It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

51% See Occupy Wall Street Protesters As Public Nuisance

page: 7
12
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 


So let me male sure im understanding you correctly. You understand that not only does a small group of people control what happens with trillions, but thzt trillions exist at all. And knowing that there are trillions out there beimg spent for ill, you cant ageee that 40k of that tril can be used to put someone through college? The money is oit there thats not a crazy.demznd. Not only that.but a population with higher education has a higher chamce.of contributing greatly to not only the economy but society as a whole. We're not trying to put doctors oit of work, if health care were free thered be.more patients for them lol
edit on 10-1-2012 by jacktherer because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by jacktherer
 


No I can't. because in the end it is people like me that wind up paying taxes for someone else's healthcare. Why should I pay for some junkie or welfare baby breeder? Or how about the 600lbs tub of lard? No thanks. I will pay for my own. Conversely, why should I have to pay for someone else's child to attend college? Not my issue, and not willing to pay for someone else to get a degree. I will attend to my own, as it should be.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 




Youre not the only one that pays taxes. Youre not the ony one that works hard. addicts and whalepeople are not the only people the only people that need treatment. the least that could be done was for insurance companies to lower rates to something along the lines of idk affordable? Same goes for education. And thats only if you cant think of a betrer thing to spend $ 70000000000000.00 on.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by jacktherer
 


No I can't. because in the end it is people like me that wind up paying taxes for someone else's healthcare. Why should I pay for some junkie or welfare baby breeder? Or how about the 600lbs tub of lard? No thanks. I will pay for my own. Conversely, why should I have to pay for someone else's child to attend college? Not my issue, and not willing to pay for someone else to get a degree. I will attend to my own, as it should be.


That would work if everyone had the same chances to "make it"...but in reality it's clear that this simply isn't the case. Also, you might not wanna pay for someone else, but the reality is, if there's no system in place to deal with issues like that, the follow up costs are often A LOT higher.

To give you a healthcare example:

A guy in Cali had issues with his intestine. But since he couldn't afford insurance, he tried to operate on himself (no joke!!!), because in his eyes, it was the only way to survive. What happened? He obviously ended up almost killing himself, cops had to be dispatched, an ambulance had to be dispatched, the emergency operation and longer stay at the hospital added a TON of costs...so in the end, simply ensuring that guy had proper healthcare would have been the cheaper option for the tax payer.

Also, a main reason for house foreclosures is that people are suddenly faced with massive healthcare bills (we all know how expensive that is in the US) they couldn't pay. So them not having healthcare was directly responsible for making the crisis worse, costing millions of people their jobs, therefore once again increasing costs.

You can't just look at things in isolation! Calculate the opportunity costs of not having proper systems in place and you'll realize that the healthcare option is the cheaper option than the status quo.

That's why RP's "less regulation" (let's face it, if he could he'd get rid of all of it) is so insane. He has some good ideas, but when he comes up with crap like "abolish the environmental protection agency", or claiming that a "voluntary pledge of not accepting bribes from lobbyists" is enough to curb corruption, it's pretty clear that he's unelectable. His financial reform opinions are just as insane to be honest.

Of course a ton of his supporters simply ignore that...and/or get really mad when you point out those FACTS.

edit on 10-1-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Less regulation is in fact what is needed. Not saying no regulation, just focused. There is a difference. I agree with more affordable healthcare. It has only been in the last 30 some odd years that it has gone out of reach for most Americans. This is the fault of corrupt officials and regulators that do not have the American people's interest in mind. It is also the fault of frivolous law suits. People using medicine as a get rich scheme. lawyers will sue for anything hoping to get a big settlement. in the end we all end up paying for it. So let's throw the blame where it actually lies, and not put it on the backs of average Americans.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by jacktherer
reply to post by haarvik
 




Youre not the only one that pays taxes. Youre not the ony one that works hard. addicts and whalepeople are not the only people the only people that need treatment. the least that could be done was for insurance companies to lower rates to something along the lines of idk affordable? Same goes for education. And thats only if you cant think of a betrer thing to spend $ 70000000000000.00 on.


Sure they can, they're quite happy spending that money on bombing innocent babies in Iran, Iraq, Afghanastan, and now Libya. They're fine with it as long as they can get their petrol/gas whatever you call it on your part of the globe.

Remember that it's ok to spend trillions on vicous wars over poppy (Opium) and oil as long as the elite are benefitting off it and as long as they can trickle it down so the poster above can keep driving his hummer all over.

