# My husband was arrested at Occupy St. Louis tonight.



## KnowOneSpecial (Sep 12, 2010)

http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post...rdinance-arrests-made-occupy-st-louis-protest

My husband is the CEO of a small company. He has numerous degrees, including a Masters of Applied Physics and a Bachelors of Math. He is the father of 8 kids, was a foster parent, and is a strong Christian. And yes, he took a shower this morning. 

He went down there today because he believes corporate greed has gotten into every pore of our society. Yes, we have a vote, but it's only between candidates that have already been bought by the corporations. We the People have been trumped by corporations and that have more influence than the populace will ever hope to have. He's not anti-corporation, but more pro-PEOPLE. And sadly, due to corporate greed and flexible rules, the people have kissed any real say in their government good-bye. 

I admire him for doing this. It's something he believes in and he's willing to go as far as to get arrested for it. He has studied this movement from all angles and has come to his conclusions without being swayed by any one political party, media outlet or person. 

I think the world needs more men like him. Ones who are willing to stand up and say that people are important and that greed is bad.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Ones who are willing to stand up and say that people are important and that greed is bad


Other than costing you money, what has his arrest *accomplished*?


----------



## KnowOneSpecial (Sep 12, 2010)

For one thing, it's showing our kids that it's OK to stand up for what you believe in. Too many times parents just sit back and kvetch about things. They don't DO anything. Yes, he has written letters, but what does taht accomplish? If you get anything back it's just some general letter that the intern had to print out. It doesn't make a statement and it's doubtful the Congressman even hears about it. Now he feels he has some creedance behind his words. When it comes to listening to people do you tend to follow the talker or the doer? It's also something that he's convinced could change society for the better. Martin Luther King, Jr. did more by protests and sit ins than he could have done by sitting at home writing his congressman. Societal change takes the courage of many people who are willing to stand together and demand their views be heard.


----------



## Scott SW Ohio (Sep 20, 2003)

I hope your husband is okay. Good for him, that he is willing to act on his principles (peaceably, I presume) to try to right what he perceives to be wrongs.


----------



## Jena (Aug 13, 2003)

Awesome.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

For one thing, it's showing our kids that it's OK to stand up for what you believe in. 

While it is his right to stand up for what he believes, laws should not be broken to do it.


----------



## kimmom2five (Apr 19, 2009)

po boy said:


> For one thing, it's showing our kids that it's OK to stand up for what you believe in.
> 
> While it is his right to stand up for what he believes, laws should not be broken to do it.


Isn't that how our country was founded?


----------



## Ana Bluebird (Dec 8, 2002)

Congratulations for standing up to the moneys people. We all SHOULD be doing that but we are too complacent. I personally think the Occupy people ARE making a difference, but one that can't be seen right now. I would have bet the US citizens would not have stood up to big business, but I'm glad I was wrong. Keep up the good work.


> Societal change takes the courage of many people who are willing to stand together and demand their views be heard.


----------



## tyusclan (Jan 1, 2005)

I am constantly amazed, that here on a forum dedicated to self-reliance, we have so many members that approve of and encourage more government interference in our lives. 

The fact that someone has a lot of money does not necessarily mean they got it because of 'greed'.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

tyusclan said:


> I am constantly amazed, that here on a forum dedicated to self-reliance, we have so many members that approve of and encourage more government interference in our lives.
> 
> The fact that someone has a lot of money does not necessarily mean they got it because of 'greed'.


Good point.
Hope things work out for you & DH, KOS. Most here may not agree, but most can defend your right to protest.
Just wish most who are w/this group would realize who's behind it and seek a different route.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

I commend your husband for standing up for what he believes in. I do not support the OW crowd. I believe their protest is disjointed and takes attention away from serious political situations occuring in our Country. Instead of protesting Corporate greed in New York they would be better served to protest government corruption in Washington. That however is my opinion and not his.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

You know, it might have been so much better all along if there had never been banks making mortgage and car loans. I mean, if everybody had worked hard and saved up for what they wanted, we wouldn't be here now. If cars were still made one at a time, in the garage, by various and sundry goofballs, we wouldn't have had to spend all that money on roads. There would be a total of 20 or so cars in the US. Oil would be a useless commodity. Yep, Corporations and their drive to make money led to everything that has happened since 1900. Wouldn't be so many people either, seeing that most medicines are made by big corporations. Reckon every community would have one of those old timey doctors like on Gunsmoke or something.
What amazes me the most is that the people complaining about corporations and greed are the ones who have relied on them the most. As I've tried, futilely, to point out before, vote with your pocket. Tired of banks? Pay off your loan and don't use them. Tired of Walmart? Quit going there. Tired of General Motors? Build your own car.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

{QUOTE]I think the world needs more men like him.[/QUOTE]

I agree. Hats off to Mr.KnowOneSpecial!

Umm, you did bail him out, right?


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

zong said:


> You know, it might have been so much better all along if there had never been banks making mortgage and car loans. I mean, if everybody had worked hard and saved up for what they wanted, we wouldn't be here now. If cars were still made one at a time, in the garage, by various and sundry goofballs, we wouldn't have had to spend all that money on roads. There would be a total of 20 or so cars in the US. Oil would be a useless commodity. Yep, Corporations and their drive to make money led to everything that has happened since 1900. Wouldn't be so many people either, seeing that most medicines are made by big corporations. Reckon every community would have one of those old timey doctors like on Gunsmoke or something.
> What amazes me the most is that the people complaining about corporations and greed are the ones who have relied on them the most. As I've tried, futilely, to point out before, vote with your pocket. Tired of banks? Pay off your loan and don't use them. Tired of Walmart? Quit going there. Tired of General Motors? Build your own car.



That is really it isn't it.


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

What law did your husband break? Trespassing? I mean was it really a good thing to show your 8 kids that some laws are okay to break? How do you explain that certain trespassing is a good thing? How do you teach them that only the laws Daddy breaks are okay to break..Do you not think you could show your children that it is a good thing to speak up and make a difference without breaking laws??

Edited to add: I am one of the ones who does not believe we need permission to exercise our right to peacefully assemble..however...to say that it was a lesson for kids is strange to me...


----------



## DAVID In Wisconsin (Dec 3, 2002)

So corporate greed applies to every company except the one that he's CEO of? Nice. Besides what's the difference, the corporate greed we all keep hearing about or the personal greed from the OWS leeches who want everything provided for them?


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

According to the news story on occupy St Louis, the mob had, earlier in the day, decided to interrupt Veteran's Day ceremonies. Geeze....


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

zong said:


> According to the news story on occupy St Louis, the mob had, earlier in the day, decided to interrupt Veteran's Day ceremonies. Geeze....


Ah now that explains the arrest..so the lesson for the kids was what again?


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

They were arrested for violating the curfew. They did not offer any resistance.

The Constitution gives us the right to assemble peaceably. 

I think the founders were wise. Notice they set the bar at _peaceable_, not merely _legal_ -- had it been the latter, every jurisdiction could simply write laws making any forms of protest illegal. Goodbye, Constitutional right!

The founders made it pretty hard to silence the people. Of course, that won't stop some entities from trying!


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Kudos to your hubby for showing your kids it is good to get arrested for breaking the law. Before long your kids will get arrested for carrying dope in their cars or something and you and hubby can smile knowing they were only standing up for what they thought was right. When your hubby was hired on as a CEO, I'm sure he didn't accept the money the job paid and instead only took 1/4 of it because he felt it was only right. After all, to take all the salary he could get would have meant he was greedy.


----------



## RWDitto (Jan 23, 2009)

Greed is the base of all problems, social, economical, and political. Everyone wants their own way. If we have less government, more freedom, more privacy, less taxation, local trade, less world intervention, absolutly no world government, then we would have less greed in this nation. (Sounds a lot like the founding of this country) But we have strayed from the constitution. Certainly I believe we need to stand up against this political and economical process that we have. But do it with an absolute goal in mind, not catch all phrases, not generalities. Go with a single goal, and fight till it is accomplished, then your able to claim a victory, and move on to the next goal.


----------



## Jim Bunton (Mar 16, 2004)

Tell your husband thank you. It is good to see people standing up. I don't think your children will have any trouble understanding the difference of what your husband did and just ignoring laws in general. I would suspect they get the message every day living with parents of principle.

