Occupy Denton

The girlfriend and I drove past the camp site a couple of times (errands)last night. It looked disgusting. It looked more like a party scene than anything else. THERE WAS TRASH EVERYWHERE. I can't believe the university is letting this go on. It is fine to protest, but come on are y'all really accomplishing anything? And for heavens sake clean up that place.

The girlfriend and I drove past the camp site a couple of times (errands)last night. It looked disgusting. It looked more like a party scene than anything else. THERE WAS TRASH EVERYWHERE. I can't believe the university is letting this go on. It is fine to protest, but come on are y'all really accomplishing anything? And for heavens sake clean up that place.

This does not help any cause. In this case, it only feeds stereotypes.

I would hope that these folks would show some pride in their movement and clean up. Otherwise the stereotypes will be cemented in many outsiders' minds.

I get the fact that these protests are MOSTLY comprised of the same old tired pro-socialist/communist brain-washed youth.

Somebody needs to warn Senator McCarthy. His job obviously ain't done.

Damn Commies!

We all mock socialism, redistribution of wealth, and hatred from the have nots toward the haves. Until it's time for conference realignment talk.

We all mock socialism, redistribution of wealth, and hatred from the have nots toward the haves. Until it's time for conference realignment talk.

Does that make ESPN like CSPAN?

The problem with the idea that they're "cheating" is that there's no such thing. They're paying politicians to change the rules of the game for them. Again, if I had the money and power to "cheat" as much as the big banks do/are doing, hell yes I would. As my parents were always fond of reminding me "life ain't fair."

Now, I'm not defending the POLICIES that take place on Wall Street or within companies, but they have to have INCENTIVE not to cheat, and the only places that can come from are the public (through their wallets) and the government (through legislation).

But the hypocrisy of this movement, and most movements, comes the second you want to convert money into "voices heard." That makes you a lobby, and the problem stems from... lobbies.

Because I'm ONE GUY who forms my own opinions and political leanings. I don't have a group of like-minded folks with a ton of cash to agree with me on every issue, so I'd have to stand on a street corner or march to Washington alone, which pretty much just makes me a random crazy guy with a guitar (I'm assuming I'd learn guitar somewhere in here).

So then to get heard, I really need a group. The second you find a GROUP, well, then you have to adopt some ideas you don't necessarily agree with, because no two people think exactly alike. And besides, to get voices heard, the more the merrier. That's how party lines are formed. I mean, Monkeypox is pro-abortion, pro-nudity, anti-anti-smoking, and wants vehicles more than 14-ft long reserved only for commercial use, but this group is only in agreement on 75% of those things, and, within the makeup of the group, only me and finger-toe Sally agree on all of the exact same ones. But, regardless, we're now a group, with our official stances... we'll call ourselves the Monkeypoxicans.

So now, I've got myself a group of sorta like-minded individuals, but nobody cares. We gotta get backed by money (which comes, somewhere, from a value-added corporation). After all, we got mouths to feed and crappy cars to fix. We can't just take off and protest, or take a congressman to Chic-Fil-A on his lunch break. NOW I can get my voice heard by Washington. How? By hiring a lobbyist. We PAY a lobbyist to wear a fancy suit and go to dinner with politicians so they can flash around how much green we have and how, if this guy also believed in these things we semi-sorta-mostly agree on, then well, we could spend that green to help get him elected.

So then we funnel our money into his campaign, and he gets to have a bunch of commercials and signs and posters telling you that HE'S FOR WHAT WE'RE FOR, which, after all, is mostly-kinda-sorta-semi what you're for. And you like his good teeth and hair, so, sure, seems like a good fit. Together, we've gotten our guy elected.

Oh, and we also want to sterilize all male children under 18, and burn fat people for fuel. We just don't mention that in the campaign. We got our money from the good folks at Pfizer to give your young boys Depo shots. But don't worry, the money to pay for the shot will come out of a government fund paid for by your taxes... which is like free medical care. YOU'RE NOT PAYING PFIZER! THE GOVERNMENT IS!

So now you're sitting on your couch with your sterilized middle-school boy wondering "How the f- did it get like this?" And, while it's cool you've got a nice, 18-yr-old model-wife to replace that old one, you're upset about things, bc your kid's pretty sad. And THIS GUY isn't really YOUR GUY. Hell, he's not even REALLY Monkeypox's guy. SO you take the next logical step... you protest Pfizer.

But celebrate, gentlemen (and gentle-ladies), the Dow's up 300 points today.