But God frobid it be spent to educate the masses or make them healthier. It also seems ok to send it to Africa where it never helps anyone but the government there, because they're hellping the "poor, shritless starving africans".

edit on 10-1-2012 by ldyserenity because: to add



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Less regulation is in fact what is needed. Not saying no regulation, just focused. There is a difference. I agree with more affordable healthcare. It has only been in the last 30 some odd years that it has gone out of reach for most Americans. This is the fault of corrupt officials and regulators that do not have the American people's interest in mind. It is also the fault of frivolous law suits. People using medicine as a get rich scheme. lawyers will sue for anything hoping to get a big settlement. in the end we all end up paying for it. So let's throw the blame where it actually lies, and not put it on the backs of average Americans.


And less regulation will result in those crooks being able to keep that advantage. Dodd-Frank was the result of less regulation as all the crucial aspects were nuked. So in essence, nothing that caused this current economic crisis is prevented from happening again!

No one likes bureaucracy and unnecessary regulations. But categorically saying "less regulation" is the best way is short sighted...which is why I believe RP is unelectable.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   
And if you beleieve that bombing babies is not happening then watch this thread video:
I cried when I saw this NATO bombing innocent babies...



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Why should I pay for roads that I don't use. Why should I be required to pay for fire engines not in my direct area? Why should I pay for police force if my area is crime free? Why should I pay for __________

The old adage "death and taxes" apply here. Humans are social creatures and rely on one another in order to survive and it's been that way since before the beginning of time. If you want some sort of government then you will have to pay taxes, there isn't a way around it. That's not to say that you can't advocate how the taxes should be spent (I understand where you are coming from).

But wouldn't you rather it go towards something that benefits the whole (free health care, and collage education) rather than it go towards killing other people (wars, military industrial complex), or sweet heart contracting deals, or foreign aid? Hell what about the bail outs that cost 14 trillion dollars? Where did that money go? For that amount I can bet we would have been able to finance free health care and undergraduate studies for 10 years or more.

We already pay crazy amounts for medicaid/medicare and tuition assistance and grants which includes unnecessary red tape and inefficiency. How can the richest country in the world with less that 3% of the world population look people in the eye and say they can't afford it when other 1st world countries (and some third world) are able to do so and do so efficiently? I'll answer my own question, it is because those funds are used to bomb other countries and fatten the pockets of rotten dirty scoundrels that's why.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Chewingonmushrooms
 




Thats exactly the point I was making. The money is there its not farfetched



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 


Proper regulation is what's needed. The regulations we have now only benefit the top or they bribe their way out, and the hurt the middle and bottom. Then the top gets to say, see regulation doesn't work get rid of it all.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Chewingonmushrooms
 


No one said I was advocating war or bailouts. I simply do not agree with paying for someone else's education or healthcare. Yes, we are social. And prior to our politically correct movement, people took care of their own. It has only been in the last 50 years that we decided we needed to support those who refused to support themselves. Yes, there are those who are not capable of doing it, and we used to provide care for them. I have no problem with that. Those that are capable, but either pretend they are not or just refuse to be capable are the ones that have pushed the rest of us against it. One bad apple spoils the whole bunch.

Is corporatism to blame? Partly. But we ourselves are also to blame. We keep re-electing the morons who allow it to happen. You can't put spoiled milk back in the fridge and expect it to be good tomorrow. It won't happen. Until we as a nation get our heads out of our asses and start replacing these bozos no amount of protesting is gonna change anything. You have to start somewhere, and a good start is steering this ship back to our founding documents. Everything needed to run this country is in there. It is not open for interpretation nor negotiation. We need leaders who understand this and are willing to guide our government back to where it belongs. We don't have to agree 100% with a candidate, but we have got to agree that the most important issue is returning us to our founding principals. Once we do that, the rest will start to fall into place.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


That's exactly what I said.
More red tape does not fix the problem. Specific, targeted regulations are needed. Cut the bloat and remove people from positions of power where there is a conflict of interest. You can't have the head of the FDA being a former big pharma executive and expect anything to change.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 




I agree that we all shzre the blame but not due to our election choices. Every politician has a price tag and unfortunately.not enough lobbyists buy with the peoples interests



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by haarvik
 


Fair enough and you make many valid points. Personally I'm not so sure that simply voting out the crooks is enough to make any real difference. The change will have to happen within the people themselves first and government will have no choice but to follow. That's why I believe in non participation so strongly.

And I agree that government isn't the only ones to blame, because we have ourselves to blame as well. No one (including myself at times) wants to take responsibility for this mess. That's why I respect OWS and to a cetain extent the Tea Party (though I disagree strongly with some of their ideology). Even though both come from different wings with different proposals as to how to bring about change, they are both fighting for the same basic thing.


edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chewingonmushrooms
reply to post by haarvik
 


Fair enough and you make many valid points. Personally I'm not so sure that simply voting out the crooks is enough to make any real difference. The change will have to happen within the people themselves first and government will have no choice but to follow. That's why I believe in non participation so strongly.