Jim


----------



## glenn amolenaar (Mar 3, 2007)

Wow, here I'm over 70yo worked for myself, worked for others, still work part time and farm for myself. We live a good life try to help others. So if I go out and break laws it will give my children and grandchildren a good example of how to get free money and help others how to take from others hard work. 

I agree the USA is in trouble but people need to WORK and SUPPORT themselves. YES there is a lot of greed in this country. BUT if people do not WORK then they should not expect to eat.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

willow_girl said:


> They were arrested for violating the curfew. They did not offer any resistance.
> 
> The Constitution gives us the right to assemble peaceably.
> 
> ...


No, they were arrested for BREAKING THE LAW. Lack of violence has nothing to do with it. I am not being violent if I drive 80 in a 50 zone, but I will get arrested for breaking the law. These clowns have every right to assemble but no right to break the law. Her hubby should have invited the crowd over to his yard where they could have assembled all night as long as they didn't disturb the neighbors.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

KnowOneSpecial said:


> He went down there today because he believes corporate greed has gotten into every pore of our society.
> 
> I admire him for doing this. I
> 
> I think the world needs more men like him. Ones who are willing to stand up and say that people are important and that greed is bad.


Congratulations to your husband for standing up for something he believes in. And congratulations to your husband for having such a wonderful wife who is proud of him.

I personally support the nonviolent OWS demonstrators. I do think violence is wrong, but petitioning government and nonviolent protests to bring change are to be commended.


----------



## Jim Bunton (Mar 16, 2004)

Glenn, sounds like this man does work.

Poppy, your right he did break the law, more of a parks hours ordinance. What gives the city the power to end constitutionally protected peaceable assemblies at ten pm. I guess maybe they should move out of the park in to the streets.

Jim


----------



## SillyMe (Mar 23, 2011)

willow_girl said:


> They were arrested for violating the curfew. They did not offer any resistance.


Were you there?


----------



## kimmom2five (Apr 19, 2009)

poppy said:


> No, they were arrested for BREAKING THE LAW. Lack of violence has nothing to do with it. I am not being violent if I drive 80 in a 50 zone, but I will get arrested for breaking the law. These clowns have every right to assemble but no right to break the law. Her hubby should have invited the crowd over to his yard where they could have assembled all night as long as they didn't disturb the neighbors.


Actually if you are driving 80 in a 50 zone, the resulting accident would be very violent.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Jim Bunton said:


> Glenn, sounds like this man does work.
> 
> Poppy, your right he did break the law, more of a parks hours ordinance. What gives the city the power to end constitutionally protected peaceable assemblies at ten pm. I guess maybe they should move out of the park in to the streets.
> 
> Jim


What gives the government the right to arrest you or me for crossing the street in the middle of the block since we aren't hurting anyone? They pass laws. I don't like a lot of laws but breaking them is not the answer. Voting for people who will legally void the laws is the answer. You can't let people pick and choose which laws they personally don't like.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

I drove 80 in a 50 zone before, I must have missed seeing that violent accident.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Were you there?


News accounts. Had there been any "excitement," I'm certain it would have been reported!



> What gives the government the right to arrest you or me for crossing the street in the middle of the block since we aren't hurting anyone? They pass laws. I don't like a lot of laws but breaking them is not the answer. Voting for people who will legally void the laws is the answer. You can't let people pick and choose which laws they personally don't like.


Ever hear of a lady named Rosa Parks?

How about Ezell A. Blair, Jr., Franklin E. McCain, Joseph A. McNeil, and David L. Richmond?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

poppy said:


> These clowns have every right to assemble but no right to break the law.


Its a good thing that; Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Revere, Franklin, Hancock, Henry, etc never broke the law, right?


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

willow_girl said:


> News accounts. Had there been any "excitement," I'm certain it would have been reported!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not to mention the ever popular HT rallying cry of SSS!!!!


----------



## tyusclan (Jan 1, 2005)

kimmom2five said:


> Actually if you are driving 80 in a 50 zone, the resulting accident would be very violent.


I'm not condoning speeding, but speeding alone rarely causes accidents. *Carelessness* while speeding does, and the increased speed causes far more damage in *case* of a crash.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

mnn2501 said:


> Its a good thing that; Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Revere, Franklin, Hancock, Henry, etc never broke the law.


Yeah them too :happy2:


----------



## EasyDay (Aug 28, 2004)

glenn amolenaar said:


> Wow, here I'm over 70yo worked for myself, worked for others, still work part time and farm for myself. We live a good life try to help others. So if I go out and break laws it will give my children and grandchildren a good example of how to get free money and help others how to take from others hard work.
> 
> I agree the USA is in trouble but people need to WORK and SUPPORT themselves. YES there is a lot of greed in this country. BUT if people do not WORK then they should not expect to eat.


Concur!
This country was built on hard work, blood, sweat, and tears.
The Occupy WoodStock party seems only out for the blood. 
They don't want to work.
They won't work hard enough to sweat.
Those aren't tears of pain, they're merely overcoming a coughing fit from drawing too hard on the bhong!


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Did you read the original post?

Her husband is a highly educated CEO, a Christian father of 8.

Seems there are an awful lot of people here who think our government is doing a great job and our country is headed in the right direction!

There's nothing to protest, right?


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

zong said:


> I drove 80 in a 50 zone before, I must have missed seeing that violent accident.


You were going so fast you missed it eep:


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

willow_girl said:


> Did you read the original post?
> 
> Her husband is a highly educated CEO, a Christian father of 8.
> 
> ...


If a person uses *ANY* of the institutions he is "protesting" about, he needs to look at himself first. If you have a mortgage or car loan, *you* are the one who made the profit for the banks. If you shop at Walmart, *you* are the one responsible for the demise of smaller stores in your area. A tiny bit of personal responsibility would cure all these woes. Protest with your pocket.


----------



## KnowOneSpecial (Sep 12, 2010)

zong said:


> According to the news story on occupy St Louis, the mob had, earlier in the day, decided to interrupt Veteran's Day ceremonies. Geeze....


No, quite the opposite. The protestors had a meeting before and stressed the respect part. In fact, they were led by a group called "Veterans for Peace". V4P had their flag and some other Veterans had issues with that. 

My husband was not a part of this as it happened before he went down there.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

Hey, I read your OP then what I did was google "occupy St Louis" and "arrest" That was the top listed story, I posted the link. I didn't write the story.


----------



## TheMartianChick (May 26, 2009)

Jim Bunton said:


> Tell your husband thank you. It is good to see people standing up. I don't think your children will have any trouble understanding the difference of what your husband did and just ignoring laws in general. I would suspect they get the message every day living with parents of principle.
> 
> Jim


Exactly this!


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

willow_girl said:


> Did you read the original post?
> 
> Her husband is a highly educated CEO, a Christian father of 8.
> 
> ...


How much protesting of government have you seen from these cretins? If they were protesting government even I would support them. They are protesting capitalism and only criticize government for not clamping down on business.


----------



## TheMartianChick (May 26, 2009)

glenn amolenaar said:


> Wow, here I'm over 70yo worked for myself, worked for others, still work part time and farm for myself. We live a good life try to help others. So if I go out and break laws it will give my children and grandchildren a good example of how to get free money and help others how to take from others hard work.
> 
> I agree the USA is in trouble but people need to WORK and SUPPORT themselves. YES there is a lot of greed in this country. BUT if people do not WORK then they should not expect to eat.


Many of the Occupiers that I've seen do hold jobs... It is one of the reasons that there is a shift change during the day. I saw something in the news that indicated that a lot of retirees were joining the Occupiers. Clearly, those people worked long and hard to be able to retire.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

I admire your husband for standing up for what he believes in even if I disagree.
I wish the well meaning OWS people would go protest Congress and the president instead of disrupting small businesses and ordinary citizens instead of falling for the leftist lies and distractions.
But, as long as they aren't trampling the rights and property of others, they can stand out in the cold protesting the wrong people all night as far as I'm concerned.
I think our efforts would be better served pitting our rage against the corruption in the government and this administration.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> If a person uses ANY of the institutions he is "protesting" about, he needs to look at himself first. If you have a mortgage or car loan, you are the one who made the profit for the banks. If you shop at Walmart, you are the one responsible for the demise of smaller stores in your area. A tiny bit of personal responsibility would cure all these woes. Protest with your pocket.


I think that is an excellent point and hopefully it will be one of the outcomes. But change doesn't happen overnight, or spontaneously ... people have to feel convicted, and often that starts when some seeds are planted by activists. Look at how PETA made the wearing of fur unpopular. Back in the 60s, I think it was caused "consciousness-raising." 