Best post in the thread, so naturally, completely ignored.

The problem with the idea that they're "cheating" is that there's no such thing. They're paying politicians to change the rules of the game for them. Again, if I had the money and power to "cheat" as much as the big banks do/are doing, hell yes I would. As my parents were always fond of reminding me "life ain't fair."

Now, I'm not defending the POLICIES that take place on Wall Street or within companies, but they have to have INCENTIVE not to cheat, and the only places that can come from are the public (through their wallets) and the government (through legislation).

But the hypocrisy of this movement, and most movements, comes the second you want to convert money into "voices heard." That makes you a lobby, and the problem stems from... lobbies.

Because I'm ONE GUY who forms my own opinions and political leanings. I don't have a group of like-minded folks with a ton of cash to agree with me on every issue, so I'd have to stand on a street corner or march to Washington alone, which pretty much just makes me a random crazy guy with a guitar (I'm assuming I'd learn guitar somewhere in here).

So then to get heard, I really need a group. The second you find a GROUP, well, then you have to adopt some ideas you don't necessarily agree with, because no two people think exactly alike. And besides, to get voices heard, the more the merrier. That's how party lines are formed. I mean, Monkeypox is pro-abortion, pro-nudity, anti-anti-smoking, and wants vehicles more than 14-ft long reserved only for commercial use, but this group is only in agreement on 75% of those things, and, within the makeup of the group, only me and finger-toe Sally agree on all of the exact same ones. But, regardless, we're now a group, with our official stances... we'll call ourselves the Monkeypoxicans.

So now, I've got myself a group of sorta like-minded individuals, but nobody cares. We gotta get backed by money (which comes, somewhere, from a value-added corporation). After all, we got mouths to feed and crappy cars to fix. We can't just take off and protest, or take a congressman to Chic-Fil-A on his lunch break. NOW I can get my voice heard by Washington. How? By hiring a lobbyist. We PAY a lobbyist to wear a fancy suit and go to dinner with politicians so they can flash around how much green we have and how, if this guy also believed in these things we semi-sorta-mostly agree on, then well, we could spend that green to help get him elected.

So then we funnel our money into his campaign, and he gets to have a bunch of commercials and signs and posters telling you that HE'S FOR WHAT WE'RE FOR, which, after all, is mostly-kinda-sorta-semi what you're for. And you like his good teeth and hair, so, sure, seems like a good fit. Together, we've gotten our guy elected.

Oh, and we also want to sterilize all male children under 18, and burn fat people for fuel. We just don't mention that in the campaign. We got our money from the good folks at Pfizer to give your young boys Depo shots. But don't worry, the money to pay for the shot will come out of a government fund paid for by your taxes... which is like free medical care. YOU'RE NOT PAYING PFIZER! THE GOVERNMENT IS!

So now you're sitting on your couch with your sterilized middle-school boy wondering "How the f- did it get like this?" And, while it's cool you've got a nice, 18-yr-old model-wife to replace that old one, you're upset about things, bc your kid's pretty sad. And THIS GUY isn't really YOUR GUY. Hell, he's not even REALLY Monkeypox's guy. SO you take the next logical step... you protest Pfizer.

But celebrate, gentlemen (and gentle-ladies), the Dow's up 300 points today.

That scenario really got out of hand quickly. I think I'm going to join the Vaccination Party... It's a movement to end to corporate greed that stemmed from orignally grass roots movement that is the Monkeypox Party.

Does that make ESPN like CSPAN?

An intriguing question, but I'm not entirely sure that ESPN likes anybody.

Between 1980 and 2005, 80% of all new income created in the US has gone to the top 1%.

Remember folks, its only called class warfare when we fight back.

We all mock socialism, redistribution of wealth, and hatred from the have nots toward the haves. Until it's time for conference realignment talk.

"Women think about theyselves when menfolk ain't around."

Between 1980 and 2005, 80% of all new income created in the US has gone to the top 1%.

You're going to cite an MIT paper where the source of this data was a "random" selection of 100 tax returns over 25 years?

You're going to cite an MIT paper where the source of this data was a "random" selection of 100 tax returns over 25 years?

I think he was citing the internet.

CT, meet EE.

Between 1980 and 2005, 80% of all new income created in the US has gone to the top 1%.

So what? If they earned it legally and ethically, why is it a problem that some have been very successful?

Between 1980 and 2005, 80% of all new income created in the US has gone to the top 1%.