And I agree that government isn't the only ones to blame, because we have ourselves to blame as well. No one (including myself at times) wants to take responsibility for this mess. That's why I respect OWS and to a cetain extent the Tea Party (though I disagree strongly with some of their ideology). Even though both come from different wings with different proposals as to how to bring about change, they are both fighting for the same basic thing.


edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)


Until they fix the entire lobbying system, nothing will ever change. EVERYONE is corruptible, EVERYONE! You might not like to admit that, but it's a simply fact. If I came to you and said "make sure that those environmental protections get lifted so we don't have to waste all that money on making sure our factories are clean...here's $100,000", you might say "no" at first. But what if I offered you $500,000 and a job paying $1m a year after that? Still saying no? What about $2m and a cushy chairman job on a few companies for another nice $5m+ per year? That enough?

Everyone has a price, and essentially, they're all bought sock puppets due to a corrupt campaign finance and lobbying system. Sadly, the people in power to fix it are the very same people benefitting of that corruption



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I agree with you. Not only do they bribe you but they also use intimidation, blackmail and compartmentalization through party hierarchy. Almost everyone has some bones in their closet, and guess what? They will find it. If you don't have a price, then they will threaten to smear you through MSM, or threaten you and your family. Of maybe fund a counter campaign in the next election cycle and out spend you, while they put someone in that will "play by the rules".

The simplistic "crooked officials" just doesn't do anymore. The whole system with money incentive and power lust is what drives politics, corrupted officials are a byproduct of the system itself, not the cause.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chewingonmushrooms
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I agree with you. Not only do they bribe you but they also use intimidation, blackmail and compartmentalization through party hierarchy. Almost everyone has some bones in their closet, and guess what? They will find it. If you don't have a price, then they will threaten to smear you through MSM, or threaten you and your family. Of maybe fund a counter campaign in the next election cycle and out spend you, while they put someone in that will "play by the rules".

The simplistic "crooked officials" just doesn't do anymore. The whole system with money incentive and power lust is what drives politics, corrupted officials are a byproduct of the system itself, not the cause.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)


A good example is what the GOP did the second they reached a majority in congress. They went to all companies who send lobbyists to Washington, and told them that from now on, they will block every single bill unless they send Republican lobbyists. Unethical, undemocratic, and beyond wrong. The sad part is, the Democrats probably pull of similar crap.

The US needs a REAL campaign and lobbying reform. That has to happen before anything else, because everything depends on it. That's why people like Ron Paul who say it's enough to make politicians sign a VOLUNTARY PLEDGE to not accept those bribes is LAUGHABLE. By saying this one thing, it's very clear that he's just as useless as Romney and the other bought sock puppets. Sadly



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
All I'm reading is bickering back and forth regarding people not wanting to pay for other people and what not, that is the jist of it. Regardless of the arguments there is one clear point that everyone here is making, there is plenty of corrupt officials serving the community.

That is where the argument starts and finishes.

What are people going to do about these corrupt officials? Nothing because they only care about themselves. As long as their health-care is paid for and they have jobs who cares about the guy getting screwed down the street, right?

Well that guy down the street is going to be you one day and the guy up the street will still have his health benefits and will still be earning money. Then one day you and the guy down the street try to make a change and you are labeled a lunatic for proposing someone fix a broken system.

This is what is happening today. America is going to go down if the monetary system is not changed and many don't care because most of the people have a job still. Once people lose their jobs they start to panic. Once the people start to panic the 1% start to panic. Once the 1% start to panic the 99% are lead to a world war to push the debt up ahead by 10-15 years.

Never ending cycle of ignorance.


edit on 10-1-2012 by Equinox99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
OWS’ers are still out making a scene even though the MSM coverage of their activities has sharply fallen off. They have recently interrupted Ron Paul and Mitt Romney as the two addressed audiences in their bid to secure the Republican nomination. But what do American’s think about OWS these days? A new Rasmussen poll on this subject had some interesting results.

Enough is enough as far as most voters are concerned when it comes to the Occupy Wall Street protesters. In fact, 51% of Likely U.S. Voters now view the protesters as a public nuisance. Only 39% see them as a valid protest movement representing the frustrations of most Americans.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey also finds that just 24% think the Occupy Wall Street protesters who first began their protests in early October have gotten their message across to the American people. Fifty-three percent (53%) say they have not gotten their message across, and another 24% are not sure.
The national survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on January 3-4, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports.

Ras mussen

The list of crimes keeps growing and the public support keeps falling.

So where does OWS go from here? Obviously they do not represent the 99% when 51% consider them a nuisance. What is the point of continued protests if the population is sick of them? What do they hope to accomplish at this point?


edit on 9-1-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)


This just in! Recent polls taken by MSM shows non-MSM favorable activities are frown upon by the majority.

This also just in! According to polls taken by the MSM, not a single person in America wants Ron Paul for president.




top topics



 
12
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join