OCCUPY WALLSTREET!

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by valithteezee [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Police are not the enemy of the "movement" and should be treated with respect.

Your scenario was symbolic and in no way hurt the officer. There's no justification of bludgeoning here. The term appropriate force would mean that the officer can only respond if he feels endangered. Otherwise, he legally obligated to maintain composure and turn the other cheek. That's how you earn respect. Respect is not owed to you just because you hide behind a badge and a gun.

Also, it looks like it's about time for the government to revitalize blind patriotism by concocting another fake war. Or are the American people smart enough to see through those after 25 years of perpetual conflict?

[Hasbinbad]

Originally Posted by valithteezee [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Police are not the enemy of the "movement" and should be treated with respect.

Well, I agree that they are not the enemy in theory, but the individuals who commit offenses against the constitution for a paycheck are. And those people are owed absolutely no respect. You're intentionally ignoring the fact that police were the original perpetrators of violence in nearly every case (I can't say "every," but I have yet to see a legitimate report of a occupy protestor doing anything to instigate violence without the police having already made overtures).

The people deserve respect too.

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How many times can you grab and pull a dogs tail before you get bit?

That's a question you should be asking of the government, industry, the media, and the riot police.

[vaylorie]

Come on guys... the Occupy Wall Street people just love America and want to reform it. They are good people:

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Hasbinbad]

Originally Posted by vaylorie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Come on guys... the Occupy Wall Street people just love America and want to reform it. They are good people:

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Come on guys... The Occupy Wall Street people just hate America and want to tear it down. They are violent, horrible people:
http://thesecondalarm.com/2011/11/20...student-leads/

[vaylorie]

Kraftwerk, I finally agree with Hasbinbad... you are a tool...

[Hasbinbad]

Originally Posted by vaylorie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Kraftwerk, I finally agree with Hasbinbad... you are a tool...

Please don't agree with me. I don't believe in guilt by association, but others may. Kraft makes a bunch of good points, but employs intentional ignorance as a tactic, and accuses me of logical fallacies which do not exist in my reasoning. He has been conditioned to be thus, and it is not all his fault (much like your situation).

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You keep referencing things as black and white and creating straw man arguments to refute points I wasn't even stating, it's as bad as varloye.

I don't see it that way. I know it is fallacious to assume of the general what is true from the specific, but in my anecdotal experience, libertarians generally refuse to see the good in a central government public works. I see that as a head-in-the-sand philosophy which is intentionally ignorant of the great things this country has done when funded heavily with taxes.

To promote my side of the argument, I only ask you to do some research on the following points:
What was the income tax rate in 1954?
What meaningful contributions to life, posterity, and the world did the United States make during that period of time?

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Being against a strong central government that abuses taxpayer money as well as creating massive public works rather than states taking it upon themselves definitely means plumbing shouldn't exist anymore.

I see your point with the black and white arguments from me, and raise you your own rhetoric (in bold above). If we're going to agree that theoretical ideals are something which can be bantered, at least give me that a central government needs not abuse taxpayer money, but that rather that is what exists in reality based on the silence of the people.

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Here is some information:

I pay a private company for power.
I pay my local municipality for water (plumbing).
I pay a private company for my gas.

Those local municipalities and private companies are generally subsidized and you know it. If your particular organization is not, then at least grant that most are. I applaud any effort to be more self-sufficient, especially if that means not using benefits which are available to you because you are not in need, but grant that there are those with legitimate need, and that helping those people become more contributory members of society is a long term goal consistent with good morality. I know you're going to cry black and white, but helping EVERYONE not get the bubonic plague helps YOU not get the plague too. Amirite?

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Should massive central government public works and federal income tax end, then states and the free market would supply what is demanded.

That is one possible outcome, but given human history, I have no reason to believe it is probable. What is more likely is that there will be private security forces ensuring that you buy only what they want you to buy either through manipulation at the personal level (if you buy jify pop instead of orville redenbockers, we'll rape your wife), at the storefront level (if you sell jify pop, we'll rape your wife), or at various distribution levels (if you deliver jify pop to the stores, trucks, ships, trains, we'll rape your wife). At the VERY least, control over choice via advertising (don't even think about arguing the power of advertising over "free choice" dude, the evidence in favor is damn near absolute) will be drastically increased.

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Also, what libertarians do you know who would support arresting an individual for marijuana use? It's an individuals right and responsibility.

Oh I wasn't saying that Libertarians supported that, I was just saying that you should say "go back to whatever it is that you're doing, and don't worry about me."

Most often, they're out arresting violent marijuana offenders..

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Hasbinbad [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

at various distribution levels (if you deliver jify pop to the stores, trucks, ships, trains, we'll rape your wife).

They already do this and get away with it, though [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Wish they would let me enjoy my jiffy pop in peace.

[Hasbinbad]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

They already do this and get away with it, though [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yes. That's one of the reasons we're out there. (I'm not out there right now coz I'm sick, probably one of the drum circles aoe'd disease cloud)

[Kraftwerk]

Originally Posted by Hasbinbad [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't see it that way. I know it is fallacious to assume of the general what is true from the specific, but in my anecdotal experience, libertarians generally refuse to see the good in a central government public works. I see that as a head-in-the-sand philosophy which is intentionally ignorant of the great things this country has done when funded heavily with taxes.

Yes, I am a libertarian. But I will concede I am not a staunch libertarian and I only choose this political alignment because the current state of our government is sickening. The current government spending is profligate and aids the few not the many. I can see the benefits of previous central government spending. I'll even toss out a few that I think aided the greater good and helped reinforce our national identity:

Mt Rushmore, Hoover Dam, National Parks system, Interstate Highway System.