Remember folks, its only called class warfare when we fight back.

The Treasury Department did a study in 2007 that found that less than half of those in the top 1% in 1996 were still there in 2005.

One conclusion from this study is that focusing on the top 1%, while convenient, isn't the most accurate gauge of economic inequality as the makeup of the top 1% is constantly changing.

The Treasury Department did a study in 2007 that found that less than half of those in the top 1% in 1996 were still there in 2005.

One conclusion from this study is that focusing on the top 1%, while convenient, isn't the most accurate gauge of economic inequality as the makeup of the top 1% is constantly changing.

The very definition of the top 1% is really skewed, and an inappropriate target of increased taxation. This is because, as you've just stated, it's got a really fleeting membership. There are a LOT of people out there who get lucky ONCE, have a great year of income, and get taxed all to hell for it, then return to the 99% where they belong the following year and ever after.

The 1% people are angry at would more likely be the top 1% of asset holders. Those guys are the ones using the system, and the population to increase the contents of their ever growing toy chests. And I don't care what the AM dial tells you, no individual can, simply by pulling up his boot straps, go from having nothing to becoming one of those guys. You've got to build that kind of wealth over generations.

As to a sense of entitlement, does no one here feel that you should be able to get an education, go to work in a job that applies that education, and earn enough money for a decent house, a couple reasonable cars, a new pair of jeans every couple years, and maybe a day or two a year frolicking in the pool? Yeah, you don't have that right as long as there are 2.6 billion Indians and Chinese who are better educated, harder working, hungrier, and much, much cheaper than you.

That's what I'm mad about. Should I just passively allow 100 years of collective American prosperity across all classes simply evaporate because Steve Forbes needs another nickel per share earnings by selling my job up the river to graduates of Indian Institute of Technology?

The very definition of the top 1% is really skewed, and an inappropriate target of increased taxation. This is because, as you've just stated, it's got a really fleeting membership. There are a LOT of people out there who get lucky ONCE, have a great year of income, and get taxed all to hell for it, then return to the 99% where they belong the following year and ever after.

The 1% people are angry at would more likely be the top 1% of asset holders. Those guys are the ones using the system, and the population to increase the contents of their ever growing toy chests. And I don't care what the AM dial tells you, no individual can, simply by pulling up his boot straps, go from having nothing to becoming one of those guys. You've got to build that kind of wealth over generations.

As to a sense of entitlement, does no one here feel that you should be able to get an education, go to work in a job that applies that education, and earn enough money for a decent house, a couple reasonable cars, a new pair of jeans every couple years, and maybe a day or two a year frolicking in the pool? Yeah, you don't have that right as long as there are 2.6 billion Indians and Chinese who are better educated, harder working, hungrier, and much, much cheaper than you.

That's what I'm mad about. Should I just passively allow 100 years of collective American prosperity across all classes simply evaporate because Steve Forbes needs another nickel per share earnings by selling my job up the river to graduates of Indian Institute of Technology?

Tell that to Bill Gates, Michael Dell, Larry Ellison, Mark Zuckerberg, and the Google founders...

Tell that to Bill Gates, Michael Dell, Larry Ellison, Mark Zuckerberg, and the Google founders...

Bill Gates came from family money and used family capital to get started. It's game time, so I'm not going to look up the others, but even if they are completely self made, that's 5 people out of 300 million, which statisticians would call statistically insignificant. In fact, that's worse odds than hoping for the powerball to come in.

Edited October 29, 2011 by oldguystudent

Bill Gates came from family money and used family capital to get started. It's game time, so I'm not going to look up the others, but even if they are completely self made, that's 5 people out of 300 million, which statisticians would call statistically insignificant. In fact, that's worse odds than hoping for the powerball to come in.

And the argument could be made that constantly telling poeple (through the educational system) that they will never be able to be in the top 1%, and that the top 1% is evil, and that they should just be happy making enough to get by and focus their anger non-sensically on people in the top 1% ensures that many never make the entrepreneurial effort to get there. I also seriously doubt the assertion that everyone in the top 1% has been there for generations. I don't have the time to research it, but if someone did, I think they would find that many in this class are self made.

What the hell: Jerry Jones- When he graduated college in 1965, he was hired as an executive vice president at Modern Security Life of Springfield, Missouri, his father's insurance company. He received his Masters degree in business in 1970. After several unsuccessful business ventures (including passing up the opportunity to purchase the American Football League's San Diego Chargers in 1967), he began an oil and gas exploration business in Arkansas, Jones Oil and Land Lease, which became phenomenally successful. His privately-held company currently does natural resource prospecting.

