If there's one thing a lazy journalist loves, it's the hackneyed, played out, beaten down archetype of the "old fashioned, hard' workin', honest, blue collar (aka white), small town 'Real America just makin' it with their old values and the sweat off their brow"'. Farking Christ, they love that overly trite romantic narrative, and will protect to the death, for future generations of hack reporters to dip into the cliche well. They'll white wash as much bigotry as they need to. They'll easily overlook the astonishing rates of government subsidies and welfare needed to prop them up. They'll turn a blind eye to the modern meth epidemic in a way they certainly didn't for the crack epidemic in inner cities in the 80s. Just please, please, please don't take that archetype away from them.

Meanwhile, pay no mind to that suburban living, bachelor degree having, prius driving guy who gets up and goes to work everyday at his software development job. He's no "real American", and deserves no such romantic narratives. I don't care how much more he pays into the system than he gets out of it. I don't care if he might be the new 'Real American', given America's increasing urbanization. For one thing, he's probably a lot smarter/well read/informed than the average hack journalist, strike one. Given that he lives in an urban/suburban environment and works a high tech job, he might even be non-white (god forbid even practice a religion that isn't Christianity ... even *gasp* Muslim ), strike two. He might even listen to NPR, strike three. And the worst of all ... he's develops that dreaded thing called the internet, which took the jobs of so many hack journalists before.

For the curious, if you want to know what sort of people can run the show, here's a Vanity fair article from a year back about what Lehman Brothers was like for executives and their wives while Dick Fuld was in charge (new window)

Huggermugger: Most of the "small towns" I know fairly well have several similar characteristics:

Excellent post! Thanks for that, you made clicking this trolly headline worthwhile.

Weaver95: y'know subby...the occupy movement isn't looking for a fight.

The number of arrests would seem to indicate otherwise.

they're not out to quash individual effort,

No actually that is precisely what they are all about because liberalism itself is a never ending assault on the rights of the individual in exchange for the rights of the group.

or stop people from living lives they want to live.

Just so long as you're required on pain of arrest or imprisonment to pay in to entitlement programs whether you want them or not.

this isn't a fight about small town vs big city.

Well you finally got something correct.

it's not a right wing issue. it's not a left wing issue. In fact it's not a fight at all.

Again, for something that's not a fight, there sure seems to be a lot of arrests going on, and no, that's not because the police are provoking it or working for 'the man' to keep the people down.

And it most certainly is a 'right wing' vs 'left wing' issue, because that's what the OWS are, a bunch of leftists whose general purpose is the establishment of socialism, and they do not represent 99, 90, 75, or even 50% of anybody, they represent only themselves and the organized movements behind them. At an absolute best they are nothing more than the fake grassroots movement that the Tea Party was constantly accused of being except the Tea Party only evolved in to that as opposed to being fake from the start.

Until they pop up at the offices of Barney Frank and the headquarters of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, these people will be nothing more than a clueless joke who are pretending to be something they are not. If the economic situation bothers them, then they need to be angry at everyone responsible, not just cherry pick who they want to go after.

publikenemy: Daveman: Skail: I'm kind of bewildered by those people who loudly respond along the lines of "I worked full-time throughout school, incurred massive student debt, work eighteen hours a day at two jobs and have no health insurance, but I'm not complaining. I don't expect anything handed to me."

How does one even attempt to combat this kind of Stockholm Syndrome? It's weird.

As someone else said: If you put in that kind of effort, make that kind of sacrifice, I want the system to reward you, I want you to get rich, not just "barely making it, and proud of it!"

Millions of people are indeed wealthy because of their hard work. Problem is, the so called "99%" and misguided, mis-informed people such as yourself actually have deluded themselves into thinking that anyone who has money somehow acquired it by farking people over, cheating, stealing, inheriting, and genuinely ass-raping everyone in their way. You do this to make up for your own shortcomings in life.

..because after all, to not do so would mean you would actually have to be accountable for yourself, look yourself in the mirror and say "perhaps I should've taken a different path somewhere along the way"

So now, the next time you are spewing out all the nonsense about the rich, stop and think that maybe, just maybe, that person got his from busting his ass and sacrificing part of his time here on earth for the greater cause of family and self worth..or whatever the fark he made his money for, it doesn't really matter.

And as you said, you want them to be rewarded...ya, you sound like a closet 1percenter to me

I think you got it wrong...he just want's his award ribbon and misses everyone getting gold stars every week in school. Somehow expected life to be the same where everyone gets gold dollars every week just for showing up.

