We are the 99 Percent

[sirhcyennek81]

The "99 percenters" do not represent me.

Any debt I have is a result of my choices. No bank forced me to borrow money. No credit card company forced me to sign up. No college made me go to it.

I find it hard to empathize, for example, with the "they are stealing my parents house" kid when we learn his parents each earn 6 figure incomes, own a $500k house with only $60k remaining on the mortgage and the "murderous" student loans he is "shackled" with are being paid for...by his parents.

The 99 percenters...who are oddly nearly all white early/late 20s kids in college. You honestly see more diversity at a La Raza protest.

This is not democracy in action. This entire episode is completely faked and bankrolled by the usual suspects. You have a "large" group of idiot kids each protesting something different, actually getting in the way of people who are 1. out of college and 2. going to work.

So no, these idiot "99 percenters" do not represent me. I actually have personal responsibility and do not wish to be coddled by a benign dictatorship.

**** em.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

^

Way to obscure the actual meaning of "the 99%."

While the right cries class war at the proposal of taxing millionaires at a slightly higher rate, the richest 1% continue to wage war against the other 99% of us with powerful corporate, financial and lobbying connections.

You are part of the 99% whether you are one of the protestors or not.

The only difference is you are cheering for the guy who is f_cking you.

[Meck77]

Originally Posted by baja

Love you guys that toss out information without investigation - good way to stay in the dark.

So others should not post without investigation yet you admit you do it just a couple posts later.

Originally Posted by baja

I post food for thought no always my beliefs this is something you never understood, Food for Thought.

You made my point.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

The "99 percenters" do not represent me.

Any debt I have is a result of my choices. No bank forced me to borrow money. No credit card company forced me to sign up. No college made me go to it.

I find it hard to empathize, for example, with the "they are stealing my parents house" kid when we learn his parents each earn 6 figure incomes, own a $500k house with only $60k remaining on the mortgage and the "murderous" student loans he is "shackled" with are being paid for...by his parents.

The 99 percenters...who are oddly nearly all white early/late 20s kids in college. You honestly see more diversity at a La Raza protest.

This is not democracy in action. This entire episode is completely faked and bankrolled by the usual suspects. You have a "large" group of idiot kids each protesting something different, actually getting in the way of people who are 1. out of college and 2. going to work.

So no, these idiot "99 percenters" do not represent me. I actually have personal responsibility and do not wish to be coddled by a benign dictatorship.

**** em.

You're such a miserable little dick I doubt anybody would want to represent you.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

You're such a miserable little dick I doubt anybody would want to represent you.

Aside from "Troglodytes for Socioeconomic Darwinism."

[baja]

Originally Posted by Meck77

So others should not post without investigation yet you admit you do it just a couple posts later.




You made my point.

I'd tell ya look up food for thought but I'd be wasting my time in your case.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

You're such a miserable little dick I doubt anybody would want to represent you.

Maybe so.

Something wrong? You do not usually get vicious in posts.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

^

Way to obscure the actual meaning of "the 99%."



You are part of the 99% whether you are one of the protestors or not.

The only difference is you are cheering for the guy who is f_cking you.

I'm not. Neither are you.

When a polymorphous group of blowhard white kids is echoing the talking points for peoples world weekly, I tune them out.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

I'm not. Neither are you.

When a polymorphous group of blowhard white kids is echoing the talking points for peoples world weekly, I tune them out.

So you're a member of the top 1% then?

I had no idea we had a billionaire here on the Mane.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Citi's Plutonomy Memos..

First published in 2006, they are clearly still the operating policy of the 1%-ers. Their contempt for us, down here, is palpable, and it is clearly stated that the #1 fear is that we'll finally catch on, and demand our share back. Also in the memos: They have the power and the influence to start major conflicts, should we get uppity.

-- Part One

--Part Two

These won't last long. They've been up a surprisingly long time as it is. Please download them, and repost them wherever you can.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

So you're a member of the top 1% then?

