Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Films, TV, Music, Books, Etc.' started by blobbohen, Oct 16, 2011.
said sarcastically, but I think you've unintentionally made a point.
-people protesting wealth disparities, based on a definition of "wealth" completely made up by the system they seek to destroy.
[insert sarcastic reaction face here]
I think the protesters my age and older are protesting the rising cost of living, and the governments lack of protections for the working class (medically, education-wise, and union busting) - for this I side with the protesters, in that the gov't should stop people from gaming the system creating HUGE inequalities - but as someone who is currently trying to jump social classes - I also believe in pulling yourself up by the bootstraps and getting $h!t done.
So you really feel that no matter what the situation. all it takes is some determination and anyone can be a walking success in terms of finances and position in life? (Of course this depends entirely on your idea of success versus mine.)
Hmm, how many of them were playing frisbee?
And there is the issue. People aren't realistic with themselves and don't see where they start and set reasonable aims of where they hope to be. Everyone should have to right to live the lifestyle they see on TV, but no one is going to give that to you. And taking that away from someone else so you can live better (not speaking in terms of taxation, because I believe restructuring our tax system will help) is wrong.
No there are some, very few, circumstances where people are in complete $h** with no hopes of getting out (absolutely terrible situations to which they are not responsible for). For the other instances I blame parental figures for lack of guidance. Knowing they didn't have the guidance they needed to accomplish what they wanted in the future or even have a good financial grounding when THOSE people grow up to have kids their concentration should be the upward mobility of their child. But lets face it, not everyone is going to be a success - and our system functions because of "relative" success - I'm at work so I can't really elaborate w/o but I will if I start getting attacked.
I don't really want to get in it with you urbs, but I can tell you right now that the major unions, such as teaching and auto unions, are part of the problem, not the solution.
Unless you want to get into it, in which I'll go toe to toe with you. I know you have a personal link to unions and thus a positive view on them, but unions in America today are a cancer on society.
I actually have to agree with Urbz. Noone is going to give you a good job. Noone owes you a house, two cars and all the conveniences and luxuries that your little heart desires. If you want something, work for it and you're going to have to make sacrifices along the way too. I personally know too many people from India, or Central and South America, etc. with success stories. People who arrive here with no family, no education, no economic means, and yet they thrive here.
Every time I read one of Eyebrows posts I think to myself "Wow, a millionaire, posting at my GR."
I'm pro union. I'm union, my management is union, and their management is DEFINITELY unionized.
People want a scapegoat to poke at, an easy out. They'll go to wherever the dollar signs are and rail against it. Uninformed I say because unions are needed for checks and balances in the workplace. When Tom, Dick and Sally sitting on the board get payed in one week what Tom, Dick and Sally sitting on the bottom rung get payed in 6 months, there's a problem. A big problem! Enter unions, enter checks and balances.
Management has unions, the same management pointing their finger at the work force blaming them for the problem. So I'm not buying it.
Cut wages across the board - literally - before going after that bottom rung. 1% is saying NOPE. So, #occupywallstreet
^Makes sense in a simple world. This is not a simple world. Jose, Carlos and Ricardo will do what Tom, Dick and Sally will for half the price and do it better. This is a globalized economy, and unions no longer make sense. Look at the big 3 auto makers and the UAW; they needed bailouts to save the unions, and only the unions, because the foreign car companies are able to make better cars at cheaper prices with a more fair wage. It's sheer arrogance to think that what you do is something only you can do at the price. We can get better teachers, doctors, lawyers, and "union" workers for a lower price by shopping elsewhere. This isn't the 1950s. What you do chris for a living could easily be replaced by a machine or someone else who bids lower. Ask an auto worker.
If you want the road to ruin, stick with unions, but this is a global-centric world and you're on the losing side.
Its very very daft to look at the block of workers protecting their rights to a safe work environment and livable wages as what has gotten us into this problem. Attacking the unions is nothing more than a ploy by the right to dismantle a large democratic voting block, and also preserve their (whatever it is) industry's bottom line.
Fox News has you, eyebrows. So sad.
Without unions in this country - the US will rapidly free fall into a third world. FACT. Then who will the right blame next I wonder - whoever is standing in the way of their bottom line.