The OWS protests have gotten people talking about unemployment, poverty, lack of opportunity, and other things that may not have popped up on the radar otherwise. That's good, IMO. Hopefully solutions will begin to emerge. For instance, I have heard more people lately talking about buying American-made products and checking labels for country of origin.

Not all solutions are going to come from the government ... as you point out, the choices made by individuals have the potential to make a huge impact.


----------



## reluctantpatriot (Mar 9, 2003)

po boy said:


> For one thing, it's showing our kids that it's OK to stand up for what you believe in.
> 
> While it is his right to stand up for what he believes, laws should not be broken to do it.


With logic like that we would still have slaves, women would have no right to vote and we would have segregation. You are part of the problem. I prefer to be part of the solution.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

poppy said:


> How much protesting of government have you seen from these cretins? If they were protesting government even I would support them. They are protesting capitalism and only criticize government for not clamping down on business.


This whole thing has been orchestrated by the left, that should be obvious.
I will stand up for people's right to protest, but I find it disturbing that so many are falling for the scam perpetrated by the democrat machine.
Just goes to show how gullible large masses of people can be, and when the media is directed to push it, it just grows.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

willow_girl said:


> I think that is an excellent point and hopefully it will be one of the outcomes. But change doesn't happen overnight, or spontaneously ... people have to feel convicted, and often that starts when some seeds are planted by activists. Look at how PETA made the wearing of fur unpopular. Back in the 60s, I think it was caused "consciousness-raising."
> 
> The OWS protests have gotten people talking about unemployment, poverty, lack of opportunity, and other things that may not have popped up on the radar otherwise. That's good, IMO. Hopefully solutions will begin to emerge. For instance, I have heard more people lately talking about buying American-made products and checking labels for country of origin.
> 
> Not all solutions are going to come from the government ... as you point out, the choices made by individuals have the potential to make a huge impact.


While solutions aren't going to come from this government, most of the problems do.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

I would like all the anti-Americans here, yes, I said it, anti-Americans, who are trashing KOS's hubby to sit down and write a letter to Patrick Henry explaining to him how his protests were wrong and that he was a criminal. 

Our country isn't dead because of the protesters, it is dead because of you.


----------



## EasyDay (Aug 28, 2004)

willow_girl said:


> Did you read the original post?
> 
> Her husband is a highly educated CEO, a Christian father of 8.
> 
> ...


He is the "image" of what they claim to be protesting. How does one protest against oneself? Just curious!

I admire his cajones to stand up for his beliefs. I think that's awesome. But, I just think that the serious protesters need to oust those that are causing trouble, and getting in the way of any progress. Their message is NOT getting out... or at least getting muddied... by those that are there for the "wrong" reasons. (Those promoting socialism, etc.)


----------



## reluctantpatriot (Mar 9, 2003)

The more I hear from those who are against the Occupy movement, the more I realize why we need more education, not less. I work with gifted high school students in my new job. One of them, picked at random, can better articulate politics, history and economics than all of you anti-Occupy complainers.

The biggest joy I had yesterday was hearing them discuss the political events of the day. They show more empathy, knowledge and understanding than most people. They know about personal responsibility as they direct themselves to earn the best grades, expand their understanding and prepare for their futures.

I am proud of the protesters and I am proud of the father and husband setting a good example for what it means to stand up for what he believes is right. There are too many people who do not have the intestinal or testicular fortitude to do more than go foaming off at the keyboard as of late.

There are more and more coming to the ranks of Occupy and we are taking action, not kvetching behind a monitor or griping at the coffee shop.


----------



## reluctantpatriot (Mar 9, 2003)

tinknal said:


> I would like all the anti-Americans here, yes, I said it, anti-Americans, who are trashing KOS's hubby to sit down and write a letter to Patrick Henry explaining to him how his protests were wrong and that he was a criminal.
> 
> Our country isn't dead because of the protesters, it is dead because of you.


I think you nailed it right there. There are too many people without the backbone to stand up for what is right. Those that do stand up get belittled by the spineless complainers.


----------



## EasyDay (Aug 28, 2004)

willow_girl said:


> I think that is an excellent point and hopefully it will be one of the outcomes. But change doesn't happen overnight, or spontaneously ... people have to feel convicted, and often that starts when some seeds are planted by activists. Look at how PETA made the wearing of fur unpopular. Back in the 60s, I think it was caused "consciousness-raising."
> 
> The OWS protests have gotten people talking about unemployment, poverty, lack of opportunity, and other things that may not have popped up on the radar otherwise. That's good, IMO. Hopefully solutions will begin to emerge. For instance, I have heard more people lately talking about buying American-made products and checking labels for country of origin.
> 
> Not all solutions are going to come from the government ... as you point out, the choices made by individuals have the potential to make a huge impact.


I agree with this, willow. And I think the key is in this:



Cornhusker said:


> I think our efforts would be better served pitting our rage against the corruption in the government and this administration.


:clap:


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

mnn2501 said:


> Its a good thing that; Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Revere, Franklin, Hancock, Henry, etc never broke the law, right?


But they were opposing government oppression, not the guy down the path making and selling buggy whips.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

tinknal said:


> I would like all the anti-Americans here, yes, I said it, anti-Americans, who are trashing KOS's hubby to sit down and write a letter to Patrick Henry explaining to him how his protests were wrong and that he was a criminal.
> 
> Our country isn't dead because of the protesters, it is dead because of you.


:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

tinknal said:


> I would like all the anti-Americans here, yes, I said it, anti-Americans, who are trashing KOS's hubby to sit down and write a letter to Patrick Henry explaining to him how his protests were wrong and that he was a criminal.
> 
> Our country isn't dead because of the protesters, it is dead because of you.


So you're saying that an overseas country taxing the people of America and not giving them any benefits of the taxation is exactly the same as a bank and a store opening, catering to your every whim, and making a profit? Only the government, both then and now can imprison you and take away from you. Those banks never forced anybody to walk in there begging for a $200,000 loan.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

willow_girl said:


> Ever hear of a lady named Rosa Parks?


Yep, I have heard of Rosa Parks.... she is the lady that walked to work (no law against that) instead of riding the bus coz she didnt like the seating arrangements. She didnt stop the bus, didnt camp out in front of it, didnt throw rocks and bottles at anyone.... she simply walked where she needed to go.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

reluctantpatriot said:


> I think you nailed it right there. There are too many people without the backbone to stand up for what is right. Those that do stand up get belittled by the spineless complainers.



What is right? Is demanding that other people give up things they worked for and give them to you right? Is taking out college loans and then expect them to be forgiven right? There are indeed things worth protesting but I haven't seen them doing that. Are they demanding smaller government and more freedom? Are they demanding Obamacare be repealed? Are they demanding fewer gun laws? Are they demanding an end of the Patriot Act and the elimination of the DHS? I have seen none of these things from them.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

zong said:


> So you're saying that an overseas country taxing the people of America and not giving them any benefits of the taxation is exactly the same as a bank and a store opening, catering to your every whim, and making a profit? Only the government, both then and now can imprison you and take away from you. Those banks never forced anybody to walk in there begging for a $200,000 loan.


You are a Pollyanna if you think that large banks and corporations, and the government are not one single entity.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

And you are blind if you think spending more than you have on stuff you don't need didn't lead to this.


----------



## nadja (May 22, 2011)

Seems to me, that as you dig
a little bit you find out the left loonies are behind this 100%, including pelosie. Lets, see, she admitted that she grew up on the corner of Haight and Ashberry. Hmmmm Free sex and Drugs. Yep , that about sums it all up. Oh by the way, for you that don't know, it is also being funded etc by the unions. Talk about coporate greed !


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

"Just goes to show how gullible large masses of people can be, and when the media is directed to push it, it just grows."

While I agree with the general concept you are stating, I disagree with the "directed" push. I was aware of the intent to protest prior to the first day of protesting. NONE of the mainstream media paid any attention on that first day, there was an effective news blackout of what was, in essence, an "Arab Spring" type of uprising on Wall Street. That blackout continued on for at least three days in tv news.

If anything, the media was initially "directed" to ignore and isolate. That actually makes sense, because media is dependent on advertisers and anything that might upset the income stream has a way of vanishing.