Originally Posted by Hasbinbad [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

To promote my side of the argument, I only ask you to do some research on the following points:
What was the income tax rate in 1954?
What meaningful contributions to life, posterity, and the world did the United States make during that period of time?

Income tax rate is one thing, and in 1954 the progressive rate scaled pretty high and there were great contributions as a result of central government spending. There is another side to the coin though when analyzing historical statistics. For the sake of argument I'm using 2006 statistics since the tax code hasn't really changed between then and now. Let's take a gander at two stats one being inflation adjusted :

1st - http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_5aAsxFJOeM...es-pct-gdp.JPG

2nd - http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_5aAsxFJOeM...ax-revenue.JPG

(I tried to post these as an IMG but I fail)

Our tax collection as a % of GDP is unchanged, and (inflation adjusted) we are collecting nearly 5x the taxes we were collecting in 1954. This kind of spending is obscene and needs to be stopped. So we're collecting 500% the taxes (adjusted for inflation) compared to the 1950's. If the 1950's were a period where "...meaningful contributions to life, posterity, and the world..." were made by the US, then now we should be contributing 5 times as much since we're collecting 5 times more money! And yet the insane central government spending has gotten us exactly nowhere.

Originally Posted by Hasbinbad [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I see your point with the black and white arguments from me, and raise you your own rhetoric (in bold above). If we're going to agree that theoretical ideals are something which can be bantered, at least give me that a central government needs not abuse taxpayer money, but that rather that is what exists in reality based on the silence of the people.

This I can just completely agree with. If a central government is a necessity to improving standard of living and enabling the best possible social contract than taxpayer money needs to be pointed in the right directions. And since the US Government in 1954 achieved such admirable things with a mere ~20% of our current tax revenue, imagine what a competent government could do if they slashed taxes by half currently. They would still have 2.5x the funds of the US Government in 1954!

Originally Posted by Hasbinbad [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Those local municipalities and private companies are generally subsidized and you know it. If your particular organization is not, then at least grant that most are. I applaud any effort to be more self-sufficient, especially if that means not using benefits which are available to you because you are not in need, but grant that there are those with legitimate need, and that helping those people become more contributory members of society is a long term goal consistent with good morality. I know you're going to cry black and white, but helping EVERYONE not get the bubonic plague helps YOU not get the plague too. Amirite?

So let's assume they are subsidized, the US Government as of 2011 will spend $5.87B this year on Energy, and $11.81B on Water. ~$3.67T is the total spending for the US Government this year. So Water/Energy combined comes to 0.4817% of total government spending this year. And that's just broad Water/Energy, I didn't even delve into the specifics to find out how much went where and why. Let's compare that to another government project, currently halted, and see where necessities to life add up on the list of priorities. The F-22 Raptor Project cost us $67.6B. That's nearly 4x Water/Energy combined in 2011, for a shelved military aviation project! Our government is spending things properly...

Originally Posted by Hasbinbad [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That is one possible outcome, but given human history, I have no reason to believe it is probable. What is more likely is that there will be private security forces ensuring that you buy only what they want you to buy either through manipulation at the personal level (if you buy jify pop instead of orville redenbockers, we'll rape your wife), at the storefront level (if you sell jify pop, we'll rape your wife), or at various distribution levels (if you deliver jify pop to the stores, trucks, ships, trains, we'll rape your wife). At the VERY least, control over choice via advertising (don't even think about arguing the power of advertising over "free choice" dude, the evidence in favor is damn near absolute) will be drastically increased.

Obviously advertising is powerful, but the consumer does have the ability to 'choose' which product most appealed to them through advertising. I think a retraction in government size and retention of anti-trust policies and regulation don't have to be mutually exclusive. I live in gray areas, I admit that not all my beliefs here are staunchly libertarian, but we've progressed beyond the ability to continue without a social contract including a central government. My belief is that that central government not behave as harmfully and carefree with our money as they have.

If a thief robs you once, you can try to convert his ways to prevent that robbery from occuring again in the future. If a thief robs you again, you're left with the responsibility. That is the situation we're currently in with our government. They've stolen from us to supply failed banks with direct lines of liquidity from The Fed and Treasury Dept. Once they realized they could get away with it, there is nothing to stop them from continuing to do it, except closing the purse. Cutting government funding will result in cutting government spending. The debt bubble has to end before the healing can begin. Let me get down to some brass tacks on USD$ Government spending though to show you how spending has gotten out of control completely and needs to be cut drastically:

All of this is in 2011 USD:

Eisenhower Interstate Highway System, the largest public works project in the history of mankind. Cost to the taxpayer - $465.97B. Less than half a trillion dollars to create jobs and improve our infrastructure.

NEA-estimated cost to bring ALL us schools into good repair. Cost to the taxpayer - $413.3B. Even less than the Highway System!

2011 Military Spending - $703.03B
Outstanding and just pure losses for the taxpayer on the TARP 'investment' into failed banks. This being a completely socialist action going against the capitalist free market in which a failing company should fail, not be rewarded for failing - $186.1B
Interest on Debt 2011 - $198.87B

The combined military and failed bank spending in 2011 alone accounts for nearly $1T. The cost to improve our infrastructure rather than support failed banks and over-extend the United States abroad would not only reduce annual maintenance costs, but also create jobs at home to build and repair our nation.

US Tax Revenue now is too massive and it merely enables the government to spend as if there is no tomorrow, because for the career politicians and the parasitic bankers who've invaded governments around the globe, they don't care if there is one as long as they have their safety net. The only way to stop an addict is cut off his supply.

And as a sarcastic PS - I drive a Jeep Grand Cherokee so I'm fine with offroading wherever.

[Hasbinbad]

er, i dunno why that quoted kraftwerk... got tripped up in my copy pastes.. sorry.