(sometimes I wish I could create an alternative universes and let people live in the realistic world they create for themselves by touting talking points)
We should create a thread called
What do Gamers think?
or something along those lines that covers news or current events - because i think people would like to know that we, the video game generation - or the generation that grew up with video games, don't have stupid fantasy type views. Some more than others - but I haven't heard one argument here that was like... WTF?! (*Noted - Ugh is on hiatus)
Double post - big woop, wanna fight about it.
The real problem in this country is our elections system, and the rampant corruption that now dominates politics. All we need is a constitutional amendment to ban all sources of campaign money except for public funding. Of course, that's unrealistic, and it wouldn't solve all problems.
But really, as long as elections can be bought and paid for, especially by corporations, the situation is unlikely to change. We've come pretty close to an autocracy run by a number of wealthy individuals/organizations. Anyone who wants to argue with the idea that the Republican party has become anything more than a loudspeaker and political machine in the interests of big business at the expense of everyone else is an idiot.
Aren't people still poor because the government continues to tax the poor while the rich are unaffected?
I'm not making a statement, I'm asking.
Your idea of "throwing money at the poor" as if you're throwing bread at mindless ducks seems a little flawed. Sure the poor can be lazy and jaded. But the rich can be corrupt, selfish and ignorant. If you're poor you know what it's like to work hard for your money and you are more appreciative of the little things in life. If you're poor you understand what it's like to fight to survive and live pay-cheque to pay-cheque without enjoying the spoils of being rich. Someone who eats out at the most prestigious restaurant won't appreciate something for free as much as someone who shops with food stamps. And yet the rich and famous are the ones who usually get everything for free. I'm mostly talking about celebrities but that's a different topic and I don't want to get side tracked. Basically the whole thing is completely backwards and as long as we're awarding the rich and disregarding the poor our working class will always remain the same.
There are lots of people who are poor who have the ability to change their lives with some assistance instead of always looking for the next hand-out. And if you're living in an ivory tower you're never going to see that.
In Canada we don't get FOX news. Thank God.
Man, 2 sigs in one week. Maybe this week isnt that bad after all.
stupid 250 character limit. :x
This guy could say it better than I ever could.
It's not often that I agree with a loud black guy with a big beard, but I agree with that one.
I was real into politics in high school. After the last presidential election though, that interest just kind of died.
The right will tell you the left is whats wrong with this country. The left will tell you the right is what is wrong with this country.
My vote goes to the first person who can make the masses of idiots see we are ALL responsible for what is wrong with this country. Everyone, nobody gets an exception.
Unless you live in another country and didn't come here in any shape.
Well, it's a good thing your such friendly competition, since my erudite self has been unemployed for over a month now and still looking to find a job with my soon to be masters in history and education.
Anyway...I agree with some things fundamentally with this protest, but in the end it will fail because of personal stigma. Simply put, most of the news stations in NY are talking about it being a problem and a nuisance to the city, not an actual threat to change or a vote of confidence. The protesters have a mixed message out right now, no real leadership, and I think one of them said they want to overthrow the government and go communist...so yeah...as much as I am feeling the pressure like everyone else, there has to be smarter ways to do this.
Or at least less of a pussified way to do it. Even if it means unrest and social disobedience, the protesters need to get active and organized soon, or else all of the little movements will fail. Hard.
So what you're saying is we should pay Jose, Carlos and Ricardo more, or boycott the unscrupulous companies who pay illegals less? Yes and yes. While Jose, Carlos and Ricardos wages were cut Tom, Dick, and Sally's were not. This seems to be an admission of sorts, you've acknowledged the skewed pay wages within the companies. So, #occupywallstreet
And boycott the companies moving jobs overseas? I agree with you there as well. Keep the jobs here in America. America is a union. We should have always been looking out for ourselves. Instead, we were sold out to corporate greed. So, #occupywallstreet
We were told robots could take our job 10 years ago. We offered a counteroffer: the robots will take managements' job. ... That was 10 years ago. Now? There is no longer any talk of a robot taking anyone's job. As for someone who bids lower? That's why I'm in a UNION. AHHhh, yes, checks and balances.
BUT robots could take anyone's job if you think about it. Your job, too. I can say that quite easily having no idea of what your job entails.
The gang of Mexicans sitting outside the Home Depot looking for work, that joke's become dated. Try every cashier inside the Home Depot is now a robot. All this talk about illegal aliens, and it's the robots I see with all the jobs. The joke's on us.