What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

This picture is from Oakland.
433134641.jpg


Iraq War veteran @jtowersSF also linked this video:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/OZLyUK0t0vQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
It's graphic and contains some NSFW language at the end.
He also reports




Different police forces are taking very different approaches to this around the country.

ETA: Faux "News" sheep are now being told the Occupy movement is being led by <del>Islamofascists</del> <del>Communist thugs</del> ACORN! It's like they have a Wheel of Scapegoats and they spin it whenever they have to pin the blame on someone.

ETA2: It gets even better. Now they're pinning it on someone else.

The Red Army? Next they'll somehow imply Mao is behind this. Napoleon? Maybe the force behind the protesters is the Ivan the Terrible?

Congratulations to the mayor and police chief of Oakland for doing their jobs. If the punks didn't want to be treated like lawbreakers they should have stopped breaking the law. Their pathetic First Amendment rights to "protest" do not transcend the rights of everyone else (especially local taxpayers) to enjoy life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in Oakland. But like their ideological predecessors from the 60's and 70's, these losers figure they're patched in to some higher moral reality. They think their puerile "protests" give them carte blanche to do whatever they want, whenever they want, wherever they want without consequence. Well, here's a flash: the rest of us have rights, too. And when the inevitable conflict with authorities comes, they want to whine and portray themselves as "victims." Even though the conflict with the cops is exactly what they want. A few cracked skulls always makes for good TV. And there are plenty of credulous people out there willing to buy in to their mythology. It's all carefully choreographed agit-prop, with the "useful idiots" doing their thing. They want it both ways: they're brave revolutionaries standing up to the forces of evil, but "I've got rights, I want a lawyer, the cops messed up my hair, etc." Screw 'em. Give 'em the gas. Arrest 'em. One hopes mayors in other cities with chunks of territory being held hostage by these bums will wake up and smell the coffee, too. As I say, if you're playing revolutionary, you've got to expect somebody's gonna take you seriously sooner or later.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

The religious right: do as we preach, not as we do.

I am not a social conservative. But don't let that get in the way of your bigotry. Since when is libtards sh*tting on police cars a religious matter, anyway? It's the libtards running this circus who want to see blood on TV.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

I am not a social conservative. But don't let that stand in the way of your bigotry. It's the libtards running this circus who want to see blood on TV.
Exactly, he just uses and writes right wing social and fiscal conservative talking points, that doesn't make him one.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

It's more about the source of the water: "American water is a failure... every other country's water is much wetter"
No matter what you compare, by any metric, a certain mentality of people will always hate their own backgrounds and circumstances, and consider everyone else to be "better". (I didn't say "liberals"; you thought of that yourself:))
It's a "grass is greener" mentality combined with self-loathing.

Its less of self condemnation of our team. Its more self evaluation and identifying opportunities for improvement.

One might say some (I didn't say "conservatives :)) would congratulate our team regardless of their shortcomings...while others look to improve our team because they value it.

The religious right: do as we preach, not as we do.

Don't include the adjective religious here. The majority of religious people I know (and I know quite a few) would rather go and donate their own time working in low income neighborhoods than watch TV.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Its less of self condemnation of our team. Its more self evaluation and identifying opportunities for improvement.
It's believable when you say it. You're not so much fun to troll.

Now, something I wonder about... a lot of the protesting is about high unemployment levels. There have been some rumblings that the economy is slowly coming back, and durable goods investment is up; but because of continued advances in automation a lot of the production investment is going to computers/robots/etc. rather than hiring people. So: will unemployment remain sky high and society eventually be rejiggered so that we all can benefit from the increased productivity made available by automation? Or do we all need to learn programming, networking etc. skills to get a decent job in future? Or what?
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Its less of self condemnation of our team. Its more self evaluation and identifying opportunities for improvement.
Correct. There are two broad approaches to any potential problem: engagement or denial. People who want to deny something is a problem will of course resent people who want to change that thing, and vice versa. Each is challenging the other's worldview.

"Hating America" is a different thing, though, because it's not a term that's evenly applied. If things were equal, you'd expect the side that supported the status quo to always accuse reformers of "hating America." But that doesn't happen when the reformers are conservative.

