numbers, engines or boilers) and apply yourself.

If you have no skill, no talent for anything other than manual labour then no, you will be on the bottom of the pile and working hard will just give you the most basic of comforts. Isn't that just life though? The only way those with no skill could be given more would be to take away from those who do.

 

[TommyV]

damn hippies

 

[elmarko]

can you explain how you feel it is moral to burden future generations with debt rather than living within our means now?

Lol.

Because the choice is obviously between an infinite pile of debt, or cuts to social care.

Nice fallacy of false choices.

While I agree most of these unwashed hippy douches have no real solutions & just want to get stoned, not everybody who is protesting/disagrees with corporate greed is like that.

How about the billions we have spent in Iraq & Afghanistan?, how many cuts could we have avoided if we didn't get involved there?.

Or In Libya, or Iran/Syria in the next six months - which I can bet we will get involved in (killing more of our servicemen/women to get more oil/building contracts for the USA).

Should we not be trying to recoup losses from tax avoidance/evasion before cutting services to the most vulnerable in society?.

Perhaps we need to address systemic problems with modern capitalism before trying to hack & slash our public services which we pay for.

Some have solutions, resource based economy, energy based economy, technocracy, collective based economys & many others.

Just because you have been successfully indoctrinated into a capitalist system, It's no reason to be blind to potential other systems which could benefit a greater number of society (as opposed to the 1% it does currently).

The purpose of an economy is the serve mankind, the markets & governments are meant to service the species - not the other way around.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Or In Libya, or Iran/Syria in the next six months - which I can bet we will get involved in (killing more of our servicemen/women to get more oil/building contracts for the USA).

Yes, lets launch an assault on Syria to gain contracts to explore the pathetic amount of oil they have - 0.5% of world exports, infact.

And obviously the reason for Libya was to gain oil contracts. Even though before the Libyan war... oh. The West held all the oil contracts anyway.

Just because you have been successfully indoctrinated into a capitalist system, It's no reason to be blind to potential other systems which could benefit a greater number of society (as opposed to the 1% it does currently).

It benefits far more than 1%. It benefits almost all of us. You seem to be doing ok - you've got somewhere to live, you've got internet access, you've got a computer you can use to post made up rubbish about oil, you've got all the food you want..?

Or do you think it doesn't benefit us because we can't all afford a big yacht?

It's just jealously wrapped up in fake nobility, isn't it? Waaaaa, some people are really rich and we are not. Its not fair. Its all somebody elses fault. Waaaaaah.

Truth is we don't NEED to be part of the 1% to live satisfied lives.

 

[elmarko]

It depends on what you define as 'making it'.

Private jets and Ferraris - no, very few can ever get to that and it's going to be mostly luck that decides it. That said most (not all) will have had to work hard and make sacrifices to get there regardless of their good fortune or contacts.

But to have a comfortable life with the trappings of a modern western country (cars, house, holidays) sure you can. You have to have some skill or talent to exploit (be it good with numbers, engines or boilers) and apply yourself.

If you have no skill, no talent for anything other than manual labour then no, you will be on the bottom of the pile and working hard will just give you the most basic of comforts. Isn't that just life though? The only way those with no skill could be given more would be to take away from those who do.

This is not true.

Capitalism REQUIRES losers to make winners, one man's gain is another man's lost.

Not everybody can have a good job, we need people to sweep floors & clean toilets in capitalism & they will always get paid peanuts.

"The American dream" was & is a lie.

What decides a persons skill/talent ability is either,

A = Genetic (no choice as it's pre-ordained).

B = Environmental of which,

1. School (a person has no choice).
2. Family (a person has no choice).
3. Socio-economic class (a person has no choice).
4. Grows up around miserable depressed people & learns learned helplessness. (has no choice).

How exactly is this system fair, when a certain number of people through entirely external factors WILL live a miserable life at the bottom of the scrapheap sweeping floors.

Because they had the cheek to be born into a poor abusive family & went to a terrible school.

That isn't the kind of society I want to live in.

