It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by newcovenant
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
"I believe that entitlements for those in need should be a basic right of citizenship."
This is difficult to answer because I agree there should be some entitlements for those in need but to claim them as a right to citizenship is a bit too much. You cannot have rights that take from anyone else and I am a liberal Democrat saying that. As citizens, we have rights - as a country, we have aspirations and principles.
I had the same problem with this question, and I am a conservative Independent. And, I had the same problem with the "right to a college education" question, for the same reason. Which tells us...what? That we need to agree on what are considered as "rights" before we'll be able to make progress.
edit on 8-10-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)
We are seeing wealth confiscation, no different than when FDR confiscated the gold from the American people to save the banks, only this time, done in a covert way to trick Americans into thinking it was their own fault they lost their homes. But again, this was the result of official US policy which gave tax credits to corporations that actually encouraged offshoring of American jobs. In short, the US Government took their jobs to make it easer for the banks to take their homes, to save themselves from going to prison over the mortgage-backed securities fraud.Iceland had the right solution. They tossed the crooked bankers in jail and fired the government that tried to loot the people to save those bankers and Iceland's economy is already on the rise. (Which is why you don't see much mention of them any more in the American media)That is it in a nutshell!
[Editor's Note: The "tell" is the publicity this is getting from the TV Networks who spin it as the Democratic Party equivalent of the Tea Party.]
Originally posted by Oscillator
I am very confused about all of this. It's like socialists hijacked anon and turned their focus against free markets and capitalism, or something
Occupy FED, sure, Occupy congress, sure, they make policy. Wall Street however is just a medium.
Originally posted by nenothtu
Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst
If you want 100% purity and fairness from the other side, before the Robber Barons make nice -- good luck with that. But it seems you expect more integrity from the OWS movement than from the people who you inadvertently defend by criticizing such peccadillos.
We expect integrity from those claiming to be fighting for... integrity. If they can't even uphold their own alleged ideals amongst themselves, what can the rest of us reasonably expect at their hands?
It appears they just want to replace one set of corrupt master with... another set of corrupt masters. where is the net gain there?
Wow. The 99% group is upset about corruption and a rigged system.
Your complaints about the OWS movement, are based on people with iPods -- this is hypocrisy?
Your ideals that "OWS" people need to uphold -- seem to be based on OLD arguments.
It seems to me, that your logic dictates that in order to stop Banks from using derivatives on their sub-prime mortgages, poor minorities are supposed to NOT want to live in homes
The OWS isn't getting started by a think-tank. It isn't about someone trying to make a buck.
Regardless of your ridicule -- this movement is going to grow, because more and more of us "don't have anything better to do."
>> Last month, my water got shut off due to my lack of funds. So I'm a guy with a laptop who might be a little dirty. I suppose I've got to give up my car, the asian electronics in my work machine -- and live the life of a hermit. Of course, CNN would still ignore me.
Originally posted by Druid42
The OWS is a blanket protest. It has spread, to Australia and England. I hope it continues.
What is the message? Is there one?
Yes, it's about the uselessness of government in serving the needs of the people. Our governments are so far from the people, the world over, that we seriously need to address the shortcomings.
This is what this is about.