Liberal reforms: women's rights, civil rights, reduction of wealth inequality, legalize gay marriage, end wars (various), increase civil penalties. Derisive terms: America hater, coward, Godless, Communist.

Conservative reforms: end abortion, end welfare, end progressive taxation, increase criminal penalties. Derisive terms: Bible thumper, warmonger, plutocrat, Fascist.

The asymmetry is that conservative reformers get called all the nasty issue-derived things that liberal reformers do except America Hater. Liberal reformers don't tend to frame their desires in terms of patriotism or religion, or at least they don't during this particular era. Maybe this is because conservative reformers tend to base their legitimacy in both abstract principles (freedom, righteousness, strength) and sacred texts (the Bible, the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence) while liberals tend to base theirs only in abstract principles (justice, fairness, kindness).
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

It's believable when you say it. You're not so much fun to troll.

Now, something I wonder about... a lot of the protesting is about high unemployment levels. There have been some rumblings that the economy is slowly coming back, and durable goods investment is up; but because of continued advances in automation a lot of the production investment is going to computers/robots/etc. rather than hiring people. So: will unemployment remain sky high and society eventually be rejiggered so that we all can benefit from the increased productivity made available by automation? Or do we all need to learn programming, networking etc. skills to get a decent job in future? Or what?

I'll choose option C. The jobs that we've lost to increased productivity/overseas are not coming back. I highly doubt a new technology is coming that is going to employ 20 million people. And there is no way everyone learns networking/coding/programming. It would take a major, major investment for the education required, and who exactly is going to make that investment? Besides, there are lots and lots and lots of people who can be educated from now until the Sun burns out and will never understand the internal workings of computers. This isn't some elitist comment - I used to work in Technical Support which is as high up the food chain as I was going. For some of these jobs even I wouldn't be qualified. We may very well be entering an era where we simply aren't going to have jobs for everyone. China will have the same problem soon - I've seen estimations of 40 million by 2020 - and I imagine other countries will suffer the same fate.

So it's option C. What this turns out to be is still up in the air. I fear China will use those excess 40M people to go seize pretty much all of Asia and there won't be anything short of nuclear war anyone can do to stop them. But I'll happily be wrong about that.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Now, something I wonder about... a lot of the protesting is about high unemployment levels. There have been some rumblings that the economy is slowly coming back, and durable goods investment is up; but because of continued advances in automation a lot of the production investment is going to computers/robots/etc. rather than hiring people. So: will unemployment remain sky high and society eventually be rejiggered so that we all can benefit from the increased productivity made available by automation?

I have a rather solid theory on this, which I have tossed out here before.

I have always been a believer of 'comparative advantage', which says one country is better at some areas of the marketplace than others. But that free trade is beneficial for the whole system and allows for everyone to benefit from each country specializing in what they do best.

So the theory is that for eample as that the US loses $10,000,000 worth of salaried positions in one sector...it gains a similar amount in another sector. And IMO innovation and cutting edge services are the US' core competencies...so that's where we'll gain.

What I have come to believe is that this is working as expected and that the US is indeed losing salaried jobs and gaining salaried jobs. But the salaries lost are the equavalent of manufacturing 100 jobs at $100,000/yr and are gaining the equivalent of 10 innovation (internet, etc) jobs that are earning $1,000,000/year.

The net impact is that of unemployment...100 jobs lost minus 10 jobs gained equals 90 workers unemployed. It also means a heightened level of inequality as the US is just better at quality rather than quantity.

So being proactive and updating skills that the emerging marketplace needs is more important than ever. So is being a smart, successful entreprenuer.

Haven't read this anywhere...its my opinion.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

I fear China will use those excess 40M people to go seize pretty much all of Asia and there won't be anything short of nuclear war anyone can do to stop them. But I'll happily be wrong about that.
Why would they? Just as large industrial labor pools are no longer necessary for wealth, ever-expanding geographical territory isn't necessary either, as long as you have a base set of resources (and China certainly does). Say there were 100 million permanent unemployed in the United States. Would we invade Canada or Mexico? How would that help?