I can see the appeal, it makes people who are successful feel better, to get some kind of ego-stroke from pretending to be "self made" - well here's the truth.

You didn't earn anything in life, you either got lucky or unlucky.

Lucky to have the ability to work hard, or unlucky to be born lazy - neither of which you had any choice.

I'm thankful of my success, but I don't feel pride about it (because I didn't have a say in the things which allowed me to become successful).

 

[MookJong]

It wasn't the banks which made people live beyond their needs, it was the people making that decision themselves.

Silly argument, financial deregulation went far to far and was thrust into the face of every person.

Money has practically been privatised and can be created out of thin air for profit, that is a problem at the heart of the system.

Most people just want to see a fair and balanced system with stability...anyone defending the current state of affairs has to be nuts, it is totally unsustainable.

 

[toshj]

Our world has been/is being flung in a direction none of us really chose, with excessive and disproportionate greed and to try and bring attention to this is worthy of being treated with contempt? Private banks have been irresponsibly printing and lending money they never had saddling the little folk with debt, enslaving with interest. Every new mortgage pushes up house prices and costs the next one more...

The system where banks lend out money they don't even have only works assuming that they don't invest dangerously, and if as substantial amount of debts aren't defaulted on. Who is in a better position to control these factors, is it the Johnny Average? Why were the banks lending to any and everyone, especially those that could obviously never pay back?

When people talk about benefits here, they say things along the lines of: "Well, whilst we hate the seriously wee-taking ones, we can't blame the majority as that's the system. People will take what they can and live how they see fit, it's the system that is broken". And yet when it comes to the financial crisis suddenly it's the people who have no clue how it works and with very little control whose fault it suddenly becomes? Doesn't smell right to me.

'Corporations' do work for their money, yes, though we are in a system where wealth creates wealth, and the rich/poor divide continues to grow.

I don't mean to sound rude, but it seems as if you're confusing the roles played by private, retail and investment banks. I don't think credit given by private banks has had any affect on all of this...

 

[koolpc]

Rubbish. Everyone has a choice wether or not to take a banks advice or not. Nobodys arms were twisted. If i cant afford something i dont buy it. Simples

 

[bam0]

It benefits far more than 1%. It benefits almost all of us. You seem to be doing ok - you've got somewhere to live, you've got internet access, you've got a computer you can use to post made up rubbish about oil, you've got all the food you want..?

Or do you think it doesn't benefit us because we can't all afford a big yacht?

It's just jealously wrapped up in fake nobility, isn't it? Waaaaa, some people are really rich and we are not. Its not fair. Its all somebody elses fault. Waaaaaah.

Truth is we don't NEED to be part of the 1% to live satisfied lives.

You're still missing the point, it's not that everyone should be equal, it's that our economic and political system has been distorted to disproportionately benefit those at the top.

 

[[TW]Fox]

This is not true.

Capitalism REQUIRES losers to make winners, one man's gain is another man's lost.

Sounds so terrible when you put it like that, doesn't it? Thankfully in reality that’s often not how it works.

When you buy something from a shop you are not a 'loser'. You've bought something you wanted or needed. The shop is a 'winner' yes, they gain money from you for selling the product. But you have hardly been robbed of the money. You've wilfully exchanged it for a product of value to you.

Not everybody can have a good job, we need people to sweep floors & clean toilets in capitalism & they will always get paid peanuts.

So you are saying what about this - that everyone should be paid enough money to be fabulously wealthy even if they sweep floors? Or are you saying everyone should be paid the same regardless of whether they sweep floors or design jet engines?

What decides a persons skill/talent ability is either,

A = Genetic (no choice as it's pre-ordained).

B = Environmental of which,

1. School (a person has no choice).
2. Family (a person has no choice).
3. Socio-economic class (a person has no choice).
4. Grows up around miserable depressed people & learns learned helplessness. (has no choice).