You are using some deeper thought, in not trusting what you are being told, but you would do well to dig deeper yet asking more questions. The first answers in a puzzle or mystery can often be either wrong or misleading.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

zong said:


> You know, it might have been so much better all along if there had never been banks making mortgage and car loans. I mean, if everybody had worked hard and saved up for what they wanted, we wouldn't be here now. If cars were still made one at a time, in the garage, by various and sundry goofballs, we wouldn't have had to spend all that money on roads. There would be a total of 20 or so cars in the US. Oil would be a useless commodity. Yep, Corporations and their drive to make money led to everything that has happened since 1900. Wouldn't be so many people either, seeing that most medicines are made by big corporations. Reckon every community would have one of those old timey doctors like on Gunsmoke or something.
> What amazes me the most is that the people complaining about corporations and greed are the ones who have relied on them the most. As I've tried, futilely, to point out before, vote with your pocket. Tired of banks? Pay off your loan and don't use them. Tired of Walmart? Quit going there. Tired of General Motors? Build your own car.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

tinknal said:


> You are a Pollyanna if you think that large banks and corporations, and the government are not one single entity.


No, they are not. The banks did not want Dodd/Frank and other things but government forced it on them. Government has the regulatory power but banks have no control over you at all. You and I are free to go get a loan today for a new house, car, or whatever. No bank will send you a demand that you do it. It is government that forces you to do business with them in the form of the IRS, SS, and regulations.


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yep, I have heard of Rosa Parks.... she is the lady that walked to work (no law against that) instead of riding the bus coz she didnt like the seating arrangements. She didnt stop the bus, didnt camp out in front of it, didnt throw rocks and bottles at anyone.... she simply walked where she needed to go.


LOL!!! Can we say "revisionist history"? Just in case someone actually believes such jokes, here is the real story:

The final straw came December 1st, 1955 as Rosa rode the bus home from her job at the Montgomery Fair Department Store. Rosa boarded the bus, paid her fare, and sat down in the first row behind the seats reserved for the whites. This was in the eleventh row and almost in the middle of the bus. Coincidentally, the same bus driver who had thrown her off of the bus 13 years earlier (James F. Blake) was driving the bus that day. The bus made its way along its route and the seats reserved for whites only began to fill up. When all of the seats were full, and there were still three whites standing the bus driver moved toward the back of the bus and demanded that four black people relinquish their seats to the white people. One crucial and often misinterpereted fact about this incident is that Mrs. Parks was in fact sitting in the first row of the section reserved for blacks.

In her autobiography, Rosa told how, when the driver was issuing his demands, she just wanted to protect herself and her rights. The three black men near her moved, but Rosa just scooted over towards the window seat. The bus driver then asked her why she did not get up and move and she told him that she did not feel that she should have to.

In her autobiography, Parks wrote, "People always say that I didn't give up my seat because I was tired, but that isn't true. I was not tired physically, or no more tired than I usually was at the end of a working day. I was not old, although some people have an image of me as being old then. I was forty-two. No, the only tired I was, was tired of giving in. I knew someone had to take the first step and I made up my mind not to move. Our mistreatment was just not right, and I was tired of it."

The bus driver then proceeded to call the police, who subsequently arrested Rosa. It is important to note here that in 1900, the city of Montgomery, Alabama had passed a city ordinance that allowed drivers to segregate their passengers by race. If necessary, they could assign specific seats. The law, however, stated that no passengers were to be forced to give up a seat or stand should the bus become too crowded. The passage of time, and increased prejudices had allowed that part of the law to become lax and drivers were now in the habit of forcing blacks to move, stand or depart the bus if a white person needed a seat. 

http://www.rosaparksfacts.com/rosa-parks-civil-rights-movement.php#rosa-parks-arrest


----------



## EasyDay (Aug 28, 2004)

tinknal said:


> You are a Pollyanna if you think that large banks and corporations, and the government are not one single entity.


It doesn't excuse personal responsibility, or lack thereof. I believe that was zong's point.

When the bank said they'd loan me $400K for a house, I took the personal responsibility of recognizing that if something unexpected came up, maybe a downturn in my employment situation, my children and I could end up homeless. So, I borrowed less than half that, choosing a more manageable mortgage instead.

Most Americans thrive on instant gratification. They have absolutely no foresight beyond picturing themselves sitting in that fancy house thinking, "others will be so impressed". (But they won't pay your mortgage!) By not falling prey to this, I've been debt-free for over 6 years. Am I special? No. I made many sacrifices to make it happen. Most of us have faced the same decisions... but, unfortunately, far too many made the irresponsible decision, and now want me to pay for it. :umno:


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

reluctantpatriot said:


> The more I hear from those who are against the Occupy movement, the more I realize why we need more education, not less. I work with gifted high school students in my new job. One of them, picked at random, can better articulate politics, history and economics than all of you anti-Occupy complainers.
> 
> The biggest joy I had yesterday was hearing them discuss the political events of the day. They show more empathy, knowledge and understanding than most people. They know about personal responsibility as they direct themselves to earn the best grades, expand their understanding and prepare for their futures.
> 
> ...


Since you are all for education, I'm sure you've educated yourself on what OWS believes, not just what YOU'D like them to believe?

Who's behind them? What DO they profess? How many want the jews & the rich shipped out of the US?

How many VOTE?

How many are anti-copitalism?

How many want their student loans paid for?

How come there's so mush violence & anarchy? Given that this group is so much smaller than the TP, why cannot they control themselves? Rape? Theft? Pushing old ladies down?

Tell us again why you are for them?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

zong said:


> So you're saying that an overseas country taxing the people of America and not giving them any benefits of the taxation is exactly the same as a bank and a store opening, catering to your every whim, and making a profit? Only the government, both then and now can imprison you and take away from you. Those banks never forced anybody to walk in there begging for a $200,000 loan.


OWS & thier supporters have not thought this far...they're parroting what the koolaid handlers have handed out w/the koolaid.


----------



## Jim Bunton (Mar 16, 2004)

The protesters are not against the banks, or profit. They are against a relatively new way of corporate thinking that pushes short term gain over long term growth. Henry Ford is best known for putting the assembly line to work building cars, but his greatest contribution to this nation was his belief and practice of paying his workers well enough that they could also be his customers. He recognized that it isn't companies that create growth it is customers. This forced his competitors to raise their pay scales to compete for the best workers and the trend continued. 

Over the last thirty years too many companies have increased upper management salaries, bonuses, and company profits at the expense of the workers, and ultimately at the expense of the nation. There are many government problems. This isn't one of them. These protest hopefully will serve as a wake up call to some of these companies, and start a trend back to what made us so strong in the first place. A strong middle class able to purchase what they were building. The working middle class has been steadily losing ground for quite a while. Average wages have been stagnant while pricing has gone up drastically. 

Jim


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

tinknal said:


> I would like all the anti-Americans here, yes, I said it, anti-Americans, who are trashing KOS's hubby to sit down and write a letter to Patrick Henry explaining to him how his protests were wrong and that he was a criminal.
> 
> Our country isn't dead because of the protesters, it is dead because of you.


We ain't dead yet, and if we were, it's because we keep electing corruption instead of insisting on honest men who love this country.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Jim Bunton said:


> The protesters are not against the banks, or profit. They are against a relatively new way of corporate thinking that pushes short term gain over long term growth. Henry Ford is best known for putting the assembly line to work building cars, but his greatest contribution to this nation was his belief and practice of paying his workers well enough that they could also be his customers. He recognized that it isn't companies that create growth it is customers. This forced his competitors to raise their pay scales to compete for the best workers and the trend continued.
> 
> Over the last thirty years too many companies have increased upper management salaries, bonuses, and company profits at the expense of the workers, and ultimately at the expense of the nation. There are many government problems. This isn't one of them. These protest hopefully will serve as a wake up call to some of these companies, and start a trend back to what made us so strong in the first place. A strong middle class able to purchase what they were building. The working middle class has been steadily losing ground for quite a while. Average wages have been stagnant while pricing has gone up drastically.
> 
> Jim


I get it
You hate "upper management" because they make a lot of money?
Here's a thought.............work your way up to upper management instead of complaining because someone makes more than you do.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Other than costing you money, what has his arrest *accomplished*?