Nobody's yet figured out how to run an economy that only needs a small percentage of its people actually working because all the heavy lifting is done, literally, by machines. We have prosperity-driven unemployment, and that's just a new animal. We have had technological-driven unemployment again and again in history, but there was always somewhere else labor was needed.

Space colonies, dammit. It's the only way! ;)
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

We have prosperity-driven unemployment, and that's just a new animal. We have had technological-driven unemployment again and again in history, but there was always somewhere else labor was needed.
The solution to this would seem to be an increasingly progressive tax/benefit system... Ding nab it, I'm getting liberal again. I need to go for more psychotherapy.
... (later)
The solution is to make the women stay home and cook so they don't take the jobs.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

The solution to this would seem to be an increasingly progressive tax/benefit system... Ding nab it, I'm getting liberal again. I need to go for more psychotherapy.
... (later)
The solution is to make the women stay home and cook so they don't take the jobs.
They do help drive wages down, though. The better solution is for the men to stay home. Soap operas would just run hardcore porn all day. Baseball teams would play in the afternoons again. And drunk driving accidents would go down because we would be drunk driving in the daytime. Everybody wins.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Why would they? Just as large industrial labor pools are no longer necessary for wealth, ever-expanding geographical territory isn't necessary either, as long as you have a base set of resources (and China certainly does). Say there were 100 million permanent unemployed in the United States. Would we invade Canada or Mexico? How would that help?

Nobody's yet figured out how to run an economy that only needs a small percentage of its people actually working because all the heavy lifting is done, literally, by machines. We have prosperity-driven unemployment, and that's just a new animal. We have had technological-driven unemployment again and again in history, but there was always somewhere else labor was needed.

Space colonies, dammit. It's the only way! ;)

Because they can? :p

Also, they like oil just as much as we do and aren't afraid to get into a ground war with Iran if they have 40 million extra pieces of cannon fodder to throw at them. Why pay Ahmadinejad or whatever nut takes his place when they can just take it? They can also liquidate a billion Indians on the way (they'll be grateful to be exterminated quickly than slowly starve/die of thirst after the glaciers all melt). The only question is if the Russians get to Iran first.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

I read that that Koran-burning nutbar Terry Jones is going to run for President. Here is a partial list of people I'd sooner vote for:

Jerry Jones
Indiana Jones (even though he's fictional)
Kenwyne Jones
Phil Jones
Vinnie Jones
Cobi Jones
Jermaine Jones
Mike Jones (the one who plays for the NY Red Bulls)
Mike Jones (the one who plays for the Vikings)
Mike Jones (the one who tackled Kevin Dyson at the end of Super Bowl XXXIV)
Mike Jones (the one who I went to high school with)
Adam Jones (the one who plays for the Orioles)
Adam Jones (the guitar player in Tool)
Pacman Jones
Barnaby Jones
Bustopher Jones
Jacque Jones
Chipper Jones
Andruw Jones
Roy Jones Jr.
"Too Tall" Jones
a bottle of Jones Soda
Terry Jones (the one from Monty Python)
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

I read that that Koran-burning nutbar Terry Jones is going to run for President. Here is a partial list of people I'd sooner vote for:

Jerry Jones
Indiana Jones (even though he's fictional)
Kenwyne Jones
Phil Jones
Vinnie Jones
Cobi Jones
Jermaine Jones
Mike Jones (the one who plays for the NY Red Bulls)
Mike Jones (the one who plays for the Vikings)
Mike Jones (the one who tackled Kevin Dyson at the end of Super Bowl XXXIV)
Mike Jones (the one who I went to high school with)
Adam Jones (the one who plays for the Orioles)
Adam Jones (the guitar player in Tool)
Pacman Jones
Barnaby Jones
Bustopher Jones
Jacque Jones
Chipper Jones
Andruw Jones
Roy Jones Jr.
"Too Tall" Jones
a bottle of Jones Soda
Terry Jones (the one from Monty Python)

What about January Jones? Howard Jones (No One is to Blame)? George Jones (C+W Singer), Bridgit Jones (although she is British)? Norah Jones?

And of course, Tom Jones.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

From the Fox 'News' twitter
FOX NEWS POLL: More than three thirds of Americans are dissatisfied with the way the US is heading
That sounds bad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top