Brett Favre: Judging from what I have seen, Most of the OWS protesters should Occupy the Shower a little bit more.

...and we entrust you with our future.

/Almost tempted to vote Yes on Ohio Issue 2 just to piss you off.
//Almost.

Scerpes: Business owners are rewarded differently because they are the ones with the risk. If a business fails, the worker goes and finds another job. The business owner loses his ass.

The CEOs on Wall Street don't lose their ass, even if they drive their business into the ground and don't get a bailout. They have zero risk; golden parachutes are written into their contracts. So how, then, do you justify CEO compensation since there's no risk?

Skail: I'm kind of bewildered by those people who loudly respond along the lines of "I worked full-time throughout school, incurred massive student debt, work eighteen hours a day at two jobs and have no health insurance, but I'm not complaining. I don't expect anything handed to me."

How does one even attempt to combat this kind of Stockholm Syndrome? It's weird.

Find someone who can legitimately say things like this. "I worked no jobs through school, incurred no student debt, because I got a legacy scholarship that did not require any kind of GPA be kept, graduate with a 2.4 out of 4.0 GPA, and went right to work in my daddies company making more in one year then you have ever made in your life. Now shut up, get back to work and make me a cup of tea sugar tits."

apoptotic: OWS isn't about objecting to the concept of wealth in general, especially not when it's accumulated through hard work, and it's not assuming anyone with money is inherently evil. It's objecting to the fact that the system is set up so that the highest echelons of the moneyed corporations can lobby (read: buy) politicians who will, in return for immediate (campaign financing) or delayed (promises of lucrative corporate or lobbying positions once out of office) remuneration, ensure that the interests of those corporations will be held in higher regard than the interests of the general population when it comes time to craft legislation.

So why doesn't "the 99%" simply vote away the politicians? Or run for office themselves? (they'd never take a bribe, Right?)

publikenemy: Millions of people are indeed wealthy because of their hard work. Problem is, the so called "99%" and misguided, mis-informed people such as yourself actually have deluded themselves into thinking that anyone who has money somehow acquired it by farking people over, cheating, stealing, inheriting, and genuinely ass-raping everyone in their way. You do this to make up for your own shortcomings in life.

Stop lying. And stop misrepresenting something you don't know anything about, nor will you.

jack21221: Scerpes: Business owners are rewarded differently because they are the ones with the risk. If a business fails, the worker goes and finds another job. The business owner loses his ass.

The CEOs on Wall Street don't lose their ass, even if they drive their business into the ground and don't get a bailout. They have zero risk; golden parachutes are written into their contracts. So how, then, do you justify CEO compensation since there's no risk?

Why is it any of your business how much a company wants to pay its employees (so long as it's legal)? If you think you can do things better, open your own farking bank and pay yourself a living wage salary. That's the beauty of capitalism. Or is actually doing something that involves risk considered too bootstrappy?

lilplatinum: publikenemy: That's it, you're right, the man is holding you down..sux for you. Gonna be a hard life. I bet you egged their mansions .

Did you miss the part where I said I come from a wealthy mansion, I'm not just their pool boy like you are.

Ahhh...now i see...I'm not a pool boy, i make a good living in a technical job, but youre just a rich entitled prick, the very ilk that you hate.

Keep hating yourself for being rich...you rich snob

I'm not sure I get thas one.

original

publikenemy: log_jammin: publikenemy: Lying to yourself is only going to hurt yourself

feel free to point out the lie.

I'm only pointing this out so y'all will be fair.

As your corporate master will one day say to you when he fires you after he buys another yacht, "life ain't fair."

LL316: Why is it any of your business how much a company wants to pay its employees (so long as it's legal)?

Why should the CEO's be paid so much when they shoulder no risk and don't do any of the things that make the company actually operate? If the CEO of Goldman Sachs was an active bond trader, that would be on thing, As it is he hasn't touched a trade in years. And doesn't even know much of what Goldman Sachs trades except for its own accounts.

DeathByGeekSquad: Weaver95: the occupy movement isn't looking for a fight.

Could've fooled me...

Yes, because if you aren't looking for a fight, you must then always be a pacifist, even if the other party starts throwing haymakers.

We aren't looking for one, but if you want one, you'll have it.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: LarryDan43: Used to be, you worked as hard as people in that town and you could become the 1%.