 That is for sure. 
After all the banks are not whats the problem. Picket the WH THERE is where the problem lies.
Banks are just following what is in the laws that the WH folks pass. Nothing more. They did not take pen in hand and MAKE people sign those ridiculous house loans. So it is a few ceo that had been over paid by some try going out and running a very large one yourselves.
This so called "occupy" is not going to do any good. Can't believe anybody would voluntarily go and put themselves in danger, when all it takes is a spark and wham you have a ugly situation going bad even more. It just is not worth it. A persons life I would think is worth more then putting ones self in danger like that.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> people have to feel *convicted*,


The judge will assure that


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Cornhusker said:


> I get it
> You hate "upper management" because they make a lot of money?
> Here's a thought.............work your way up to upper management instead of complaining because someone makes more than you do.


 I keep reading this over and over again. Some try to make Henry Ford as a great person.
Well I will say he did nothing different then what is being down today for ANY company or business to survive.
And many forget Ford was so much about himself that he failed twice before he got Ford Motor Co. going.
He is not the good guy that some try to make him out.
*Henry Ford, ruthless business manipulator* 
GEE that still going on today now isn't it. LOL


> Henryâs overwhelming vision was to produce a basic motor vehicle en masse and, by so doing, relieve drudgery *while making himself rich.* He achieved this beyond measure. Ford was involved in two start-ups before the serious company got under way. Most manufacturers of the time were concerned with small production and quality; Ford was concerned with mass production.
> Ford started the Ford Motor Company with several other investors, but as these others became a nuisance to him, *Ford connived and contrived to remove them.* This document chronicles Fordâs method of consolidating his holdings and, later, ensuring minimal loses through taxation.


http://www.abelard.org/ford/ford2-business.php


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> What gives the government the right to arrest you or me for crossing the street in the middle of the block since we aren't hurting anyone? They pass laws. I don't like a lot of laws but breaking them is not the answer. Voting for people who will legally void the laws is the answer. You can't let people pick and choose which laws they personally don't like.


The courts traditionally have looked at religious and political expression a little differently than other forms of expression due to a little thing called the First Amendment. 

Churches, and individuals in the practice of their religion, have been allowed to do things that otherwise wouldn't be permitted under law because the First Amendment protects their religious freedom. 

By the same token, protesters "peaceably assembling" have been granted similar leeway.

The founders perhaps recognized that these were important freedoms, more worthy of protection than, say, jaywalking.


----------



## nadja (May 22, 2011)

I have an idea ! Lets outlaw all business's that are privately owned, as they may actually be successuful and turn into a corporation. That way we would eliminate coporate greed alltogether ! Oh, but then there would be no large food stores with all the things you need to fix dinner and lunches for your kiddies. And no car factories or Oil corp. You could experiment with "green energy" to get you to work. But you would not have a car either. And of couse going to work would be out of the question, because there would be no large co.'s to work for. Don't bother with the light switch , as without that "greedy Power Co" there would be no electricity. 

This is all something conjured up by the dem's, mostly to take your minds of what O Great one is doing behind your backs. When are you going to all wake up and smell the stink coming out of the white house? Because if your don't , you are going to wake up and salute O Great one 50 times a day for allowing you to breath.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> I keep reading this over and over again. Some try to make Henry Ford as a great person.
> Well I will say he did nothing different then what is being down today for ANY company or business to survive.
> And many forget Ford was so much about himself that he failed twice before he got Ford Motor Co. going.
> He is not the good guy that some try to make him out.
> ...


Yep, ford was a dink. He was racist, anti-Semitic, greedy, pushy, etc. But he was an economic genius too. He didn't pay a good wage because he was a nice guy, he paid the wage because he realized that for the engines of industry to grow that people needed to make enough money to actually buy products.

I don't think that anyone is claiming that he was some sort of humanitarian, only that he recognized the benefit in paying a good wage.


----------



## Txrider (Jun 25, 2010)

Jim Bunton said:


> The protesters are not against the banks, or profit. They are against a relatively new way of corporate thinking that pushes short term gain over long term growth. Henry Ford is best known for putting the assembly line to work building cars, but his greatest contribution to this nation was his belief and practice of paying his workers well enough that they could also be his customers. He recognized that it isn't companies that create growth it is customers. This forced his competitors to raise their pay scales to compete for the best workers and the trend continued.
> 
> Over the last thirty years too many companies have increased upper management salaries, bonuses, and company profits at the expense of the workers, and ultimately at the expense of the nation. There are many government problems. This isn't one of them. These protest hopefully will serve as a wake up call to some of these companies, and start a trend back to what made us so strong in the first place. A strong middle class able to purchase what they were building. The working middle class has been steadily losing ground for quite a while. Average wages have been stagnant while pricing has gone up drastically.
> 
> Jim


Problem is our middle class isn't building anything any more.. Chinese workers are. So we are giving up our middle class jobs in order to buy cheap foreign goods.. We're just now being hit with the real consequences of that choice we made as consumers now in the form of unemployment and stagnant wages.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

tinknal said:


> Yep, ford was a dink. He was racist, anti-Semitic, greedy, pushy, etc. But he was an economic genius too. He didn't pay a good wage because he was a nice guy, he paid the wage because he realized that for the engines of industry to grow that people needed to make enough money to actually buy products.
> 
> I don't think that anyone is claiming that he was some sort of humanitarian, only that he recognized the benefit in paying a good wage.


Yep, and that benefit had NOTHING to do with his workers being able to buy his product. It had everything to do with having a workforce available to produce cars that he could then sell to anyone who could afford them for a PROFIT. It makes no sense to furnish someone with breakfast (or an automobile) and then pay them to eat it (or drive it).


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Jim Bunton said:


> The protesters are not against the banks, or profit. They are against a relatively new way of corporate thinking that pushes short term gain over long term growth. Henry Ford is best known for putting the assembly line to work building cars, but his greatest contribution to this nation was his belief and practice of paying his workers well enough that they could also be his customers. He recognized that it isn't companies that create growth it is customers. This forced his competitors to raise their pay scales to compete for the best workers and the trend continued.
> 
> Over the last thirty years too many companies have increased upper management salaries, bonuses, and company profits at the expense of the workers, and ultimately at the expense of the nation. There are many government problems. This isn't one of them. These protest hopefully will serve as a wake up call to some of these companies, and start a trend back to what made us so strong in the first place. A strong middle class able to purchase what they were building. The working middle class has been steadily losing ground for quite a while. Average wages have been stagnant while pricing has gone up drastically.
> 
> Jim


Excellent points. I would also add that too many of these big corporations don't actually produce anything, they just move stuff around. Rather than creating a product, hiring people to make it, bringing it to the consumer, and selling it, they instead just create winners and losers by manipulating money. 

There is something wrong when a small business person cannot get a loan to expand and create more wealth, but anyone can get a Visa card.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Txrider said:


> Problem is our middle class isn't building anything any more.. Chinese workers are. So we are giving up our middle class jobs in order to buy cheap foreign goods.. We're just now being hit with the real consequences of that choice we made as consumers now in the form of unemployment and stagnant wages.


Our middle class worked hard and climbed up out of poverty, they are now far "too good" to work. The poor folks in Chinaland are well aware that eating is a result of work, and they are willing to do so. Not to worry though, very soon the unions will have the chinese workers convinced that they too are too good to work for their meals, and the jobs will return to this country.... where the people will once again understand that they have to do a days work to earn a days pay.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

kimmom2five said:


> Isn't that how our country was founded?


Are the Occupiers starting a new country?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MoonRiver said:


> Are the Occupiers starting a new country?


They certainly seem to want to. A nice new country where everyone works for the government and the government feeds and takes care of everyone, and requires everyone to be financially equal. (poor) 

From each as his ability, to each as is his needs.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

zong said:


> Tired of General Motors? Build your own car.


Only if I can get a multi billion dollar govt bailout like they did! After all I am too big to fail....


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

MoonRiver said:


> Are the Occupiers starting a new country?


We can only hope so...


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

HermitJohn said:


> We can only hope so...


Then they can go to a island somewhere win the south pacific, where they can have cradle to grave offered by their new government. And lets see just how long that lasts. LOL


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> They certainly seem to want to. A nice new country where everyone works for the government and the government feeds and takes care of everyone, and requires everyone to be financially equal. (poor)
> 
> From each as his ability, to each as is his needs.


Couldnt be any worse than system we have now where the idea of capitalism is moving around money chasing inefficiencies in the stock market and collecting their million dollar bonus at the end of the year. How about these genius capitalists actually earn their million dollars and create something? Hmmm...


----------



## SquashNut (Sep 25, 2005)

A country that is passing out food stamps to 50 percent of the people is greedy?