Steve Jobs - Jobs was born in San Francisco and adopted at birth by Paul Jobs and Clara Jobs (née Hagopian). They moved from San Francisco to Mountain View, California when he was five years old. Paul and Clara later adopted a daughter, Patti. Paul Jobs, a machinist for a company that made lasers, taught his son rudimentary electronics and how to work with his hands.His adoptive mother was an accountant, who taught him to read before he went to school. Clara Jobs had been a payroll clerk for Varian Associates, one of the first high-tech firms in what became known as Silicon Valley.

Herman Cain (don't think he is top 1%, but he could be the next President) - Herman Cain was born in Memphis, Tennessee, to Lenora Caine (née Davis), a cleaning woman and domestic worker, and Luther Cain, Jr., who was raised on a farm and worked as a barber and janitor, as well as a chauffeur for Coca-Cola president Robert Woodruff. Cain has said that as he was growing up, his family was "poor" but "happy". Cain related that his mother taught him about her belief that "success was not a function of what you start out with materially, but what you start out with spiritually". His father worked three jobs to own his own home — something he achieved during Cain's childhood — and to see his two sons graduate.

The examples go on and on and on and on and on.

People would like to believe that those more successful than themselves got there through some other sinister measure besides hard work and being smarter than the other guy. It makes people feel better about their own laziness.

Human nature.

(Yes, this is from Wiki.. don't care enough to go much further).

I am just completely pissed that the University is allowing it to go on there. Thats an outrage.. everyone else has to use the damn free speech area and even RESERVE it. While ludicrous.. quite a double standard. The University is showing its hypocrisy and President Rawlings himself needs to step in.

There are thousands of examples of people who build up succesful businesses from nothing. Not all of them become multi-billion dollar corporations, but many of them become multi-million dollar family business or small chains.

The fact is... you have a better chance to be succesful in a market capitalist system than you do in any other. All you need is a good idea and you can get financial backing to make your dreams come true. If you are content with being a working stiff and making a living, then that's fine as well.

But it is foolish to point accusatory fingers at a system that has allowed a countless number of Americans to work and live in comfort, if not in opulent luxury.

After leaving the Tavern, I decieed to donate to #occupydenton. As a registered Stock Broker I thought it would be kind of me to give back to those in need. I went to Jimmy Johns (a corporate company) and bought a loft of bread, and donated it to those who are camping out on fry. They have no food or water and as a person of corporate america I thought I should give back to those in need. Needless to say, they ate it......

I am a little amused every time I see this (have class in the Lang building there), but not really against it. Nowhere is it said that only intelligent protesters are allowed in the US. If they want to protest, more power to them. They bug me less than the fire-and-brimstone preacher does.

I am a little amused every time I see this (have class in the Lang building there), but not really against it. Nowhere is it said that only intelligent protesters are allowed in the US. If they want to protest, more power to them. They bug me less than the fire-and-brimstone preacher does.

I used to love that guy. Whenever he was on campus I'd always get my lunch and watch the show for hours on end.

There are thousands of examples of people who build up succesful businesses from nothing. Not all of them become multi-billion dollar corporations, but many of them become multi-million dollar family business or small chains.

I like the example of the guy who got his dad's friends to buy him a baseball team, have the taxpayers foot the bill for a new stadium, and then made 5x's his investment and became governor. That's a self-made man right there.

But it is foolish to point accusatory fingers at a system that has allowed a countless number of Americans to work and live in comfort, if not in opulent luxury.

Foolish, maybe, but constitutionally guaranteed. We should all be happy there are people who care enough to protest. Even if we disagree with their point of view the simple exercize of their rights is a defense of all our rights.

Scream on Tea Partier! I disagree with much of what you say and I laugh at your candidates but I'm glad you care enough to speak out.

God bless Texas!

I like the example of the guy who got his dad's friends to buy him a baseball team, have the taxpayers foot the bill for a new stadium, and then made 5x's his investment and became governor. That's a self-made man right there.

I'm usually a pretty moderate guy in my stances on things but this isn't a new phonomenon. I'm not sure what you define as a self made man. What is wrong with the guy who was able to do this as your example stated above? We live in a society that believes in capitalism. Are there things that could be improved? Sure no doubt but I don't think this is a good example.

I always say that it's not alwaysy what you know it's who you know. Societies all over the world have this.