When was that, exactly? Maybe you could pull yourself up from poverty into the middle class, but when was rags-to-riches ever a major rout to becoming one of the wealthiest 1% in the entire country?

Back in my day, everyone was in the top 1% of wealth!

urban.derelict: Hey dumbasses,
OCCUPY [YOUR TOWN HERE]

Try making the primary focus Occupy DC and you would probably get more of a positive response.

/calling them dumbasses isn't going to help either

IlGreven: publikenemy: log_jammin: publikenemy: Lying to yourself is only going to hurt yourself

feel free to point out the lie.

I'm only pointing this out so y'all will be fair.

As your corporate master will one day say to you when he fires you after he buys another yacht, "life ain't fair."

I don't think so, I own my own company

publikenemy: Keep hating yourself for being rich...you rich snob

So wanting things to be better and easier for other people, means they hate themselves for being rich? Ever heard of something called empathy?

Awesome!

original

First of all, thanks to all the Farkers who backed me up on this. Nice to know I'm not out on a limb, like publikenemy here.

publikenemy: Millions of people are indeed wealthy because of their hard work. Problem is, the so called "99%" and misguided, mis-informed people such as yourself actually have deluded themselves into thinking that anyone who has money somehow acquired it by farking people over, cheating, stealing, inheriting, and genuinely ass-raping everyone in their way. You do this to make up for your own shortcomings in life.

Yeah, that's not what I said. How many people are not rich, or not even out of poverty, despite backbreaking hard work? I have plenty of anecdotes from my own life, but they don't seem to be making a dent in this overarching narrative promulgated by the wealthy right that somehow those folks are still lazy and looking for a handout, that hard work is some kind of guarantee of financial success and freedom. This concept is fundamentally at odds with reality. I'm sure there are plenty of people who got rich by honest means, but as the financial crisis has shown, many people in the 1% are willing to damn their scruples to remain in the 1% and keep others from getting there at all. And it's entirely possible that what they've done to stay there isn't illegal at all--like building wealth on the backs of subprime mortgages, or betting on mortgage-backed securities--but it sure as hell is exploitive and immoral.

..because after all, to not do so would mean you would actually have to be accountable for yourself, look yourself in the mirror and say "perhaps I should've taken a different path somewhere along the way"

No, I'm cool with both the good and bad choices I've made in my life. I'm actually relatively content to be in the 99%, because, unlike your clients, I'm not exactly eager to spend all of my time at work and away from my family (while some dude "services" them) just to claw my way to the top. No thanks. But, you know, I would like that to be acknowledged as a valid lifestyle choice, not sneered at from the heights as "lazy."

So now, the next time you are spewing out all the nonsense about the rich, stop and think that maybe, just maybe, that person got his from busting his ass and sacrificing part of his time here on earth for the greater cause of family and self worth..or whatever the fark he made his money for, it doesn't really matter.

Yeah, again, reacting to an argument I didn't make, exactly. That's what we call a "strawman." If you'd like me to psychoanalyze you, for a bit, we could talk about your burning insecurity and fear about not being able to make it encouraging you to side with your wealthy clients in the hopes that they'll reward your rhetorical and fiduciary loyalty. Perhaps you even see yourself as one of the old-timey members of the service class, like back in England, where yeah, maybe you didn't really have it much better off than the peasants out in the fields, but at least you were in the house, the master knew you by name, and occasionally you'd get the crumbs from his plate--which you'd never get in the fields.

And as you said, you want them to be rewarded...ya, you sound like a closet 1percenter to me

I'm not even sure that makes sense.

WhyteRaven74: Scerpes: Business owners are rewarded differently because they are the ones with the risk.

Mine owners no longer risk much. You don't start a new mine until a whole shiat ton of geological work has been done. You don't go into the ground hoping you'll find coal, you know it's there already. Thanks to advances in geology mining is no longer a matter of chance. And the cost of doing the geology work is trivial in comparison to what a mine produces. So you pay a little, drive your risk down to zero and then you just need to have the money for new equipment and to hire people. Which given that the only people who open new mines are existing mine operators, is not a problem. They have the cash on hand, and if they don't want to dip too much into that, they can take out a loan against their production. They know they produce X value of coal a day, easy enough to go to a bank and borrow against that. And because they're already in business, the paperwork is not something that trips them up as they already have people who can handle it.