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

arabian knight said:


> Then they can go to a island somewhere win the south pacific, where they can have cradle to grave offered by their new government. And lets see just how long that lasts. LOL



Wont work, all the south Pacific islands seemed doomed to be under water thanks to the global warming from the short term thinking capitalists.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

SquashNut said:


> A country that is passing out food stamps to 50 percent of the people is greedy?


Think I heard food stamps or whatever they call it anymore are used by around 20% of the population thanks to scammers on Wall Street tanking the economy for short term gains. Thats a might less than 50%.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

HermitJohn said:


> Wont work, all the south Pacific islands seemed doomed to be under water thanks to the global warming from the short term thinking capitalists.


Think I will go and invest in some Reynolds Aluminum stock.:rotfl:


----------



## SquashNut (Sep 25, 2005)

HermitJohn said:


> Think I heard food stamps or whatever they call it anymore are used by around 20% of the population thanks to scammers on Wall Street tanking the economy for short term gains. Thats a might less than 50%.


What the wall street guys did shouldn't have tanked the economy. If the goverment hadn't allowed the economy to become so fragile, it should have been a small blipp not a cliff dive..


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

SquashNut said:


> A country that is passing out food stamps to 50 percent of the people is greedy?


No government ever gives anyone anything out of benevolence. By "giving" someone something the government expects a quid pro quo. 

Does a farmer give his pigs free food so they will love him? Nope, he feeds them so they can get fat and he can kill them.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

SquashNut said:


> What the wall street guys did shouldn't have tanked the economy.* If the goverment hadn't allowed the economy to become so fragile, it should have been a small blipp not a cliff dive..*


Yes. It is the Government not the WS guys. They are and have been doing nothing out side of what the Government Set In Place, by in acting legislation for them, the WS folks to use.


----------



## DJ in WA (Jan 28, 2005)

KnowOneSpecial said:


> Yes, we have a vote, but it's only between candidates that have already been bought by the corporations.


I know many don't want to hear his name, but could someone give me examples of Ron Paul being bought by the corporations? Why do you think the media tries to ignore him?

As for those who complain about laws being broken. The highest law of the land is the Constitution. What percent of our government is authorized by it? Are you for abolishing all the illegal programs? Are you okay with theft through mob rule and the government?

When someone comes along who wants to follow the Constitution strictly, most of the "law-abiders" here will find ways to discredit him.

Cherry picking.


----------



## jwal10 (Jun 5, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAOrT0OcHh0[/ame]


----------



## TheMartianChick (May 26, 2009)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yep, I have heard of Rosa Parks.... she is the lady that walked to work (no law against that) instead of riding the bus coz she didnt like the seating arrangements. She didnt stop the bus, didnt camp out in front of it, didnt throw rocks and bottles at anyone.... she simply walked where she needed to go.


Actually, she refused to give up her seat which was against the law at that time. It wasn't until she was bailed out of jail that she began walking to get to her destination.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

I would bet everything, that there is not one person on this forum who does not break some law/ordinance or rule once they leave their home and most do not even need to leave the home. I knew I had thousands to choose from in my former profession, if I so wished, and had not found anyone if I was persistent that could not be legally detain or arrested. 

Laws do not trump the constitution, period. Thank your husband for me OP, for I do admire anyone who places himself at risk for a cause.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

I break laws every single day. I don't bother pretending there's a cause involved. I do what I think is best for me. By the same token, I don't go down to the bank and borrow a million bucks just because they'll lend it to me, neither. That couldn't possibly be good for me. Personal responsibility. I got to answer to what I agreed to.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

zong said:


> I break laws every single day. I don't bother pretending there's a cause involved. I do what I think is best for me. By the same token, I don't go down to the bank and borrow a million bucks just because they'll lend it to me, neither. That couldn't possibly be good for me. Personal responsibility. I got to answer to what I agreed to.


OK, so what if the government passed a law that no matter what you did with that million dollars, that they would come in in bail you out if it all went south? This law is just for you, no one else. 

Ya think others wouldn't be rightfully angry?


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

The Occupy crowd benefited a friends tow and recovery service down south. Apparently they left their cars parked in the wrong place so they didn't have as far towalk to the Occupy campout . march or whatever and he scored impound on three or four of them. With impound tows of $110 and storage fees of $30 a day it won't be long before he has some cash in hand or title on some nice newer model used cars to sell.

Power to the Small business owner :rock:


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

SquashNut said:


> A country that is passing out food stamps to 50 percent of the people is greedy?


A country passing out food stamps to half it's people is a slave owner


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

tinknal said:


> OK, so what if the government passed a law that no matter what you did with that million dollars, that they would come in in bail you out if it all went south? This law is just for you, no one else.
> 
> Ya think others wouldn't be rightfully angry?


"what if?" are you serious?? What if the government passed a law saying everybody had to fall in love with me? What if the government passed a law saying everybody had to agree with me. I mean, "what if?"" Get a grip girly. The government don't pass a law for me.


----------



## Home Harvest (Oct 10, 2006)

Jim Bunton said:


> The protesters are not against the banks, or profit. They are against a relatively new way of corporate thinking that pushes short term gain over long term growth. Henry Ford is best known for putting the assembly line to work building cars, but his greatest contribution to this nation was his belief and practice of paying his workers well enough that they could also be his customers. He recognized that it isn't companies that create growth it is customers. This forced his competitors to raise their pay scales to compete for the best workers and the trend continued.
> 
> Over the last thirty years too many companies have increased upper management salaries, bonuses, and company profits at the expense of the workers, and ultimately at the expense of the nation. There are many government problems. This isn't one of them. These protest hopefully will serve as a wake up call to some of these companies, and start a trend back to what made us so strong in the first place. A strong middle class able to purchase what they were building. The working middle class has been steadily losing ground for quite a while. Average wages have been stagnant while pricing has gone up drastically.
> 
> Jim


That's great, Jim! But how do you KNOW that what you describe is what they are protesting. I've been saying it for weeks, and it bears repeating. These protestors have no stated agenda or goals. They literally have no idea what the result of their actions will be.

I believe that we will see Washington jump on board with these protestors. I believe the Democrats will latch on to this just as the GOP latched on to the Tea Party. I believe we WILL see change due to these protests. We will see more regulations, bigger government, less freedom, and more jobs headed overseas. I sure hope I'm wrong.


----------



## Tracy Rimmer (May 9, 2002)

I just want to ask one thing of the people occupying various parks and public spaces:

Do you shop at WalMart?

I respect and defend anyone's right to protest, but it's kind of like PETA supporters wearing leather shoes; all your protesting counts for nothing so long as you're supporting the very thing you're protesting.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

zong said:


> "what if?" are you serious?? What if the government passed a law saying everybody had to fall in love with me? What if the government passed a law saying everybody had to agree with me. I mean, "what if?"" Get a grip girly. The government don't pass a law for me.


Irony deficient, "girly"? 

Isn't this _exactly_ what the government did with the "too big to fail banks", GM, and Chrysler?

Isn't this at least part of what folks are protesting?


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Tracy Rimmer said:


> I just want to ask one thing of the people occupying various parks and public spaces:
> 
> Do you shop at WalMart?
> 
> I respect and defend anyone's right to protest, but it's kind of like PETA supporters wearing leather shoes; all your protesting counts for nothing so long as you're supporting the very thing you're protesting.


I totally fail to see the connection.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

tinknal said:


> Irony deficient, "girly"?
> 
> Isn't this _exactly_ what the government did with the "too big to fail banks", GM, and Chrysler?
> 
> Isn't this at least part of what folks are protesting?


Am I too big to fail?? Did the government pass a law especially for me?? Hey, you read the news, you got a choice of who to do business with. You want to do business with the people who suck money from the "people"? I'm not like that. You make your choices, you pay your penalties. Cash, integrity, or whatever. You know yourself.


----------



## InvalidID (Feb 18, 2011)

KOS I applaud your husband for standing up for what he believes in. Whether one agrees with OWS or not, they 'should' at least have a little respect for the working men and women that are willing to risk something for what they believe in. I know I do.

As a side, I've noticed this is sort of a nation wide thing. Many cities are deciding all at once that they are tired of the OWS people. Trying to clear them out before holiday shopping season maybe?


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

tinknal said:


> I totally fail to see the connection.