I had no idea we had a billionaire here on the Mane.

Well...I like to keep that quiet. Can't let this board know I am a global jetsetter and a member of the illuminati...


I think the protests (such as they are) are b****ing at the wrong group of powerful people, using updated slogans from the 1890's-1900's. This is not suddenly a new argument, but the same discounted solutions are constantly applied.

No society has ever existed that did not have people who had more than others. As someone else in this thread noted, no system is perfect because man is not perfect. You can argue logically the abuse of wealth and influence on government, and there are ways to limit it without culling out a single percentage of the population simply because they "have more". Giving everyone $20 an hr wages, free healthcare, free housing, free college, open borders, a completely green energy sector will not fix problems, but create new ones. Which group gets gutted with the rise of new problems?

It also bugs me that the people protesting are completely ok with taking power from one group and giving more power to another. So lets say they succeed in wealth redistribution, get everything they want. They are now serfs to a greatly expanded central authority with an even more diminished capacity to change it and probably no intention of wanting to change it. We have seen that play out before. How is the USSR doing these days?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

No society has ever existed that did not have people who had more than others. As someone else in this thread noted, no system is perfect because man is not perfect. You can argue logically the abuse of wealth and influence on government, and there are ways to limit it without culling out a single percentage of the population simply because they "have more". Giving everyone $20 an hr wages, free healthcare, free housing, free college, open borders, a completely green energy sector will not fix problems, but create new ones. Which group gets gutted with the rise of new problems?

It also bugs me that the people protesting are completely ok with taking power from one group and giving more power to another. So lets say they succeed in wealth redistribution, get everything they want. They are now serfs to a greatly expanded central authority with an even more diminished capacity to change it and probably no intention of wanting to change it. We have seen that play out before. How is the USSR doing these days?

Thanks for the feudalist manifesto.

Neither the French Revolution nor the American Revolution would have happened had people who espoused the arguments in your post prevailed.

Whether you realize it or not, you are championing an ideology that precludes the existence of a strong middle class and/or widespread prosperity and produces a state like Mexico (where ~30 families control all of the wealth and everyone else is a serf.)

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Thanks for the feudalist manifesto.

Neither the French Revolution nor the American Revolution would have happened had people who espoused the arguments in your post prevailed.

Whether you realize it or not, you are championing an ideology that precludes the existence of a strong middle class and/or widespread prosperity and produces a state like Mexico (where ~30 families control all of the wealth and everyone else is a serf.)

Do not compare the American Revolution to the French Revolution. Outside of sharing the word "revolution" they had nothing in common.

Communism failed, man. Updating the slogans does not hide this simple fact. But keep blaming "the rich" for the country's problems. That will fix it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

Do not compare the American Revolution to the French Revolution. Outside of sharing the word "revolution" they had nothing in common.

You're kidding, right?

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

Communism failed, man. Updating the slogans does not hide this simple fact. But keep blaming "the rich" for the country's problems. That will fix it.

Ah, I knew the "communism" straw man was just around the corner.

That's one way to avoid a real debate, I suppose. (But what other recourse do you have when your trickle-down/supply-side ideologies have all been discredited?)

[epicSocialism4tw]

It really is pathetic how hard these crazy leftists are trying to mimic the Tea Party.

"BUT.....BUT.....WEE HAV R MOOOOOVMINT TOOOOOOOOO!!!!1111!!11111!!! N ITZ BETTR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!1"

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

But keep blaming "the rich" for the country's problems. That will fix it.

Your "solution" re: how to "fix the country's problems" = allow the rich and powerful to loot and pillage at will with no regulation and no restraint whatsoever.

[baja]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

Well...I like to keep that quiet. Can't let this board know I am a global jetsetter and a member of the illuminati...


I think the protests (such as they are) are b****ing at the wrong group of powerful people, using updated slogans from the 1890's-1900's. This is not suddenly a new argument, but the same discounted solutions are constantly applied.