Sounds like you got a plan, let me know when you are hiring...and where to send my resume.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: He's saying capitalism is brutal, and a more humanitarian social structure needs to take its place. You can disagree all you want, but it's a fairly simple argument to understand


Ah. I think it was the "shift in global human consciousness" hippy talk that got me. Thanks for clarifying.

Brett Favre: Judging from what I have seen, Most of the OWS protesters should Occupy the Shower a little bit more.

Ha ha! Wow! What a zinger. The great thing is that you managed to insult them and discredit their movement at the same time. Because not showering is definitely a reason not to listen to what someone has to say. Not to mention we know that every last one of them is some dirty, homeless hippy and not people with legitimate problems.

publikenemy: IlGreven: publikenemy: log_jammin: publikenemy: Lying to yourself is only going to hurt yourself

feel free to point out the lie.

I'm only pointing this out so y'all will be fair.

As your corporate master will one day say to you when he fires you after he buys another yacht, "life ain't fair."

I don't think so, I own my own company

HOLY CRAP

A job creator posts among us. Let us join hands and pray.

Is this another thread where people who are jealous of union members making more money than they do accuse OWS of being jealous of the wealthy?

WhyteRaven74: publikenemy: Keep hating yourself for being rich...you rich snob

So wanting things to be better and easier for other people, means they hate themselves for being rich? Ever heard of something called empathy?

It's a bunch of BS..it's so easy for a rich guy to say he has sympathy, because he doesn't know th wreak world..do you think I have no empathy? You don't even know me. What you all have to realize is that you aren't going to change everyone's minds on this. Every day, 3.7 million peeps in NYC get up and go to work every day. Unless you get 99% of those people to protest with you, you aren't going to change what works for 99% of the people ( funny how it's really the other way around)

Wait, Darth Cheney AND Joker Obama? *headexplode*

original

I Am The Egg Matt Drudge Smears Upon His Body: I'm gonna go out on a limb and bet the "small town America" in question pays more to the fed government than it receives.

Know how I know you failed Demographics 101?

From Occupy Vancouver.

original

rubi_con_man: Skail: I'm kind of bewildered by those people who loudly respond along the lines of "I worked full-time throughout school, incurred massive student debt, work eighteen hours a day at two jobs and have no health insurance, but I'm not complaining. I don't expect anything handed to me."

How does one even attempt to combat this kind of Stockholm Syndrome? It's weird.

For the last thirty years, a very talented and entrepreneurial set of 'entertainers', of which Mr Rush Limbaugh is the foremost, has been able to create a mythology and a set of narratives that form a hypnotic basis for the kinds of analysis we see on the Fox news channel, and in other, lesser entertainers (Hannity, Ingram, etc).

Narratives include memes like :

Taxes are confiscatory - that is they are designed only to STEAL from those who work hard. - This is not true. Taxes are levied by congress to pay for the policies it has enacted.

If you decrease the tax rate, the economy grows, and the tax base increases - This is often called the 'laffer curve' and while it may hold true when the government was still paying off war debt after WWII, it's much more debatable now.

The poor don't pay any Taxes - The poor pay a lot of taxes, including sales tax, payroll taxes, gax taxes, cigarette taxes. More importantly, the poor work hard to pay the bills they have, which all include the necessities of life - food, clothing shelter. which for many of them eats up more than they can earn. For most of them simply 'getting' a better job isn't an option.

Welfare people want things handed to them and don't want to work.- People who are on government assistance are generally in ill health, old, sick, broken or have a new child. Many laws were put into place in the eighties centered around this meme, limiting lifetime benefit payouts, and requiring job training for those who were healthy and fit. Most people who want a more social government want to mitigate public risk, and reduce costs for people in general (as in health care), and they don't want things just 'handed to them'

If you tax a corporation or a high-earner too much, they can't create jobs. - Wrong. Supply and demand create jobs. Most employers would create jobs in the face of strong demand and weak supply no matter how much they might be taxed. They'd still get a better return than simply buying stocks or bonds.

Raising the capital gains tax rate hurts grannies and retirement funds and middle-class people - The capital gains tax rate is a ceiling, limiting the tax rate for stock trades and other, related incomes to 15%. Otherwise, the income would go into the 'general income' category and be taxed at what is , for most people, a very similar rate (a middle class person might pay 18% on it) unless you're in the top tax bracket, where every new dollar is taxed at 33% (this used to be 49% when Regan was elected, making it an even bigger deal for republicans). So it doesn't really benefit grandma (living on 12k a year) or the pension fund. It mostly helps rich people get richer through short-term stock manipulation.