The connection is that Walmart will not be in business without your support, And millions of others, who make one all encompassing statement and shop there anyway.
You are your own worst enemy. I'm not treyi g to bust your hump. I'm trying to make you see each and every one of us has some culpability in what *WE* let happen. I know you see it. I don't know if you'll admit it. Doesn't matter. It's right there, in front of your face. We are our own worst enemy.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

zong said:


> Am I too big to fail?? Did the government pass a law especially for me?? Hey, you read the news, you got a choice of who to do business with. You want to do business with the people who suck money from the "people"? I'm not like that. You make your choices, you pay your penalties. Cash, integrity, or whatever. You know yourself.


Dude, are you really this dense? Ever heard of an "analogy"?

I don't do business with _any_ banks (at least if you don't count my tax dollars going to bail them out).


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

zong said:


> The connection is that Walmart will not be in business without your support, And millions of others, who make one all encompassing statement and shop there anyway.
> You are your own worst enemy. I'm not treyi g to bust your hump. I'm trying to make you see each and every one of us has some culpability in what *WE* let happen. I know you see it. I don't know if you'll admit it. Doesn't matter. It's right there, in front of your face. We are our own worst enemy.


So would "protesting" count as doing something about it? 

You are getting more and more confused. 

I just happen to believe that Walmart and OWS are two entirely different subjects, I'm not defending them. 

Kind of like starting a thread about raising pigs in Missouri, and having someone chime in about raising budgies in London. Just not related.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

I'm almost positive that I'm the one confused here. LOL. You crack me up. Along with everybody I know who I'm sending these posts to. You really think that your own excesses are somebody else's fault?? Hey, you don't like the banks?? pull your money out. That's action. Whining and complaining, that's just being the child you are. Grow up, already.


----------



## SquashNut (Sep 25, 2005)

What people don't seem to understand is we vote and pay the pay checks of the politicians, so they are supossed to be the ones looking out for us. While big business is doing it's job when it makes money. With out these two processes being done on the up and up our economy crashes. Big business only got away with what it did because the politicians let them.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Tracy Rimmer said:


> I just want to ask one thing of the people occupying various parks and public spaces:
> 
> Do you shop at WalMart?
> 
> I respect and defend anyone's right to protest, but it's kind of like PETA supporters wearing leather shoes; all your protesting counts for nothing so long as you're supporting the very thing you're protesting.


Dont know what your reality is like, but for most people living on working person's salary, there isnt the luxury of paying twice at much at Joe Blow's Mini Boutique on Main Street for same goods as at Big Bloated Greedymart. And bad thing is that when Joe Blow's Mini Boutique is forced out of buisiness, then Big Bad Greedymart raises its prices to what Joe Blow was charging. And nobody left to compete, though you may get Big Bad Green Greedymart and Big Bad Blue Greedymart as if thats any kind of choice. Called predatory capitalism. Pretending we still live in early 20th century with hundreds of car companies and little independent stores everywhere is just walking around with blinders on. THERE IS NO REALISTIC CHOICE except maybe for the mega rich that can hire somebody to design and build custom one-off stuff for them.

As real world working class salaries nosedive as prices skyrocket, there is less and less choice.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

nadja said:


> I have an idea ! Lets outlaw all business's that are privately owned, as they may actually be successuful and turn into a corporation. That way we would eliminate coporate greed alltogether ! Oh, but then there would be no large food stores with all the things you need to fix dinner and lunches for your kiddies. And no car factories or Oil corp. You could experiment with "green energy" to get you to work. But you would not have a car either.  And of couse going to work would be out of the question, because there would be no large co.'s to work for. Don't bother with the light switch , as without that "greedy Power Co" there would be no electricity.
> 
> This is all something conjured up by the dem's, mostly to take your minds of what O Great one is doing behind your backs. When are you going to all wake up and smell the stink coming out of the white house? Because if your don't , you are going to wake up and salute O Great one 50 times a day for allowing you to breath.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

SquashNut said:


> Big business only got away with what it did because the politicians let them.


And politicians let them because BIG BUISINESS got them elected with anonymous mega donations to fake political action groups. Remember our Supreme Court ruled that BIG BUISINESS is people too and can anonymously spend as much as they want to put who they want into office.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Cornhusker said:


> A country passing out food stamps to half it's people is a slave owner



A country that lets half its workforce starve or die of exposure is a bad slave owner....


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

jwal10 said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAOrT0OcHh0


I posted this on another thread...everyone should see it.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

dlmcafee said:


> I would bet everything, that there is not one person on this forum who does not break some law/ordinance or rule once they leave their home and most do not even need to leave the home. I knew I had thousands to choose from in my former profession, if I so wished, and had not found anyone if I was persistent that could not be legally detain or arrested.
> 
> Laws do not trump the constitution, period. Thank your husband for me OP, for I do admire anyone who places himself at risk for a cause.


Tell us what cause is that? Tell us who's behind OWS? Tell us what the majority of OWS believes.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

SquashNut said:


> What the wall street guys did shouldn't have tanked the economy. If the goverment hadn't allowed the economy to become so fragile, it should have been a small blipp not a cliff dive..


President Shrub encouraged Fed to make artificially low interest rates to promote real estate bubble. Our manufacturing was disappearing so the real estate bubble made it look like the economy was still growing. The real estate bubble along with cheap petroleum was hiding a fragile economy. The big bank scam just popped that bubble and the emperor's nekkidness was exposed.

And we still dont know the extent of the scam. Lot of it is still hidden I think. When people were making bets on bets on bets, it gets super complicated super fast. The only way to truly know would have been to let the banks and big biz fail. It would have been super painful, but it would have taught everybody some very important lessons and shown up lot weaknesses in current economic system.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

HermitJohn said:


> And politicians let them because BIG BUISINESS got them elected with anonymous mega donations to fake political action groups. Remember our Supreme Court ruled that BIG BUISINESS is people too and can anonymously spend as much as they want to put who they want into office.


You(and you alone) are responsible for your vote. If you sold it, you are responsible for whatever goes wrong. Its all about personal responsibility.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

zong said:


> I break laws every single day. I don't bother pretending there's a cause involved. I do what I think is best for me. By the same token, I don't go down to the bank and borrow a million bucks just because they'll lend it to me, neither. That couldn't possibly be good for me. Personal responsibility. I got to answer to what I agreed to.


But that guy that would lend you a million dollars should be responsible to his share holders. Very few banks in the world are owned by individual robber barons. But once that guy makes lot bad loans, he isnt wealthy enough to reimburse for damages caused, so exactly how do they get even again? Thats why you need government watchdog that is serious. Otherwise the house of cards just tumbles hurting everybody. Its not just bunch independent super wealthy people out there that will be affected, there are lot little people screwed coming and going plus lot of other buisinesses. In other words a few irresponsible people without regulation and serious oversight can bring down the whole world economy and make life very unpleasant for everybody.


----------



## InvalidID (Feb 18, 2011)

zong said:


> You(and you alone) are responsible for your vote. If you sold it, you are responsible for whatever goes wrong. Its all about personal responsibility.


 Yes, but he nor you or I are responsible for the votes of others. I often (more often than not) don't get the candidate that I voted for. I end up with people like McCain and Obama to choose between because so many of the rest of our society is semi retarded. So what then? Am I now responsible for your vote? Tricky's vote? Tinks vote? Am I to blame for how the majority (and often not even the majority) vote?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yep, I have heard of Rosa Parks.... she is the lady that walked to work (no law against that) instead of riding the bus coz she didnt like the seating arrangements. She didnt stop the bus, didnt camp out in front of it, didnt throw rocks and bottles at anyone.... she simply walked where she needed to go.


I think you need to read up on history a bit more, cause you have it wrong. She didn't walk, she sat in the front of the bus and refused to move.


----------



## SquashNut (Sep 25, 2005)

HermitJohn said:


> President Shrub encouraged Fed to make artificially low interest rates to promote real estate bubble. Our manufacturing was disappearing so the real estate bubble made it look like the economy was still growing. The real estate bubble along with cheap petroleum was hiding a fragile economy. The big bank scam just popped that bubble and the emperor's nekkidness was exposed.
> 
> And we still dont know the extent of the scam. Lot of it is still hidden I think. When people were making bets on bets on bets, it gets super complicated super fast. The only way to truly know would have been to let the banks and big biz fail. It would have been super painful, but it would have taught everybody some very important lessons and shown up lot weaknesses in current economic system.


The politicians play the stock market too. i beleive they let it get this bad because they just like any other wall street player were making big money. Both through stocks and kick backs. But let's not fool our selves into thinking this was going on for so short of time as only Bush's term.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

HermitJohn said:


> President Shrub encouraged Fed to make artificially low interest rates to promote real estate bubble.