So you reckon nobody has any control over how they do in life? What a ridiculous thing to say. Obviously the quality of your education and how your parents bring you up will have a massive effect on your future, but..

a) Why shouldn't it? That’s the job of a parent is it not? It's true across the world and across species that the better the parent the better the child. It's just nature!
b) You imply that if you have a crap school, a crap family, have a negative socio-economic class and grow up around depressed people that its impossible to better yourself. This is obviously complete rubbish - there are many, many people have made a success and live happy lives despite having troubled childhood. It makes it difficult but it doesn't make it impossible.

As for the school argument - school is what you make it. Its your choice whether you throw rubbers at the guy in front or get on with it and get the grades.

How exactly is this system fair, when a certain number of people through entirely external factors WILL live a miserable life at the bottom of the scrapheap sweeping floors.

How is ANY system fair? There is no 100% fair system and why would there be? Is it fair that a small rabbit could at any time by eaten by a predator despite doing no wrong?

Because they had the cheek to be born into a poor abusive family & went to a terrible school.

That isn't the kind of society I want to live in.

Me neither - but the answer he is deal with the abusive parents obviously, not sit around in tents crying that you don't have a lear jet and somebody who runs a bank you don't even understand does.

Lucky to have the ability to work hard, or unlucky to be born lazy - neither of which you had any choice.

And here we reach the real argument. You think you need luck to not be lazy or you need luck to have the ability to work hard. Basically, you think there should be a system that rewards those who cannot be bothered. That’s the hub of everything - everything is somebody elses fault in the eyes of these people.

They might be the 99% in terms of income but they are the 0.000001% in terms of attitude.

 

[flibbage0]

Every time I read a political thread here I'm filled with despair. I can but hope that the countries' population is more open-minded than this forum suggests - I know that those I meet in real life seem to be, so I can only assume it has something to do with computers, which doesn't make sense. Or more like all the Jeremy Clarkson wannabe's hanging out in motors.


Is attacking these people at every pitiable opportunity really constructive? They're all anti-capitalists/anarchists/dole scroungers/students (a cuss word around here, it seems)... They don't stay the night.. They don't have a complete solution so why listen... It seems like if someone says something you don't agree with so you'll call them fat? It's all one big smear campaign, nationally and with the vocal blues of the forum ganging up like a bunch of bullies.

Our world has been/is being flung in a direction none of us really chose, with excessive and disproportionate greed and to try and bring attention to this is worthy of being treated with contempt? Private banks have been irresponsibly printing and lending money they never had saddling the little folk with debt, enslaving with interest. Every new mortgage pushes up house prices and costs the next one more...

But anyway, I read the guardian rather than the mail, so I imagine I'll be written off as another of the unwashed. I'm sure all of you who are incensed by the idea of free speech and protests are the first to rely, when spouting your "send 'em home" vitriol, on "How can it be racist to suggest that immigration should be something we discuss?". Oh how hypocritical, that when someone else suggests debate and alternate thinking that they fall fowl of cheap character assassination.

... In the world

 

[[TW]Fox]

You're still missing the point, it's not that everyone should be equal, it's that our economic and political system has been distorted to disproportionately benefit those at the top.

Which is the same right back for the last 4000 years.

Good luck with that. I'm sure a few more sleeping bags will do the trick. After all, we've all got Facebook and Google now, so we all know everything.

 

[MookJong]

Rubbish. Everyone has a choice wether or not to take a banks advice or not. Nobodys arms were twisted. If i cant afford something i dont buy it. Simples

And that explains the growing gap between rich and poor how exactly? All the rich people saved and all the poor people spent...err no

 

[[TW]Fox]

And that explains the growing gap between rich and poor how exactly?

Why is the gap important provided the 'poor' have an acceptable standard of living?

The whole 'gap' thing is just more jealousy surely. Consider two examples.

Lets reduce 'the rich' and 'the poor' to 2 people.

Scenario 1:

The Rich man earns £30k a year.
The poor man earns £10k a year.

The gap is £20k.

Scenario 2:

The rich man earns £300k a year
The poor man earns £30k a year

The gap is £270k.

I'm sure you'd prefer Scenario 2.

Why is your financial position relative to other people more important than your financial position in isolation?