No society has ever existed that did not have people who had more than others. As someone else in this thread noted, no system is perfect because man is not perfect. You can argue logically the abuse of wealth and influence on government, and there are ways to limit it without culling out a single percentage of the population simply because they "have more". Giving everyone $20 an hr wages, free healthcare, free housing, free college, open borders, a completely green energy sector will not fix problems, but create new ones. Which group gets gutted with the rise of new problems?

It also bugs me that the people protesting are completely ok with taking power from one group and giving more power to another. So lets say they succeed in wealth redistribution, get everything they want. They are now serfs to a greatly expanded central authority with an even more diminished capacity to change it and probably no intention of wanting to change it. We have seen that play out before. How is the USSR doing these days?

Sadly you are right on this. The Globalists (Those elite 1%ers that control the world's governments through influence and wealth {actually about 250 persons at the very top] that are intent on one world government and total servatude of the people) will "give into" the damands of canceling all debt (No way it could ever be paid anyway) and all the world will cry "We have won" "We have won" but the trade off to canceling the debt will be one world government with a one world currency and we will have lost all semblance of freedom with very little chance of ever recovering it.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Your "solution" re: how to "fix the country's problems" = allow the rich and powerful to loot and pillage at will with no regulation and no restraint whatsoever.

And your solution is to enslave the entire population in economic and social bondage to a bloated central government that will only be more inclined to live your life for you.

You blame the rich. I blame government. Who gave all these banks money in the first place?

Yeah. b****ing at the wrong people will fix it.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

1. You're kidding, right?



2. Ah, I knew the "communism" straw man was just around the corner.

That's one way to avoid a real debate, I suppose. (But what other recourse do you have when your trickle-down/supply-side ideologies have all been discredited?)

1. I'm not. You should probably read up on the French Revolution before you decide to compare it to anything other than a bloodbath.

2. Taking wealth from one group and redistributing it to others is what, exactly? Where have we seen that before? What system of government did they run. A strawman argument is blaming banks/wealthy people for the problems now, and not the government that allowed it to happen.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

And your solution is to enslave the entire population in economic and social bondage to a bloated central government that will only be more inclined to live your life for you.

There you go into full straw man mode.

Did you know the federal government was actually downsized under Clinton and increased under your hero Dubya?

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

You blame the rich. I blame government.

Perhaps your views are so black and white, but don't presume to speak for me.

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

Who gave all these banks money in the first place?

Um, your hero Dumbya.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

2. Taking wealth from one group and redistributing it to others is what, exactly? Where have we seen that before?

Um, under such notable "commies" as Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

1. I'm not. You should probably read up on the French Revolution before you decide to compare it to anything other than a bloodbath.

I wasn't comparing the methods - I was comparing the motives and the outcomes.

[baja]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

1. I'm not. You should probably read up on the French Revolution before you decide to compare it to anything other than a bloodbath.

2. Taking wealth from one group and redistributing it to others is what, exactly? Where have we seen that before? What system of government did they run. A strawman argument is blaming banks/wealthy people for the problems now, and not the government that allowed it to happen.

You need to consider the possibility that bankers and global corporations control many of the world governments (I mean have them by the gonads control) in your argument that the government is to blame. They are not if they are controlled to the degree they are a non factor and just doing someone else's bidding.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

There you go into full straw man mode.

1. Did you know the federal government was actually downsized under Clinton and increased under your hero Dubya?



3. Perhaps your views are so black and white, but don't presume to speak for me.



2. Um, your hero Dumbya.

1. Republican dominated congress. (You know, back when congress actually passed budgets)

2. Democrat dominated congress.

3. Hello, kettle.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by baja

You need to consider the possibility that bankers and global corporations control many of the world governments (I mean have them by the gonads control) in your argument that the government is to blame. They are not if they are controlled to the degree they are a non factor and just doing someone else's bidding.

So governments are faultless?

I dont think so.