Keep that up, and maybe someday it will be true.
But as of now, it is FALSE.
President BUSH, and no he isn't a shrub at [email protected]!!!!!
in fact PRESIDENT BUSH tried to put Regulations BACK on the banks after CLINTON put the rules in play..........


----------



## EasyDay (Aug 28, 2004)

tinknal said:


> personal insult to another member was here.


Wow. Just Wow.
Very immature to start winging personal stuff out there that NONE of us needed to know.

A new glimpse into your character, for sure, tinknal!


----------



## Farmerwilly2 (Oct 14, 2006)

Research Frank-Dodd. Learn something.

As for OWS the same phrase keeps coming to mind:

*USEFUL IDIOTS!

*From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search 
For other uses, see Useful idiot (disambiguation).
In political jargon, the term useful idiot was used to describe Soviet sympathizers in Western countries. The implication is that though the people in question naÃ¯vely thought themselves an ally of the Soviet Union, they were actually held in contempt and were being cynically used. The term has been extended to other people perceived as propagandists for a cause they do not understand.


----------



## Jim Bunton (Mar 16, 2004)

Txrider said:


> Problem is our middle class isn't building anything any more.. Chinese workers are. So we are giving up our middle class jobs in order to buy cheap foreign goods.. We're just now being hit with the real consequences of that choice we made as consumers now in the form of unemployment and stagnant wages.


Txrider, that is a commonly believed myth. We are only doing poorly compared to a standard we have set for the last 100+ years as far and away the world leader in manufacturing. During that time we averaged over 25% of world wide manufacturing. In 2010 China surpassed us in manufacturing producing 19.8% of the worlds goods compared to the U.S. at 19.4%. That is a long way from not building any thing. China is doing this with a work force of 100 million in the manufacturing sector while the U. S. has only 11.5 million workers in the same sector.


----------



## InvalidID (Feb 18, 2011)

Jim Bunton said:


> Txrider, that is a commonly believed myth. We are only doing poorly compared to a standard we have set for the last 100+ years as far and away the world leader in manufacturing. During that time we averaged over 25% of world wide manufacturing. In 2010 China surpassed us in manufacturing producing 19.8% of the worlds goods compared to the U.S. at 19.4%. That is a long way from not building any thing. China is doing this with a work force of 100 million in the manufacturing sector while the U. S. has only 11.5 million workers in the same sector.


 Oh but that's counted in dollars not goods. We make one plane and sell it for a few hundred mil, China has to produce a lot of IPads to catch up to that.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

A lot more Ipads than planes out there though. I've no idea the ratio, but my grandson wants an Ipad for Christmas, and he'll get one. On the other hand, if he wanted a plane, probably not...


----------



## EasyDay (Aug 28, 2004)

zong said:


> A lot more Ipads than planes out there though. I've no idea the ratio, but my grandson wants an Ipad for Christmas, and he'll get one. On the other hand, if he wanted a plane, probably not...


Good point. I always wanted a Tomahawk missile mounted on my hill, but they were a million bucks apiece. Now that they're only half that, maybe I can get someone to buy me one for Christmas! Yes? 

(Yes, I'm serious about wanting one! )


----------



## unregistered41671 (Dec 29, 2009)

tyusclan said:


> I am constantly amazed, that here on a forum dedicated to self-reliance, we have so many members that approve of and encourage more government interference in our lives.
> 
> The fact that someone has a lot of money does not necessarily mean they got it because of 'greed'.


Correct, thank you.


----------



## InvalidID (Feb 18, 2011)

zong said:


> A lot more Ipads than planes out there though. I've no idea the ratio, but my grandson wants an Ipad for Christmas, and he'll get one. On the other hand, if he wanted a plane, probably not...


 Yes, there are more IPads than planes. But the manufacture of everyday stuff employs more people than the manufacture of planes and big ticket items, which is why we are still in the mix for manufacturing at all.


----------



## Jim Bunton (Mar 16, 2004)

InvalidID said:


> Oh but that's counted in dollars not goods. We make one plane and sell it for a few hundred mil, China has to produce a lot of IPads to catch up to that.


Takes a few more hours to build a plane then an Ipad, but you are right about that being part of it. We are best suited for innovation and high end products that require a better educated work force. That is where we are falling behind for the first time since the founding of our country, and is something to worry about.

Jim


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

EasyDay said:


> Wow. Just Wow.
> Very immature to start winging personal stuff out there that NONE of us needed to know.
> 
> A new glimpse into your character, for sure, tinknal!


Well, Thank God the Morality police finally showed up to say that my personal life is not sufficient to make political comment. I mean, none of us(or them) has ever done anything as bad as me, right?? Long as my opinion don't coincide with his.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

reluctantpatriot said:


> I think you nailed it right there. There are too many people without the backbone to stand up for what is right. Those that do stand up get belittled by the spineless complainers.



Agree. 

Glad to see someone standing up for what they believe in.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

tinknal said:


> there was a quote of a deleted post here..


Wow Tink, 

Just wow, who the heck are you to judge Zong? Who are you to judge ANYONE?


----------



## beccachow (Nov 8, 2008)

KOS, kudos to your husband for standing up for what he believes in. "I don't agree with what you are saying, but I will defend to my death your right to say it."

And I could get into the legalities, the cause, who they are protesting, why, but I will simply leave it at this.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> They were arrested for violating the curfew. They did not offer any resistance.
> 
> The Constitution gives us the right to assemble peaceably.
> 
> ...


The USC also gives you the right to free speech yet I'm sure you don't have a problem with the fact its illegal to yell "FIRE" in a crowded place. Or do you? The point is all rights come with limits. 

But on another issue. From my reading of the story the curfew was not a special law passed to prevent this protest but a long standing law. Most cities have them because they actually do increase public safety w/o unduly infringing on the people's rights. Therefore to say that his getting arrested for breaking curfew was a way to stand up for the right of public assembly or free speech is just stupid.


----------



## EasyDay (Aug 28, 2004)

zong said:


> Well, Thank God the Morality police finally showed up to say that my personal life is not sufficient to make political comment. I mean, none of us(or them) has ever done anything as bad as me, right?? Long as my opinion don't coincide with his.


Actually, I was hoping that you'd buy me that Tomahawk for jumping in! 
They're 1/2 price, for goodness sakes.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

TheMartianChick said:


> Actually, she refused to give up her seat which was against the law at that time. It wasn't until she was bailed out of jail that she began walking to get to her destination.


Rosa Parks is a great example of the "small insignificant" person doing what needed to be done: i.e. breaking the law at the time to make the laws better!

I have always thought Rosa was someone to admire because she was REAL. I can imagine her saying, "no". My grandma would have done the same. Both were from the same era and my grandma would have supported Rosa and told her " I tole you not to git up, you done been working all day long, you jist sit there and they kin git thair own seat"..

My grandma was for the rights of the oppressed. And she was a tiny little thang, 5" maybe and maybe weighed 100 lbs. soaking wet. But she knew right from wrong and what was what.

Too bad not more people do.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

zong said:


> Well, Thank God the Morality police finally showed up to say that my personal life is not sufficient to make political comment. I mean, none of us(or them) has ever done anything as bad as me, right?? Long as my opinion don't coincide with his.



Zong I remember that gal.. too bad it did not work out. What is astonishing to me is that back in the day..many men married women much younger than they were. 

What the hay? It was good for the gal and good for the man. He got heirs, she got his fortune. 

Yep..check it out..England, Europe, most of America at one time or another have had men marry women a lot younger than themselves.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

......


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2011)

Tricky Grama said:


> Tell us what cause is that? Tell us who's behind OWS? Tell us what the majority of OWS believes.


Closed minded drivel like this is exactly why I have little faith that we may regain some justice in this country. I only said I admired him for standing up for a cause (his) what ever it may be. I also admire you for standing up for yours, which appears to be to stifle the first amendment by badgering and belittling, a common tactic of those less tolerant of others opinions.


----------



## InvalidID (Feb 18, 2011)

dlmcafee said:


> Closed minded drivel like this is exactly why I have little faith that we may regain some justice in this country. I only said I admired him for standing up for a cause (his) what ever it may be. I also admire you for standing up for yours, which appears to be to stifle the first amendment by badgering and belittling, a common tactic of those less tolerant of others opinions.


 Well said.


----------