There are more recent, more twisted memes as well - It's the repetition of these memes over and over on a daily basis that creates 'dog-whistle' terms and 'blinders' on their audiences, meaning penetration is extremely difficult. Limbaugh himself is a genius. Have you listen to him? I was on the road doing deliveries for three years and it's amazing how he does it.

Your entire post is bullshiat and you know it.

People on welfare are all in ill health or old? N word please.

I have to say, I do enjoy the cooperative efforts often found in small towns. I grew up in one and volunteered my time to a few different organizations.

There's a lot of ugly infighting, politicking, and feuding to go along with it too. But it makes things colorful. And in my experience, most people are able to recognize priorities when appropriate and put the petty stuff aside.

At least until the next budget meeting.

I grew up with good parents, not in extravegance, but not wanting, and one of the values they instilled in me was helping those around you in need. I'm glad for that.

publikenemy: , because he doesn't know th wreak world

And yet the people in OWS are being told they don't know what the real world is like either or what life is like for the 1%. And it doesn't take very many people to change things, never has. After all it took just a few dozen men to tell the English to go fark themselves. At the time of the Revolution, depending on where you were, you'd find anywhere from 20% to maybe 60% of the local people being royalists. And those who weren't, well they had lives to live they weren't about to go get involved in anything. Of those who wanted to get involved and were capable of it, joined the army. Many others did other things. But the average person in support of the revolution didn't do anything directly involved with it. Other than support it.

publikenemy: WhyteRaven74: publikenemy: Keep hating yourself for being rich...you rich snob

So wanting things to be better and easier for other people, means they hate themselves for being rich? Ever heard of something called empathy?

It's a bunch of BS..it's so easy for a rich guy to say he has sympathy, because he doesn't know th wreak world..do you think I have no empathy? You don't even know me. What you all have to realize is that you aren't going to change everyone's minds on this. Every day, 3.7 million peeps in NYC get up and go to work every day. Unless you get 99% of those people to protest with you, you aren't going to change what works for 99% of the people ( funny how it's really the other way around)

But It's not working for 99% of Americans, boy. And you know this, so stop lying.

And you don't need 99% of Americans to agree with you to get something done. Just 51% of the people who show up to vote.

GilRuiz1: From Occupy Vancouver.
[farm7.static.flickr.com image 500x333]
original

You'd think trutherism would have died the day Dylan Avery admitted it was all a cash grab hoax. Hrm. I guess this is just a reminder to me to never underestimate the depth of stupidity humans are capable of.

From Occupy Wall Street in Manhattan:

original

digiprof: This article had nothing to do with the OWS movement. Why did the author force that OWS sentence in?

THIS.

Thunderpipes: People on welfare are all in ill health or old? N word please.

He never said all. And if you call up HHS or Social Security, they have people who can give you the exact break downs of who is receiving what and why. Yes they do actually employ people whose only job is to field such questions from anyone who calls asking them.

apoptotic: OWS isn't about objecting to the concept of wealth in general, especially not when it's accumulated through hard work, and it's not assuming anyone with money is inherently evil. It's objecting to the fact that the system is set up so that the highest echelons of the moneyed corporations can lobby (read: buy) politicians who will, in return for immediate (campaign financing) or delayed (promises of lucrative corporate or lobbying positions once out of office) remuneration, ensure that the interests of those corporations will be held in higher regard than the interests of the general population when it comes time to craft legislation.

Well said.

First they came for the rich....

/repeating history, how does it work?

TRIFECTA COMPLETE!!! From Occupy San Diego:

original

Daveman: Skail: I'm kind of bewildered by those people who loudly respond along the lines of "I worked full-time throughout school, incurred massive student debt, work eighteen hours a day at two jobs and have no health insurance, but I'm not complaining. I don't expect anything handed to me."

How does one even attempt to combat this kind of Stockholm Syndrome? It's weird.

As someone else said: If you put in that kind of effort, make that kind of sacrifice, I want the system to reward you, I want you to get rich, not just "barely making it, and proud of it!"

"My dad beat me with a hose three times a day for my first 18 years, but now I have three kids that I'm paying child support for and I have to double shift it delivering Chinese food. Clearly I'm doing OK, so domestic abuse laws are just socialism."

Joe Blowme: First they came for the rich....

Except no one is going for the rich. Individuals aren't the target here, institutions are.

GilRuiz1: farm7.static.flickr.com

Is there some point you're trying to make?